Overcome Job Misery

MedImmune’s Learning Environment | Training as an Investment | Nature vs. Nurture

Creating Successful Trainingwww.watercoolernewsletter.com

volume 5 issue 8 november/december 2011

Outside Expert

Patrick Lencioni Founder and President, Table Group

OO

PatFounTabl

Please turn to page 12

When I was in high school, my mother gave me a copy of What Color Is Your Parachute? so I could start thinking about what kind of career would be best for me one day. About seven years later, I fi nally read that book and benefi ted from it immensely. In addition to helping me fi nd a job that suited my talents, it provoked my interest in career counseling, a hobby that I dabble in today. Helping people discover passion in their work lives gives me great satisfaction.

However, in the past few years, I’ve come to realize that the pursuit of the right career may be a little over-rated. Don’t get me wrong. I continue to enjoy and greatly value help-ing people fi nd careers that allow them to use their natural talents. It’s just that we sometimes mislead ourselves into thinking that this alone is enough to make us satisfi ed in our work. Let me explain.

Creating Successful Training2

MedImmune is the biologics arm of AstraZeneca, producing two marketed biopharmaceutical products, FluMist® (Infl uenza Vaccine Live, Intranasal) and Synagis® (palivizumab). Accordingly, our company is both highly technical and highly regulated. We’ve also grown from 2,600 employees in 2007 to 4,200 today. With the constant changes in our industry, we needed to be sure all our employees within Operations, regardless of their functional role, had a common foundation of what and how, as well as why we do what we do.

We had three basic goals for our learning program. First, we wanted everyone to understand the key concepts behind the science and manufacturing we perform in a controlled environment so we could institute and defi ne behaviors to support them. Second, we had experienced some quality issues, and found that the common root cause between all these issues was a basic lack of understanding of the fundamentals behind an individual’s position – they

knew what to do but not why it was done that way, and that led to an inability to react to unexpected issues. And third, we wanted to expand people’s perspective in applying knowledge in the interest of a larger goal. It’s never enough to understand only your piece. It’s great to have depth, but our people needed breadth as well so they could see the context of where their pieces fi t.

When we began our project in 2008, we wanted it to be co-owned by the business, as they are the subject matter experts. So we commissioned a team of cross-organizational and cross-level SMEs and engaged them in the vision, current and desired future states, and approach. We also did a targeted needs assessment with potential end users and received great feedback that identifi ed not only the knowledge areas we needed to cover, but also the priority of those areas, and we built that into the plan. An example of this is the gap in understanding of critical aspects of the facilities themselves; we included this area in the fi rst phase, as it was foundational.

Creating an Environment of Learning

Case Study

Allan Darling, Vice President of Technical Operations and Carole Tilmont, Director, Corporate Capabilities MedImmune

CCCC

AlCaMe

www.watercoolernewsletter.com 3

We initially planned for electronic modules on knowledge areas, but quickly incorporated two Learning Map® modules to provide context around the business, strategy, goals, and culture. These were “front-loaded” as prerequisites for the electronic modules when we rolled the program out in mid-2009. We found it interesting that our goal of making content interesting, making it stick, and making it relevant in the eLearning modules – 12 in all, covering Facilities, Microbiology, and Cell Culture – was solid, but the addition of the Learning Map® session really pulled things together in a very sensible and engaging way.

We immediately began working on “deeper dive” technical topics using the same approach: front-load with a Learning Map® module (this time the end-to-end manufacturing process) and then following that experience with eLearning modules. We developed another 12 modules, covering topics such as Filtration, Purifi cation, and Centrifugation, and rolled out this phase in 2010. We structured the modules to fi t various audiences. Phase 1 is required for everyone in Operations. Phase 2 is required for people working on those processes and is optional for all other Operations employees (e.g., Supply Chain).

In creating the more detailed technical modules, we initially had a little diffi culty in that the specifi c language and subject matter was unfamiliar to the team at Root. Because we had built such a strong trust and working relationship with them, we felt comfortable raising and working through these issues. In fact, working with Root and their feedback helped our subject matter experts think more about how they should present the material to their prospective audience. We leveraged our Technical Council, a few senior level leaders with deep experience and scientifi c and technical knowledge, who worked closely with Root to resolve issues from strategic and scientifi c standpoints.

