Category: Human Resources

We all go through egocentric phases, and we need to understand them. We admit our audiences or trainees are all egocentric. The fact is that we all are, but we, as trainers, even need to see how we change over time and how it affects our decisions, attitudes and choices.

Shakespeare’s quote never made more sense to me. “All the world is a stage…” needs to be read several times to appreciate the genius of its wisdom because it’s meaning is many-layered–as people tend to be. It’s not about people on a stage, but about the stages of life, putting it simply. But there are complicated stages in between these simple stages that affect our most important life and work decisions, our attitudes and our choices.

Decisions can be easy; we do things because they make sense at the time. This is a fancier form of hind site; I’m calling it reflection. This will no doubt be my most unusual post on the Free Management Library and this Training and Development blog, but I promise to connect it beyond the usual because we are all humans (for my students, reference clarifying and narrowing down “too broad” a topic).

Attitude. My wife is convinced I am going through a mid-life crisis because I’ve been particularly cranky lately; I’m a little impatient with rude people, uncaring people, and want to be passionate about dealing with them. No holds barred. That means take restrictions off the “nice guy.” That’s all, but upon reflection, I will admit I am struggling with growing up again, wanting to know what I want to do, wanting it to matter to someone else. We all do this a various times in our lives.

Choices are easy, too, believe it or not. To make a choice, we simply make a decision based on our attitude, which is shaped by events, and it’s done. Hopefully, we are happy about the choice we made, but the rest is more complicated. It is a conundrum we are faced with everyday, making sense of egocentricity-a relatively simple concept.

Now, we always say the most concern for making the right choices applies to youth and anyone in today’s market, but I think it is more than that. The answer is actually not all three, but none of the above, which are merely off-shoots of something far more important. Of course, it doesn’t seem so now in our individual egocentric minds. (Transition for my students.)

We’re nervous. We’re nervous because the economy doesn’t give us much choice unless we are rich, but for some of those who were rich (the smart investors who lost a lot of money, and I’m not being facetious here) suffer now to from the same conundrum. I received an e-mail from a talented, well-educated and accomplished woman who was asking me and others to consider where she has been for future endeavors where she might use her experiences and education after she lost so much in the market.

I felt a little like Charlie Brown. “She’s asking me? Little me who nobody notices?” She was an investor who lost a lot when the economy crashed. Me, I didn’t invest–at least not in the same places. It wasn’t particularly smart of me–just lucky. In the scheme of things, she and I are different from one another, but similar in a big way. That’s what follows here.

Compared to her, I am pretty boring. But she started my reflection of how the world works. I know, “too broad a topic my students would say,” but I mean from my perspective of understanding how the world worked for me. I think we all have such perceptions and it’s useful to reflect like this. We know people are at different points in their lives and have different needs and therefore truly different people than they were a few years. This is probably easier for older people to get since they’ve been there. For me it became a stress point, not realizing it.

It’s a matter of perspective. After the Marines, finding a job was easy; I was young and pretty much willing to do anything. I had decided I wanted to be on air in radio and I didn’t really care in what capacity. At that time I would be working for minimum wage I knew; after all, I had only a year of college (but I was going back). I sent out a rough demo I had asked a friend to help me produce at the base radio studio. I had never been on-air at that time, only on stage, part-time professionally at a dinner theatre in San Clemente, California before getting out of the service. I enjoyed acting but I didn’t want to be an actor for life. In my mind, it wasn’t minimum wage that bothered me, but I didn’t want to wait on tables, which to me pretty much summed up what actors starting out did. A career in broadcasting made sense.

I sent out the resumes and demos, hoping some radio station would give me a break. I got two responses initially. Remember I had absolutely no experience–only a voice of sorts. One interview offer was for a local station who wanted a DJ with a first class radio telephone license; I would be an engineer as well. Always good to take the interview, but I knew walking in that I was totally unqualified. Then, Ed, a program director in Missouri said to come in to see him when I came home. He said he didn’t have anything at the time but he did know some people.

He didn’t forget and sent me off to KARE radio station in Atchison, Kansas–the radio station that cares about you. How sweet is that. Also ironic in this situation. It was a middle of the road station, meaning it played music not to offend anyone, but they seemed to know their place so well in the market that they could hire college kids to work 3-11 weekdays (every other day because you had school), and 7-3 or 3-11 on the weekend. What was great here was that they didn’t care if you had to switch with the other guy you were working with because you needed to study for a test. Luckily he and I went to different colleges so our schedules varied. Best job I ever had.

