Corporate educators and trainers often rely on engaging program design and expert knowledge to deliver practical, enjoyable and productive learning experiences. These experiences are intended to shift the needle on employee well-being and business outcomes. Implementers employ schoolroom concepts like pre-work exercises and homework to ensure learning is being observed, and some may even base their methods on learning principles backed by psychology and brain science research.
These common methods steeped in traditional education are well-intentioned. Yet, adult learning continues to be fraught with challenges that require greater attention, more collaboration and multidisciplinary design.
Rather than proceeding with confidence and hoping for the best, educators might be better served to examine a few dilemmas, which, as esoteric as some may seem, greatly affect the learning they’re delivering:
Differentiating between evidence-based and non-evidence-based learning: Both evidence-based learning and non-evidence-based learning have a place in adult education. Evidence-based learning fosters a feeling of integrity because it’s based on the fact that concepts being taught will make statistical differences to personal and business-related outcomes.
However, evidence-based practices come with their own hang-ups. They are fraught with ethical issues including rigged studies skewed by sample sizes and the selective publishing of positive versus negative results. And even when dealing with principles of brain science, it’s important to recognize that not all brains are the same.
In some circumstances, experiential learning relevant to an organization should trump generalized evidence-based learning. However, wild and unsubstantiated claims could be just as unappealing as initiatives based on statistics. So rather than blindly or obsessively applying any evidence- or non-evidence-based practice, it may be helpful to discuss how it uniquely applies to your specific organization’s present culture — not its preferred culture.
Avoiding trite generalities: It’s important to balance the warmth of delivery, engagement, and emotional elements of a presentation with a certain amount of rigor. Simply bandying about trite ideas like, “Every leader should learn empathy” or “More leaders should be transformational” is an oversimplified approach.
For example, women are already wired to be empathetic and to pick up the emotions of others. So, why would such a person want to become even more empathetic? Also, depending on the individual, he or she may need to learn to be more of a transactional or instrumental leader, rather than a transformational leader.
And while optimism may be highly desired, realistic optimism is really what’s needed. In fact, it is now widely known that people are prone to optimism biases, and they may even be wired to underestimate the likelihood of future negative events.
That’s not to say we need to focus on the negative underbelly of every virtue out there, but these differences provide a great opportunity for debate — and such debates can be informed by research and be made relevant to your organization.
Embracing self-directed learning: Self-directed learning is a successful, money-saving method that companies like Motorola, The Walt Disney Company, Aetna, Xerox, and American Airlines have all implemented in their long-term training and development strategies.
When individuals have the freedom to decide what they want to learn, their brain’s long-term memory hub, the hippocampus, is more willing to cooperate. As a result, they are more likely to remember things over the long term.
In order for adults to be motivated to learn, the learning has to be of value. The topic must resonate with them, and it cannot be mired in conflicts.
Why not ask people what they want to learn? If it’s a crucial topic, explain why they need to know about it, and help them reorganize their lives to make this learning experience fit into their busy schedules.
Removing the stigma from ‘un-focus’: Time-management strategies and relentless efforts to avoid distraction help corporate workers become more productive. However, few people recognize that downtime and daydreaming are just as important as focus time. The brain excels at building creative solutions when the mind wanders, not just when it is mindful.
Focus and “un-focus” offer different brain pathways to creativity. Mindfulness prevents prior habits from intruding upon current analyses because you are in the present. Letting your mind wander allows for creative insights through connections when you hit a wall. It’s not just dawdling — even if it seems like it is.
Rather than rely on the mind’s natural tendency to wander, building this practice into the schedule for 10 to 20 minutes every few hours can go a long way to helping people learn more effectively.
How do we choose between the paradoxical conflicts inherent in learning? This dialectic should be the fuel for the next generation of corporate learning, and it emphasizes the fact that learning is best deployed in a multidisciplinary environment.
While it helps to understand the psychology and science behind learning, it’s just as important to have internal debates and discussions surrounding how to enhance the collective intelligence of your organization. Ultimately, the direction you choose will be best implemented if it’s addressed within the context of your company’s current culture, and the relevance of the topics are made uniquely clear on an individual and companywide basis.