Our results have been amazingly positive. We had extremely high participation rates. We were planning for 80%, and we are seeing nearly 100% of people completing all the modules. Anecdotal responses are also excellent. We have seen the level of knowledge shifting and growing over time. Members of the Operations Management Team say they’ve seen an uptick in knowledge from before and after, and also in the level of interest and depth of conversation. The modules are embedded into the onboarding process as well.

The quality issues that were driven partially by lack of understanding have decreased signifi cantly, with very successful regulatory inspections over the last two years. We can visibly see the change in engagement, and the program has acted as a springboard for other learning. Before, people wanted training so they could learn their jobs, but now they want it because they’re curious to learn! In a technical organization such as ours, the creation of a learning culture is essential for the organization to continue to grow and thrive.

Carole Tilmont heads the Leadership, Management, and Professional Development Center of Excellence, as well as the organization’s talent management and succession planning processes.  Previously, she was responsible for delivering learning and development solutions to drive achievement of functional strategy.

Allan J. Darling is responsible for the Corporate Manufacturing Sciences and Technology, QC, and Technical Training functions. He also oversees development and implementation of Global Technical training curricula.

Creating Successful Training4

Outside Expert

Christine Fox, PhD & Svetlana Beltyukova, PhDInference LLC

OOOO

ChInf

It is well known that the utility of training as a business investment is demonstrated through its impact on performance, and that measurement of this performance is critical to key decision-making. Although some key metrics used to gauge performance are more easily quantifi able (for example, production and sales fi gures), it is the human capital variables, such as level of skill, motivation, knowledge, and satisfaction, that provide a greater measurement challenge to most companies. Training is a key venue for maximizing this human capital, and companies could gain competitive advantage if they could measure human capital as scientifi cally as they do other performance metrics – in clearly defi ned, uniformly understood, standardized units.

Only Measures Can Tell

Is Training Worth the Investment?

www.watercoolernewsletter.com 5 www.watercoolernewsletter.com 5

Most business practices attempt to measure human capital with

survey data.

What is a Measure? By now, we have all become aware of Steve Jobs’ views on business and innovation. Integral to his approach to innova-tion was to strike a balance between humanities and science. Measurement is no different in that the same balance is criti-cal to meaningful measurement. Thus, not only do we need to measure training outcomes and the impact of training on human capital, but we also need to capture those using a strictly defi ned scientifi c system to produce standardized and replicable human capital metrics.

Take, for example, measures we use on a daily basis, such as time, temperature, and money. The measurement systems of these have been deliberately (and painstakingly) constructed by scientists. The impact of these measurement systems on us as humans is huge. We take for granted how these metrics answer questions such as Am I on time for the meeting? Do I need to bring an umbrella? How is the stock market perform-ing? In fact, all measures are a result of deliberate efforts to develop a system of standardized and meaningful units for the purpose of equity, communication, and fair exchange, so that a given number has a common meaning across different groups, settings, and times.

Measures are clearly quantitative in that they are expressed in standardized equal-interval units, yet each measurement unit also possesses a rich qualitative meaning. We all understand what it means to have $100, weigh 125 pounds, or arrive 10 minutes late to a meeting. Each of these measures represents an abstract idea, but these abstractions are replicable and use-ful! Wouldn’t it be ideal to measure other abstractions such as “performance” or “satisfaction” using the same principles of measurement to capture these key human capital variables that result from training? The answer is – we have the tools to do this and it is already routinely done in many high-stakes decision-making. Take, for example, testing companies that develop licensure exams for physicians. These companies routinely convert test responses (including essay responses) into scientifi cally defensible (and hence legally defensible) human performance measures. They literally cannot afford to license unprepared physicians or to be sued for failing a competent candidate. Can other businesses afford not to do the same?