You’ve heard the saying I learned all about how to treat people in kindergarten. This is how I learned a business should treat its employees. All it took was flexibility. We affected the business as would anyone at that level–not much, but it gave us the chance to apply ourselves.

After going back to school and working in radio and television later, I was ready for a new challenge and that was the Air Force. It’s a much longer story I’ll reserve for another blog maybe. During that period of my life, family and other personal reasons entered the picture, which is now getting more complicated. I am now really looking at life for a career and a place in society.

This is important because it is another phase. Not too deep yet.

I had great jobs in the Air Force and it offered me the security I needed; however, I had married someone who did not appreciate the military aspect of my life–even though from my perspective I had a pretty regular job. I was a public affairs officer by trade, but at the time I was on a special duty assignment as an instructor of English, speech and theatre at the U.S. Air Force Academy. Still, military… I left the military and the marriage split anyway.

Ironically I became an Air Reserve Technician, a civil servant who wore the uniform and trained Reservists. Later, I gave up the Reserve part and made civil service the way I would fill out the phase.

The final phase came when I felt all that I had learned in life was being pushed into job descriptions, mission statements, needs assessments, and very little seemed to be what I cared about. We are egocentric. We are multidimensional and it is important to realize it. I think that when we begin to feel like a number that things don’t go well. That can be a decision time. I think it was for me. I’m sorry I waited so long actually, but that’s the way it is sometimes.

Now I write, teach and act or direct when I want. I live. I find I get passionate easily about things I feel strongly about. I have to watch that or I become a cranky old person. I need to keep some things in and reflect on them or try them without broadcasting them. Maybe it’s personality thing, but it’s something I’ve learned about myself.

We talk about how leaders need to be reflective of the decisions they make, their attitudes because those things affect the people who work for them. They also affect the people who don’t work for them, and by the same token, by not actively noticing people are themselves egocentric and that it is okay, we lose credibility and we lose good people who have to make choices maybe they don’t want to make.

Remember, the book, The Right Stuff? Tom Wolfe is looking at the space program through the eyes of the government and the people setting it up, but showing us the guys who have the “The Right Stuff.” Interestingly enough, those who have “the right stuff” according to the government and astronauts themselves see it totally differently.

Some people realize it sooner than others, no one really cares about the details of your story–only in how it affects them in some way. I like to think people care–really care, but I think I have to put it in a mature perspective.

The evidence has been in front of me for years. I teach students and others to analyze your audience. Recognize all people are egocentric, and it’s not just the audience. It should be a “duh” moment.

I am about to embark on a number of adventures, as we all are, and I am determined to not be cranky, which will make my wife, kids and probably everyone else happy. I am going to pursue my latest dreams because dreams evolve, but I may not talk about it as much. I’m going to explore and risk within limits things I think I’d like to do. I still want things to be relevant to me; I’m egocentric like everyone else. A hard lesson to learn and to apply to our lives is that the journey makes changes in us despite of what we vow at the beginning. We can’t help it.

There is no reason this phase of my life should be any less or more than any previous or future phases. I said I would make this apply to training. I lied. It applies to life and our perception of people and, if you really need me to be specific on the training connection it is about how we analyze our audience. I have always said, know your audience, know your subject and know yourself. Two out of three ain’t bad. And the one that seems to be missing, the subject? That’s easy, too. That’s you and me. Our audience and ourselves.

I told you this would be different. I hope it offered perspective, light, amusement or even a shaking of the head. If you got this far… It should be no surprise to you that refer to myself as the Passionate Communicator, or more recently, the Cave Man trainer who is looking for training organics, training from the perspective of someone who only had needs to fulfill. The Cave Man found learning and training wherever it was to be found. I even have an inexpensive but dynamic Ebook called The Cave Man Guide to Training and Development. Under the What I Say category on my website I talk about traditional and nontraditional approaches to training and development, communication, theatre arts, and social behavior. You’ll even find voice demos.

One short note and I’m out of here. I will be on vacation for a week, thinking of you from the deck of a ship. I hope to do some speaking on ship, but if that doesn’t happen, I’ll smell the salty sea, bask in the sun until an opportunity presents itself. I will probably make myself a bit of a nuisance in learning about shipboard training practices, organizations, methods so that I’ll write it for you the next time. I may sneak a blog in if something rattles me. In the meanwhile, remember your egocentric audience, and don’t forget you are, too. Happy training.

