Typically, when we think about KPIs or important metrics to track on an ongoing basis, we think of things like ROI, revenue, units sold, or anything else related to the company's goals. Rarely does workplace culture or morale become a priority for upper management - unless of course a morale problem develops. Instead of only thinking about culture when you're first defining your core values or as a reaction to a morale problem, culture should be something you are actively working to create, monitor, and iterate on an ongoing basis. Not only does this create more satisfied employees and an ability to attract the right talent, company culture is also strongly correlated with business success. Bottom line: even if your sole goal for the year is growth, culture cannot be ignored and could even be the key to success.
However, a recognition that culture matters is not enough. The post below outlines why it is critical to monitor and measure culture metrics on an ongoing basis. Ideally, your culture shouldn't be something that "just happens naturally" - it should be intentionally defined, bought into across the organization, and influence decisions at every level of your company. When that happens culture becomes something almost tangible - and as a result helps you attract the job applicants that will be best suited to succeed in the environment you've created.
Once you're recruiting people that want to work in the type of culture you've established, you should seek out feedback and address concerns. Combining an empowered HR team and tools like eNPS scores to collect feedback, you should be able to address concerns with culture before they lead to morale problems, a disengaged workforce, and ultimately retention problems.
Many people in Silicon Valley knew about Uber’s “hyper-masculine, hyper-aggressive” company culture, but looked the other way because the company was minting money. And probably just as many companies questioned whether they should be copying it.
But as revelations about Uber and companies like Signet Jewelers unspool almost daily — attended by stories of lawsuits, valuation drops and high-profile firings and resignations — we’re now second-guessing ourselves, wondering if “hyper-aggressive”...
Read the full article on recode.net
Study: People Learn Better Online than in a Class (Although a Mix Works Best)
When LinkedIn surveyed over 500 learning and development professionals, they found that instructor-led training is still the most common way training is completed in organizations. While there is certainly a place for instructor-led training, a comprehensive "study of studies" completed by the US Department of Education analyzed the results of 99 studies about the effectiveness of online versus classroom training and found some interesting results.
First, when comparing whether online, classroom, or a blended approach was more effective for learners they found that a blend of both was more effective. When eliminating the ability to do both (which is a reality for many organizations), the study found that online-only instruction was better than classroom-only learning across all ages, genders, and socioeconomic statuses.
So why have organizations been so slow to evolve when the Department of Education study came out 7 years ago and is probably even more conclusive today with the rise of better online tools and a more tech-savvy workforce? It most likely stems from a combination of confusion over what technology would work best to facilitate digital training, a lack of content ready to be deployed online, a lack of prioritization of training programs among all of the projects pulling IT resources, and perhaps a little bit of fear of change.
Despite these challenges, replacing in-person lectures with online content to absorb information and focusing in-person efforts on experiential learning to practice skills (think simulations, shadowing, etc.), we could see more effective, engaging, and cost-effective training.
In 2010, the United States Department of Education released an expansive study comparing online learning to in-person learning (classroom time); compared to a mixture of the two.
This was a critical study, as the department was determining where it would allocate more than $600 million in funding it had received from the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act – aka the stimulus package. Should the money go to facilitate more online learning in schools across the country, or would it be ...
Read the full article on learning.linkedin.com
3 Reasons That Experiential Learning Boosts Performance
If you think back to any class or training you've completed throughout your life, it is probably not surprising that the classes you remember and succeeded in were generally on topics you were interested in and taught in a way that held your attention - you were engaged. Engagement in training is key to motivating employees and retaining information - which is better for the organization as a whole. Experiential learning - learning by doing - is effective not only in making the experience more enjoyable for employees, but it also has significant impact in knowledge retention. Traditional learning has been shown to have about a 5% knowledge retention rate, where experiential learning has shown up to 90% retention. Essentially, experiential learning doesn't just teach concepts, it alters behavior.
Read on for the three main ways that experiential leading can impact performance.
Entrepreneurs and business owners, like all executives, are tasked with keeping an eye on business growth and ensuring that employees’ skills and values remain in line with the emerging needs of the organization. When business owners notice that performance is deteriorating, they realize this can quickly have a negative impact on revenue or customer satisfaction.
Typically, business leaders may look to traditional training as their first line of defense to move performance toward the desired...
Read the full article on entrepreneur.com