Constructing Measures of Human CapitalMeasures are developed from a strict scientifi c system, yet the derived units must capture the human impact of training on individuals. As we know, most business practices attempt to measure human capital with survey data. But no matter how well developed a survey may be, responses are either simply descriptive numbers (“20% agree that…”) or are correlated with one another to ex-amine response patterns. These descriptions and correlations are not measures, and hence need to be converted into measures much the same way as, for example, the statement, “It is unusually warm in this room,” needs to be assigned a tem-perature if we are to express our discomfort in commonly understood units. In other words, survey responses must be analyzed with a scientifi c measurement model1 to construct meaningful and replicable numbers. In either their original or correlated form, survey responses do not possess the additive properties required for measurement, but they do contain all the necessary information for constructing a measure, if one additional yet critical analytic step is taken.

This critical and often-missed step in data analysis is absolutely essential to meet the scientifi c requirements of measurement and to better understand and replicate the human aspect (the psychological and qualitative meaning). Once human capital is measured scientifi cally, key training metrics are interpretable across a variety of contexts, ready for use in ex-amining benchmarks, trends, and goals of a training program. With so much business capital invested in training, it is only by adequately measuring its impact on human capital that busi-nesses can assess the value of that investment.

Inference LLC offers comprehensive design and analytical support for academic and corporate settings. Both partners hold a Ph.D. in research design, measure-ment and statistical analysis, are tenured professors, and have over 30 years of combined consulting experience. You can contact Inference at inferencellc.com.

1 The Rasch family of models is the only approach to date that can use survey data to construct standardized units with common meaning across multiple people, settings, and time.

Creating Successful Training6 Creating Successful Training6

Try This With Your Team!

Training Challenges?Take a Look Around…In this issue of The Watercooler, we’ve focused on the effectiveness of training, integrated with strategic change, employee needs, and working environments. Gather your team, explore the image, and discuss these questions.

1. First, look at the entire visual and read the quotes. Which ones are familiar to you?

2. Note the two roads in the visual moving from Current State “A” to Future State “B.” What is the role of training on these roads?

3. What elements of the visual do you recognize in your organization? How have these infl uenced your opinions of training?

4. At the bottom left, we see the Training-O-Matic vending machine. Have you ever been involved in a training request like this one? What happened?

5. At the center of the visual, we see that organizations often use training to address compliance. How are training experiences different when they focus on employee needs rather than compliance?

6. Across the top of the visual, there is an integrated team working towards “B or Bust!” What is different about training in these images?

7. Have you ever had a training experience when performance improved but the training wasn’t obvious? What happened to make it feel like a natural part of the environment? How was performance improved?

8. Does training impact the quality of the environment – the road on the visual – or does the environment impact the quality of training? Explain your answers.

9. Considering this discussion, what advice would you give leaders in training and development? What advice would you give customers of training and development?

10. What needs do you or your team have that training should know about? What role does the environment play in addressing your needs?

11. What stands out as most meaningful about this discussion?

www.watercoolernewsletter.com 7 www.watercoolernewsletter.com 7

Creating Successful Training8

Industry Perspective

Ed FrancisManaging Director,Root

IIIn

Ed FManRoot

I love a good provocative philosophical debate! A classic example: Are we who we are because of nature or nurture? Most people will say it’s both, but some vehemently take a polar position and stick to it. At the risk of over-generalizing (which means I’m about to over-generalize), people in Training & Development unwittingly take a similar polar stand. They do this by overemphasizing training – nurture – and ignoring environmental and cultural infl uences on behavior – nature.

So what would it look like it if we applied common training approaches to a house plant? First, we’d show the seedling a video of how it will look when it’s mature. Then, we’d set some context by explaining the impact of plants on the hu-man psyche, or how chlorophyll helps convert carbon dioxide into oxygen. We’d give the little plant some best practices for growing straight and getting proper sunlight. Finally, we’d ask it questions about the Carbon Cycle, and if it scored less than 80% on a knowledge check, we’d ask it to fi nd a new pot.

The reality is that, given the proper environment and basic care, a plant will grow. Now, most people are very differ-ent from plants, but the same principles still apply. Given the proper environment, people can excel in the absence of formal training. However, it doesn’t work in reverse. Formal training will not cause people to excel in the absence of a good environment.

Trainers as Change AgentsTraining departments must view themselves as “change agents” so they can develop strong programs. In its simplest form, training means taking people from a current state and helping them acquire the necessary knowledge, behaviors, and attitudes that will move them to a desired future state.