For my students: there’s a blog, a rant and a ramble. Right now this is a ramble that became a reflection. It’s too long to be blog.

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

Either I have weird friends or friends who just know weird things. To be quite honest, they know true, scary things. Not exactly Edgar Allan Poe but still interesting facts of history I thought I’d share on Halloween. Not exactly Cave Man stuff, but close. I’m thinking more 15,000 B.C., but we’ll find humor just 500 years ago.

Oh, but these are useful fun things that trainers and speakers can use. I could be wrong, but I’m probably not, since history was made before copyright law.

At any rate, check out the true stories (as told to me) as to why we humans do things we do, why we have sayings and poetry that makes no sense today. Not that it was terribly deep then. This may get a little deep itself, so if you are do-do sensitive, please refrain from reading. No laughing or smiling for you.

Some of these facts would be straight from Ripley’s, but these are from Ron Harris, a friend of mine and fellow actor, via someone else via someone else until we get to some monk in the dark ages. However, this is the time of dark. Halloween, and not of dark days ahead. Check this out…

Friend Ron says, “Us older people need to learn something new every day…just to keep the grey matter tuned up.”

Ever wonder where the term “piss poor” come from? I always thought it was a “dad” original. Interesting History.

They used to use urine to tan animal skins, so families used to all pee in a pot. And, then once a day the urine was taken and sold to the tannery…and if you had to do this to survive you were “piss poor.”

But worse than that were the really poor folk who couldn’t even afford to buy a pot. They “didn’t have a pot to piss in” and were the lowest of the low.

The next time you are washing your hands and complain because of the water temperature. If it isn’t just how you like it, think about how things used to be.

Here are some more facts about the 1500s:

• Most people got married in June because they took their yearly bath in May, and they still smelled pretty good by June. However, since they were starting to smell, brides carried a bouquet of flowers to hide the body odor.
• Hence the custom today of carrying a bouquet when getting married.

Baths consisted of a big tub filled with hot water.

• The man of the house had the privilege of the nice clean water, then all the other sons and men, then the women and finally the children. Last of all the babies. By then the water was so dirty you could actually lose someone in it.
• Hence the saying, “Don’t throw the baby out with the Bath water!”

Houses had thatched roofs-thick straw-piled high, with no wood underneath. It was the only place for animals to get warm so all the cats and other small animals including mice and bugs lived in the roof.

• When it rained it became slippery and sometimes the animals would slip and fall off the roof.
• Hence the saying, “It’s raining cats and dogs.”

There was nothing to stop things from falling into the house. This posed a real problem in the bedroom where bugs and other droppings could mess up your nice clean bed.

• Hence, a bed with big posts and a sheet hung over the top afforded some protection.
• That’s how canopy beds came into existence.

The floor was dirt. Only the wealthy had something other than dirt.

• Hence the saying, “dirt poor.” The wealthy had slate floors.

(Getting quite an education, aren’t you?)

In those old days, they cooked in the kitchen with a big kettle that always hung over the fire. Every day they lit the fire and added things to the pot. They ate mostly vegetables and did not get much meat. They would eat the stew for dinner, leaving leftovers in the pot to get cold overnight and then start over the next day. Sometimes stew had food in it that had been there for quite a while.

• Hence the rhyme: “Peas porridge hot, peas porridge cold, peas porridge in the pot nine days old?”

Sometimes they could obtain pork, which made them feel quite special. When visitors came over, they would hang up their bacon to show off. It was a sign of wealth that a man could, “bring home the bacon.” They would cut off a little to share with guests and, you guessed it, they would all sit around and chew the fat.

Those with money had plates made of pewter. Food with high acid content caused some of the lead to leach onto the food, causing lead poisoning death. This happened most often with tomatoes, so for the next 400 years or so, tomatoes were considered poisonous.

• Bread was divided according to status. Workers got the burnt bottom of the loaf, the family got the middle, and guests got the top, or the upper crust.

Lead cups were used to drink ale or whiskey. The combination of lead and alcohol would sometimes knock the imbibers out for a couple of days. Someone walking along the road would take them for dead and prepare them for burial. They were laid out on the kitchen table for a couple of days and the family would gather around and eat and drink and wait and see if they would wake up.

