Who is responsible for personal development? The individual? HR? The managers?

If I look at my own learning, I see it first and foremost as a responsibility of my own. However, there are regular impulses in my life, mostly from specific individuals, which orient me further towards the next stage of development.

This is the second time that Gergely Koltányi  (Nitrolearning) has had such an impact on me.

  • First, when we met almost a decade ago and discussed the possible intersection of leadership development and digital learning. I picked up the term “microlearning” from him, which we then put into practice when we created the Act2Manage leadership development app in collaboration with Telekom.
  • And secondly, a few weeks ago, when he invited me to a podcast discussion in their We-Learning Podcast series on learning and its digital possibilities. We had coffee beforehand and he mentioned that he is in contact with a Senior Learning Technologist at Amazon, Zsolt Oláh. In a LinkedIn article he tackled the dilemma mentioned in the title of this blogpost.

For those who are more specifically interested, they can find the full model on his profile page, but below I will briefly reflect on the key messages of  his model.

It is perhaps not surprising that in an organisation it is not a good idea to put the responsibility for staff development on the shoulders of a single actor.  The model outlines four types of responsibility and accountability: the individual, the line manager, top management and corporate HR (L&D). At Amazon, the employee’s responsibility is the development itself, to be curious and to take lifelong learning seriously, so that time does not pass her by. Actively engage in learning, whether it is through formal training or on the job. Focus, engage and reflect on what she has learned. It is her responsibility to put into practice what she has learned and to move forward with the help of feedback. 

It is the job of her line manager to set the bar high enough for what has been learned, i.e. to set expectations for implementation and of course to create the necessary conditions, be it time, resources, tools or opportunities. And, as a coach, support the person’s development. So it’s not just about getting the job done.

Top management holds the investor role, they are the sponsors of learning. Their responsibility is to remove obstacles, set priorities and empower managers to support the development of people in the organisation. Set specific expectations in this domain as well, not just business goals.
And here’s another very important point: it’s not about ticking off the training or filling in the happy sheets to see how participants liked the venue or the snacks, it’s about measuring both the effectiveness of putting knowledge into practice and the impact on the business. And HR’s role is to design the right conditions and frameworks for this to happen.

So the message is clear: it will work well if all stakeholders do their part conscientiously to promote learning in the workplace.

More blog posts:

wise owl

Fight as if you are right, listen as if you are wrong

Several studies have concluded that a sense of psychological safety is an important component of a successful team. It could be roughly described as the leader creating an environment in which team members can feel confident to speak up or get the job done without fear of being turned against if they are wrong or punished if they are wrong. A sense of psychological safety allows us to openly and frankly question beliefs, opinions or even the way we do things.
If these issues are important to us, then it is worth learning to balance confidence and doubt. In my experience, a healthy amount of self-doubt can keep us from being arrogant assholes. Or as the ancient Japanese proverb goes: we are less annoying if we keep our mouths shut. 🙂

Read more »
lajhár

Lajhárok és gazellák a munka világában

Még 2016-ban írtam egy cikket itt a Tudatos Vezetés blogon, egy 600 ezer fős nagymintás kutatás alapján arról, hogy a tudásmunkások körében a teljesítmény nem haranggörbe szerint oszlik el, hanem hatványfüggvénynek megfelelően. Ennek az a jelentősége, hogy a felső 5% hozza az összteljesítmény negyedét, a top 1% pedig az átlagnál tízszer eredményesebb. Azaz van egy szűk réteg, aki tényleg kiemelkedő, összesen legfeljebb 20%, aki még egész jó, a többiek teljesítménye ehhez képest igen szerény. Ugyanezt igazolták vissza a Google saját kutatásai is, ahol vagy kétszázezren dolgoznak, és nem szűkölködnek az adatfeldolgozási és elemzési technológiában és erőforrásokban.

Read more »