In the training world, we don’t really talk about “change management.” That’s usually reserved for the Organizational Development world. But really – what is training, if not

Culture vs. TrainingIs It “Nature vs. Nurture”?

www.watercoolernewsletter.com 9

change management? In the training world, I’ve seen too many educators and instructional designers who focus only on instilling knowledge. People say, “This is what they need to know,” as if knowledge alone will change a person’s perfor-mance! The purpose of training is not simply to instill knowl-edge, but to help people change themselves to be successful.

For training to be successful, we need to present information in an effective way (knowledge), develop skills (behaviors) through observation and practice, and create an environment in which people want to change (attitude).

KnowledgeThere are entire university graduate programs dedicated to the principles of adult learning. Still, a few items are often overlooked. When we’re designing instruction intended to improve performance, the language should shy away from corporate-speak. Training departments should refl ect the style of the end-user, not an executive. As soon as corporate-speak begins, the chances of learners internalizing the mes-sages decrease, and we actually create a resistance to change. In my experience, corporate training departments cater to the needs of project sponsors and subject matter experts more than to end-users. Actually, this is an example of not being a change agent to improve performance.

BehaviorsKnowledge is great, but if behaviors don’t refl ect that knowl-edge, then the training dollars are wasted. Methods to change behaviors include:

1. Modeling the desired behavior.2. Providing clear instruction and expectations.3. Allowing for practice and repetition.4. Reinforcing behaviors as needed.5. Providing enough experience for mastery to occur.

While the methods are simple, changing behaviors is tough! It requires planning, time, and often heavy collaboration with Operations. Most training departments allow too many barriers for proper behavioral change, and we let it happen! To be effective change agents, trainers must design practical programs that include proven behavioral change methods, and strongly advocate for them.

AttitudeEven with appropriate knowledge and behaviors, everyone faces a choice to use them or not. This refl ects attitude, and

it’s most infl uenced by the environment in the organization. Training is often used as an attempt to compensate for a lousy environment. As I mentioned earlier, the best training program will fail in a poor environment. While leadership drives organizational culture, it’s the frontline manager who determines the local culture. So if we connect the dots, trainers must consider the skills and decisions of local leaders when trying to improve performance.

To summarize ideas from Patrick Lencioni, there are three key actions that will create an environment where employees choose to think and act in a way that enables performance improvement:

1. Avoid employee anonymity.

2. Show employees that their actions are relevant to customers.

3. Measure performance and hold employees accountable.

Sound simple? For trainers, it’s not. It means that training departments must address and work with Operations to improve performance.

Creating Successful Training10

Point-of-View

Robin Wooddall KleinSenior Vice President, Root

PPPo

RobSenioRoot

Have you ever misdiagnosed a medical issue for yourself? Perhaps you thought a cold would just run its course, but after several weeks you give in and go to the doctor for antibiotics. Or maybe you ran to the doctor, sure that you needed a particular treatment – only to learn that you had something completely different. Good doctors examine all of our symptoms and connect things that we don’t always realize are connected. They understand the human body as a system and are taught to diagnose the system before applying treatment.

Unfortunately, in the fi eld of Learning & Development, we can feel rushed to apply treatment, and we’re often pressured by those around us – leaders as well as employees – to give them the medicine (training) that will fi x the problem. But helping people grow, change, and be more effective is usually more complex than that. Of course,

sometimes we need to “get the message out” quickly and give people some quick guidance and procedures to follow to keep bigger problems from occurring. However, when we’re trying to grow capability, applying a treatment without understanding the full picture can be completely ineffective. It’s like taking Sudafed for a punctured lung.

Good Medicine Starts with a

Good Diagnosis

www.watercoolernewsletter.com 11

The good news is that when you combine the disciplines of Change Management and Learning & Development, you can get a leading-edge treatment for the actual problem. At Root, we often see these opportunities at both the corporate level and the individual role level. When companies want to go from point A to point B, we start by ensuring that there is a solid understanding of the current state. We help them diagnose where they are today and align them on the truth of the current state – the positives as well as the challenges, obstacles, and barriers. When key stakeholders are aligned on the current state, they can most effectively take steps toward the future state and execute their strategy to get there.