• Hence the custom; of holding a wake?

England is an old and small country, and the local folks started running out of places to bury people. So they would dig up coffins and would take the bones to a bone-house, and reuse the grave. When reopening these coffins, one out of twenty-five coffins were found to have scratch marks on the inside and they realized they had been burying people alive. So they would tie a string on the wrist of the corpse, lead it through the coffin and up through the ground and tie it to a bell.

• Someone would have to sit out in the graveyard all night (the graveyard shift) to listen for the bell; thus, someone could be “saved by the bell” or was considered “a dead ringer.”

And that’s the truth, according to Ron.

Now, whoever said History was boring! So, get out there and educate someone! Share these facts with a friend. Inside every older person is a younger person wondering, “What the heck happened?” Now we know.

“We’ll be friends until we are old and senile. Then we’ll be new friends. Smile, it gives your face something to do!”

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

Imagine training others, not only how to make the wheel, but how it could be used to make life easier. This trainer had a full-time job. He probably ate well, too, thanks to grateful people.

I should probably explain the “Cave Man” thing. I wrote an inexpensive ebook called The Cave Man Guide to Training and Development. It’s subtitled “A Common Sense Guide by the CEO of Acting Smarts.” And it seems to be resonating in the training development community. I even have students in several universities using it as a study guide in the formal academic process because it makes plain sense. Still, since it kind of came out of the blue, and as a reaction rather than a rush to make money, I feel an explanation is necessary.

At first glance, most people think it is like the famous commercial, but it is not, “So easy a caveman can do it.” I’m not addressing simplicity–not that it isn’t–but I am referring to the time when we learned the basics and how going back to basics is not always a bad idea. I am also referring to two parts: “Cave,” which is a place of work, home, society, etc. and Man,” which is man at work, man at home, man in society.

It is a way of looking at training and development, and soon at communication in general how we can find solutions we are making so hard and expensive for ourselves. I know I don’t have all the good ideas in the world, but like all of us I am trying to make a difference.

My difference is in pointing out sometimes the obvious, but more often those things we have forgotten. Most situations are no-brainers when you put people in the equation, but we get hung up on this complex and complicated world, and stick to what we know.

We leave the very people out who can help us out of the picture because “it isn’t done that way here.” We ignore them or their talents and skills because they don’t fit the papers we’ve written on how it should be done. Too bureaucratic? Perhaps. Do we have to be? Is it all about money? If it is, maybe we should examine why we became a company in the first place, when we had all these new, risky ideas and people with vision.

There is probably some clever quote on how people and companies that don’t change, wither and die, but that sounds more like Poe. Doom and Gloom. But I’m not trying to be gloomy. In fact, just the opposite. What if we looked at every opportunity in the company as a way for people to shine. When they shine, we, their supervisors look good, and the company looks. Companies that do that now are enjoying tremendous staying power when other companies stuck in the near past (not caveman times) are faltering in this economy.

Trite as the saying may be, people are our greatest resource, and yet we abuse them and expect them to work for us without complaint because we give them money to support to their families, to survive. Ever really think about why going postal happens? It’s not all deranged individuals; it may have to do with some basic needs not being met and survival of the fittest takes on new meaning, and not a positive one.

People are trying to survive and for the right opportunity that rewards them with praise and kindness for a job well done, they’ll probably do more for you if couldn’t pay them until the following week–if they truly trusted you. You only get that by trusting them. Of course there are exceptions. People who take advantage, people who use others, people who want power and don’t care who gets in the way. I have my suspicions these behaviors may have manifested themselves over the long term abuse they perceived they received from others. Think not only of Maslow’s Heirarchy of Needs also motivational theories, and Darwin’s evolutionary survival of the fittest–the term, which by the way was not defined by Darwin, but Charles Spenser, a philosopher of the day.

The term has “evolved” (pun intended) to encompass more than Darwin’s biological theory. I think we can also include Darwin’s basic ideas in the evolution of the human mind beyond Maslow’s actualization as we strive as humans to survive in the modern world certain adaptations are occurring even now.

Although I am a psychologist, I don’t think in those terms necessarily. I am a communicator, which I think takes in other aspects of the dynamics. I am also a theatre critic.

Strange as it may sound, this unusual combination has brought me to the Cave Man approach. I was a “formal” trainer for a number of years and did it all from managing, developing and delivering training; I was a public affairs officer, which if you don’t know is different from the public relations officer. The public relations officer is thinking about the company, first and foremost, while the public affairs officer is wide open and looking out for the public good, within the realms of confidentiality and propriety.

The difference means the public affairs officer cares about the public more directly while the public relations officer is concerned about the public connection to the company. Nothing wrong with either tact, but there is a different perspective. My job as a critic has enabled me to look at theatre, which as an art, reflects–dramatizes even–the nature of man. The Cave Man. Who we are at our base. Our basic needs. Our desires.

This is the Cave Man Approach. You could probably find some New Age way of branding it, but I like basic. It’s fun to imagine what life was life when we were trying to find ways to survive, to grow as a society, to thrive as a community.

There were experiences in my life that set me over the edge, that made me realize things were stupid the way they were. That’s putting it bluntly, but some days I’m not known for subtlety. If saying something is stupid and offends someone. I apologize for offending, but it is still stupid. I can do better. One of my most popular blogs is really a rant. It’s called The Needs Assessment Disconnect and I’ve expanded it in my book, The Cave Man Guide to Training and Development. The rant began as I was filling out a needs assessment form.

Now remember I was a trainer at the national corporate-level myself and I know how these things come about and how they are used. My boss, who might complain my productivity and others is now giving us something else to do without any preamble. Filling out a Training Needs Assessment. From that, of course, our training will be developed; our training that no one will really want to attend; that will see no reward us for as employees.

The idea is that this training is for us and therefore we should fill out what we think we need, how what we have in-house is useful, and would train willingly and enthusiastically. All I could think of was to ask a question: how does this benefit me? It didn’t; it benefited the company if they increased productivity because of it. Would we receive credit on our evaluations for taking this training? No, but if we didn’t it would be reflected.

Top it off, we had a meeting later that day and managers were concerned if we gave this same training to contractors who worked for us, they could take that training, put it on their resume and use it on another job. Bet the contractors had it in “their” evaluations.

My point is: all this is fine for the company, but anyone in communication knows the audience (the people) matter most. That’s why you are there. The company has customers. Last I checked they were people, too. Do they want to work with a company or people? I think the answer is people they trust with a company name for reputation.

You’ve heard the term–all we learned in kindergarten? Well, this goes further back. Not only that, but people like being included. The needs assessment says we need you, but at the same time “kicks you in the ***.” Training is a mainstay with any organization. Don’t train and people who don’t know what to do–let alone be productive. Make that training count. Make it part of their portfolio. The military does.

I wrote a piece asking why all training and professional development couldn’t be like training for your black belt. See the article and you’ll see what I mean. Every step of the way the training is counted, rewarded and respected by peers. We say accomplishments say what we are capable of; training is an accomplishment. On the other hand, training alone doesn’t cut it, but fix that by being honest.

You may have a job to fill and I may need that job, but one day I’m just going to wish I could punch you out for treating me like an idiot… Can’t say that much does much productivity. Or, job growth for either one of us. Then, the Cave Man would have used his club. Problem solved.

Better yet, let’s embrace the Cave Man. Let’s see if we can get rid of petty maneuvering for power and reward merit. It doesn’t always have to be a promotion. People know others may have more of what it takes to do a certain job and should be rewarded for it. Recognize or seek to know other talents your people may have and interests they might want to pursue. You might discover something wonderful to benefit all in the form of a new product or process. Maybe some ways we do things have to be do overs, starting with the people. Leave egos and clubs behind and talk as people.

As for a good and reasonable how to do a needs assessment, check out this link: http://www.dirjournal.com/guides/how-to-conduct-a-training-needs-analysis/

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

My book, The Cave Man Guide to Training and Development, is available now. It’s inexpensive and is available in several downloadable e-book forms, including basic PDF. My blogs here on The Free Management Library do reflect my own opinion, but I do accept opposing views and even guest bloggers. Check out the link at the top. The place to find my other writings as well is currently called Shaw’s Reality (which works well for writing, not so much for training).

Happy training.

These Questions and Answers lay out in plain and simple–in Cave Man terms–how easy it is to be misunderstood. Not only be misunderstood, but be quite funny in the process–intentional or not. Enjoy.