The right execution of strategy is also more complex than applying one “treatment.” For a company to get where they want to go, a plan takes shape with multiple initiatives that include a full plan of attack for launching and sustaining key efforts. To return to the medical metaphor, if you want to lose 50 pounds to avoid disease, the best strategy likely involves approaching the change from several angles in ways that you can sustain over time.

Individual change is the same, but when organizations are looking to grow people, they sometimes just “put in an order” for a program. This can result in a bad rap for Learning & Development when the desired change doesn’t occur. L&D can get labeled as non-strategic and could be one of the fi rst areas to be cut when organizations don’t deliver on key outcomes.

In our experience, that’s a bad move. Best-in-class L&D professionals are highly strategic – they understand business outcomes and the human condition with a capability

in change consulting. When organizations need their salespeople to increase business or they want their frontline people to improve quality, the best-in-class learning doctor goes into diagnose mode. We partner with leaders in learning and development to do just that.

We start with an assessment of the current state of the role. What’s working? What isn’t? What are the truths that frame reality for that role today? The key to gaining clarity on the current state requires hearing from people in these roles, and not just the leaders who manage them. Alignment on a new vision for the role and the shifts required to get there begins to shape the plans that will be most effective.

Attending a development or training program can be an important aspect of change, but one event likely won’t ensure that a group of people evolve a role from point A to point B. A coordinated plan includes multiple interventions and sustaining efforts that are embedded into critical systems in the organization.

Are there roles in your organization that need to evolve to higher levels of capability to enable business performance? If so, bring the expertise and examination techniques of the “doctor” to bear, and the solutions that emerge can get the role on its way to better health.

When we’re trying to grow capability, applying a treatment without understanding the full picture can be completely

ineffective.

Creating Successful Training12 Creating Successful Training12

Bad Job vs. Miserable JobIt isn’t uncommon to hear someone say that so-and-so has a good job. If you ask that someone what a good job is, you’ll get a variety of answers depending on the person.

For some, a good job is about being paid well. For others, it’s about the prestige of working for a well-known company, and for still others, it might be about having the freedom to avoid sitting behind a desk all day in an offi ce. We also hear people say that so-and-so has a bad job, which can mean that they are underpaid, have to do manual labor, or sit in an offi ce without ventilation or natural light.

It’s almost entirely subjective.

What is not subjective is the defi nition of a miserable job, because it’s largely the same whether you are an executive, waiter, teacher, or professional football player. People who are miserable in their jobs dread going to work and come home frustrated, defeated, and weary.

Misery’s ImpactThe cost of job misery is very real, both for individuals who are miserable and for the families and friends of the people who must live with them. Scores of people suffer every day as they trudge off from their families and friends to jobs that make them more cynical, unhappy, and frustrated than they were when they left. Over time, this dull pain can erode the self-confi dence and passion of even the strongest people, which in turn affects their spouses, children, and friends in subtle but profound ways.

Organizations are not immune to the effects of misery either. Some studies show that as high as 77% of workers are dis-satisfi ed with their work, and that the primary driver of job dissatisfaction is not pay or benefi ts, but the relationship that an employee has with his or her supervisor. Such widespread dissatisfaction kills morale and productivity within companies, and drives up the cost of recruiting, hiring, and retraining new employees, all of which takes a huge, if not easily measured,

toll on the bottom line. Gallup estimates that the annual cost to the American economy due to lost productivity is some-where in the vicinity of $350 billion.

The causes of job misery are as simple as they are common, and are the subject of my most recent book, The Three Signs of a Miserable Job. Let’s explore just one of those causes, which is the most obvious and perhaps important of the three. I call it anonymity.

AnonymityNo employee, regardless of how much money he makes or how much she loves her work, can be fulfi lled without a man-ager who knows and cares about them as a unique individual.

Yes, that seems ridiculously obvious, which makes the per-vasiveness of anonymity so puzzling. Ask most employees whether their managers really understand them, whether they are genuinely interested in them as human beings, and most will say “no.” Ask their managers, “Why don’t you get to know and understand your employees more?” Assuming that they’ll admit the problem, here are some of the likely reasons:

Political correctness: During interviews, managers are instructed by legislators and lawyers to avoid any personal questions that might be construed as discriminatory and/or irrelevant to the job. Unfortunately, when an employee actually starts working for them, many of those managers continue to deal with them at arm’s length, rather than treat-ing them as a human being, one with a family and a history and aspirations and hobbies.