While I suspect this series of jokes hits the Internet every so often, the answers did make me smile so I thought I’d share them with you. It’s that time of year anyway. I have no idea of the origin of these questions, but something tells me there is modicum of truth to them as there is to any humor.

I was sent an e-mail that contained these Qs and As. I thought they were a little scary–only in the OMG factor that students may actually think like this–and perfect for Halloween pleasure, and so I thought I’d share.

Humor keeps our attention in training and educational instruction of any kind. In communication it is an invaluable tool. Besides, it is healthy to laugh, or so say the scientists.

These are indeed treats, not tricks; although I’ve been told by students I have tricked them into learning. To which I reply, “And, this is bad, why?”

The following questions were sent in last year’s GED examination These are genuine answers (from 16 year olds)…………and they WILL breed.

Q. Name the four seasons.

A. Salt, pepper, mustard and vinegar.

Q. Explain one of the processes by which water can be made safe to drink.

A. Flirtation makes water safe to drink because it removes large pollutants like grit, sand, dead sheep and canoeists.

Q. How is dew formed?

A. The sun shines down on the leaves and makes them perspire.

Q. What causes the tides in the oceans?

A. The tides are a fight between the earth and the moon. All water tends to flow towards the moon, because there is no water on the moon, and nature abhors a vacuum. I forget where the sun joins the fight.

Q. What guarantees may a mortgage company insist on?

A. If you are buying a house they will insist that you are well endowed.

Q. In a democratic society, how important are elections?

A. Very important. Sex can only happen when a male gets an election.

Q. What are steroids?

A. Things for keeping carpets still on the stairs. (Shoot yourself now, there is little hope)

Q. What happens to your body as you age?

A. When you get old, so do your bowels and you get intercontinental.

Q. What happens to a boy when he reaches puberty?

A. He says goodbye to his boyhood and looks forward to his adultery. (So true)

Q. Name a major disease associated with cigarettes.

A. Premature death.

Q. What is artificial insemination?

A. When the farmer does it to the bull instead of the cow.

Q. How can you delay milk turning sour.

A. Keep it in the cow. (Simple, but brilliant.)

Q. How are the main 20 parts of the body categorised (e.g. The abdomen)

A. The body is consisted into 3 parts – the brainium, the borax and the abdominal cavity. The brainium contains the brain, the borax contains the heart and lungs and the abdominal cavity contains the five bowels: A, E, I,O,U…

Q. What is the fibula?

A. A small lie.

Q. What does ‘varicose’ mean?

A. Nearby.

Q. What is the most common form of birth control.

A. Most people prevent contraception by wearing a condominium. (That would work)

Q. Give the meaning of the term ‘Caesarean section’?

A. The caesarean section is a district in Rome.

Q. What is a seizure?

A. A Roman Emperor. (Julius Seizure, I came, I saw, I had a fit.)

Q. What is a terminal illness?

A. When you are sick at the airport. (Irrefutable.)

Q. Give an example of a fungus. What is a characteristic feature?

A. Mushrooms. They always grow in damp places and they look like umbrellas.

Q. Use the word ‘judicious’ in a sentence to show you understand its meaning.

A. Hands that judicious can be soft as your face. (OMG)

Q. What does the word ‘benign’ mean?

A. Benign is what you will be after you be eight. (Brilliant.)

Q. What is a turbine?

A. Something an Arab or Shreik wears on his head.

IS THERE ANY HOPE FOR US? You tell me.

Now, I don’t claim to be this funny, but I’d like to be… Might even take a class in comedic delivery. Does that sound like a real class, complete with a curriculum? Sounds about right for a speaker or trainer. Good to have in your repertory of tricks.

The timing seemed right for those of us who mock reality or celebrate the absurd with Halloween. Humor is the bridge to the ridiculous. We laugh because what we hear sounds true and not true simultaneously. If it is true–a treat, and not, well–a trick.

No offense is intended by these questions and answers. They are offered in the spirit of humor. If these are true answers, I suppose we should be concerned or train comics. By the way, I have thought that would be great training for professional speaker or trainer. As you all know, we all take many paths to get here.

Although I never intend to offend, it can happen as I try to hard too hard to be cute. Sarcasm, often used in humor, can be misconstrued to reflect a vindictive purpose. Sometimes it isn’t the words themselves and their intended meanings; it can be just the topic with “triggers” that set people off emotionally, but always–always I do my best to be fair and even. Even typos and misspellings can get you into trouble if you aren’t careful.

Still, there’s always room for a smile or laughter in the training environment. At least I hope there is. and, I think it’s worth it.

Contradictions are sometimes funny, we don’t always laugh at them. “I may live inside the box, but I always think outside.” And, whatever is politically correct? However, if we can laugh, we can relax. If we can relax, we can stop worrying about our troubles and listen and learn. Maybe live outside the box. I would be willing to bet everyone has learned something here in between uncontrollable laughter. The answers are important to the GED–no doubt, but we should all know these answers, which is what makes them funny. But you knew that already.

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

If you can take more of me, more writings can be found on my web site. Can’t decide yet if it’s a cave or a website. My unusual and often thoughtful scribblings are under What I Say and range from training and development blogs found on this site, to theatre commentary and reviews. You may not see it now, but the two professions are intricately linked. Performance is performance after all. I have been told by others and almost believe it myself that performance reviewing is my profession; however, passionate communication is my life. My inexpensive, yet incredibly profound, interesting and amusing ebook is out now: The Cave Man Guide to Training and Development. In the very near future I hope to have another Cave Man book out based on my cave art and Cave Man approach to today’s life: The Cave Man Guide to Binding One’s Spear, or something like that. Happy training. Oh, and Happy Halloween!

Today, I start my first day as a professor of public speaking in a hybrid teaching environment. Oh, I’m not new to teaching–just the environment. Granted, it’s been awhile. It is both an exciting and daunting task. I won’t mention any names because it really doesn’t matter what institution it is; they are all relatively the same in how the process works.

This post begins my first hands-on experience with urban students and then it’s on to the suburbs to teach the same class to a different group at a another campus. You know about different audiences so I won’t go there except to say, it is, of course, something I must consider in how I relate my subject to my students. Not that these are necessarily big things–just different. Just like any other audience. You have to know who you are dealing with so you don’t step on your tongue, assuming anything.

Students have a different experience from when I was learning the same, but the parts that need to be in class are in class; those that can be written or discussed can be done in a form–a mandatory thread and posts that meet certain requirements and standards. In my class, communication is the name of the game so we’re talking practice on all levels. Because we are in class a few times, eight to be exact and for three to four hours, the days in class a student can miss are severely limited. Miss two and you can be withdrawn from class completely. gone are the days of showing up and passing (or not) the mid-term and exams in some classes. Here, you have to be present because that is when most of the substantial grading is done. Easy to fail; easy to be withdrawn for lack of attendance.

Let’s face it. This is when I am going to have my students show me they know how to give a speech. In the threads, we’ll talk about about we do things, give examples that we know what we are talking about. And, of course, I am there to guide and instruct.

I’ve written on hybrid education before, and I still feel it is definitely part of our future, not only in education but also in training. In fact, I think trainers got there first, but I find it interesting that we don’t put nearly as much emphasis on it in training; it’s as if we only want to save money, rather than train, making training somewhat less important than education. We could debate the two and I think education wins in the long run because it is training for life; while we are training to do a better job.

We have become a society of too much to do and too little time. We have technology for everything, and we even have technology to manage our technology with voice commands. On our phones. Today it’s the I-Phone 4S. Tomorrow?

I have already had one student request to use her smart phone (at least I’m assuming it’s smart) to do the online portions of her class because her computer is in the shop; life happens. Now, I know smart phones are seducing us in the market as the only electronic product we’ll ever need, but I still have a hard time writing on a laptop, let alone a small phone screen. Different too is the touchscreen. For some, it’s a dream to others a nightmare. But here’s something students won’t let you know they know: libraries have computers and internet access. Teachers know it. Internet cafe’s? Sometimes you have to do what you’ve got to do. I’m a survivalist, remember. Cave Man–that’s me. I just look better on paper, but I’ve been there and I’m a good resource.

I find it interesting that here on the Training and Development site, I have a following of students from another university that I think operates the same way or similarly. In essence I am doing the same job of teaching these students online. I love it. I really do, and I am so glad to see they get why I am saying something. It’s a free education. Even at my age, if someone offered me the chance to go back to school…I’d jump, but life does influence our choices. I waited a long time to do what I love because life was hard and I needed a job and I needed security. Well, I still need the security, but I could only last so long not doing what I love. Eventually I tried to do it all and nearly wore myself out. But it’s worth it. I’m working harder and loving it more.