Amnesia: So many managers seem to forget what it was like when they were more junior employees. They don’t remember the impact that a manager can have on an em-ployee’s sense of self-esteem, enthusiasm, and job fulfi llment just by taking an interest in their life outside of work.

www.watercoolernewsletter.com 13 www.watercoolernewsletter.com 13

Fear of the “touchy-feely”: Some managers downplay the impact of the human element on the productivity and fulfi llment of employees, often because they’re embarrassed. This can stem from their discomfort with being emotionally open with people, from their fear of seeming disingenuous, or from the painful realization that they haven’t generally taken an interest in the employees who work for them.

Busy-ness: Some managers don’t believe they have the time to take an interest in their people. They see themselves as individual contributors who happen to have direct reports. For them, any time taken away from “real work” is a waste and a threat to making progress. Obviously, they don’t have a sense of the impact that a manager can have on an em-ployee’s productivity and morale.

Of course, no excuse is a good one for a manager to avoid treating employees like the three-dimensional human beings that they are – mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, grandpar-ents, and neighbors, all of whom have a need to be known by the person who oversees their work.

Overcoming AnonymityManagers who struggle with demonstrating a real interest in their employees need to do one or both of the follow-ing. First, they have to overcome their fear of being politically incorrect. Yes, our current legal climate makes it necessary for managers to be careful about the kinds of personal interview questions they ask. But that doesn’t mean that they should continue in that same vein after an employee comes on board. Of course, that doesn’t mean all personal topics are suddenly fair game. It just means that managers should act like human beings, and not the automatons that our legal system requires them to be during the interview process.

Second, managers need to overcome their fear of coming across as insincere. That’s not to say that they need to get comfortable being insincere. They just need to realize that it is okay if employees initially suspect that they are being manipulative. They have to have the courage and wisdom

to realize that the truth about their intentions will eventu-ally become clear after they demonstrate consistent, genuine interest in their employees as people.

Imm

easurement

Irrel

evan

ce

AnonymityyAnonymity

oJoberyMise

The Other SignsAddressing anonymity is the fi rst of the three areas that man-agers need to tackle. To transform our ailing workforce, there is more work to be done in the areas of Employee Irrelevance and something I call Immeasurement.

More than anything, managers need to understand that job misery at work is costly, unnecessary, and treatable. It is my sincerest hope that managers learn to approach their jobs so that employees fi nd true fulfi llment in theirs.

Solutions to Overcome Job Misery:To combat this problem, Lencioni’s fi rm, The Table Group, recently developed a suite of products for managing for employee engagement to ultimately help managers make lasting, important connections with employees, thereby creating a new ethos of job loyalty, satisfaction, and productivity. To learn more, please visit www.tablegroup.com/employeeenagement.

Patrick Lencioni is the author of nine best-selling books. After seven years in print, The Five Dysfunctions of a Team continues to be a fi xture on national bestseller lists.

Happy Holidays from everyone at Root!

News and Events

• Visit Root at ASTD 2012 TechKnowledge Conference, Las Vegas, January 25 – 27, www.astd.org

• A free webinar on manager development coming in January. Look for more details on www.rootlearning.com.

• Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels: Increasing Training Effectiveness Through Evaluation – an onsite seminar offered by the American Management Association. For more information, go to www.amanet.org.

Looking for information?Whether you need insights on strategy execution or a speaker for an upcoming company event, we can help.

Check out www.watercooler.com for industry experts, articles on business issues, or exercises for your team!

WatercoolerTM SketchesNeed an insightful, interactive experience for your

team, department meeting, or annual conference?

Check out our Watercooler Kits! Use the

Watercooler™ sketches from previous newsletters

to create a kit that includes a large version of the

sketch, dialogue for conversation, and a guide to help

you facilitate the experience. Take a look –

www.watercooler.com.

The next issue of the newsletter will be January/February 2012.