Had I been born sooner, as a student I like to think I would have used the Internet for the very same reasons and more. I hear something in a movie or read something in a book, it’s so easy to clarify what it is I don’t know. I review plays, too, as some regulars to this blog know. I don’t always know the show. How could I know them all, but I use the Internet to find out what others have said, starting with Wikipedia because it is a good basic place to start. Is it the kind of place I will accept has having authoritative information? No, but there are links found there that are.

My first day. I am not worried about the students–except that I don’t know them yet. I like them without knowing them and I want them to like me. I want them to see the value in what I convey to them and apply it to their lives. They don’t know I had my share of problems growing up; first impressions can be deceiving. We all got to where we are based on where we come from. You can’t help who your parents are or where they came from. I could just as easily been born somewhere else and grew up in a totally different environment, but this is the one I’ve got; this is my reality.

It is the reality of my students as well. This electronic age and how it affects education is what it is. Beats the one-room school house, which I’m sure in it’s day beat the not having a school at all. Of course, you didn’t need some of the sophisticated tools of today, like being able to communicate well. All you needed then was to read and write, and if you did that, you were off to a good start. Many jobs were open to you, but some still required more specialized education. You made choices.

We have choices today. Of course, I feel communication (and public speaking) paves the way for many jobs, and can communicate credibility and leadership traits necessary for success. If you want success, that is. I’d like to say, “Who doesn’t?” It’s always apparent some aren’t willing to work for it. Being “old” I know that it pays off. Guess it’s my job to convince them.

Today I have to figure out how the grade book works. Important. Not just a log book like in the past, but an electronic marvel that provides real time feedback. I always hated waiting for grades. Teacher and student habits. We have to get into the routine. Once there, we won’t need to think about the routine, we’ll just know it and do what we have to do.

My biggest concern is that students (and I know what it’s like) will wonder how to minimize what they do. Efficiency. “What do I need to do to pass?” Not good. “What do I need to do to excel?” Better. “What do I need to do to succeed, not only in this class, but use that information to everything else?” Best.

As for me, don’t wish me luck. I’m doing what I love. I will be challenged. I know my audience (I will know them better shortly), I know my subject, and I know myself.

I will follow from time to time with similar ruminations on life teaching the hybrid education and how it relates to training. Totally off this topic, I am planning to talk about the enrichment programs at sea on the cruise lines. Sounds like a fun thing for a trainer, speaker, actor, author to do. In a couple of weeks I will be doing my first on ship. I’ll pay for the cruise, but I want to be on that stage, working with that audience, and seeing what else is out there to experience. As I keep doing all that do because it is exciting and worthwhile. My passion.

For now, the words here are my own. There’s more on my website, including dramatic criticism and comment. Saw and reviewed three wonderful shows this weekend: THE ROCKY HORROR SHOW, SUDDENLY LAST SUMMER, and PICASSO AT THE LAPIN AGILE. Talk about variety. All did a profesional job communicating life. I had my suspicions of ROCKY since it has a cult following, but in the hands of a professional theatre group, the original theatre came through. PICASSO, if you didn’t know, is Steve Martin’s first play and it is a witty look at how art and science are very similar. Two guys walk into a bar…Picasso and Einstein. I’ll put in the links later, but you can find them on my website under What I Say.

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

Check out my book, The Cave Man Guide to Training and Development. If you don’t know me, I take a rather non-traditional look at training, reacquainting us with the basics and reminding us what we may have forgotten since the days of the Cave Man. The book is inexpensive and an easy read–a compilation with some modification of related blogs you would find here. End of plug. Happy training.

It is assumed that once we have delivered the information to our students and trainees that they are ready to put them to use. Are students and trainees learning what we want them to and applying that learning when they should? The answer is a resounding, “No!”

I was astounded a few years ago when I taught at the United States Air Force Academy at a seminar on learning that students and trainees don’t really apply the information we convey–no matter how important or life saving it is–for about two years hence. That’s how long experts say it takes for the information to sink in.

I thought it was an interesting fact at the time, but as a trainer and a professor of students in an intense environment now where performance is everything I find I am more concerned. Call it a maturity issue on my part earlier, if you will, but at the time I was more concerned that some instructors at the Academy and other fine institutions thought the study seemed to exclude them.

Quite the contrary, it was exactly the institutions that have a rigid framework found not only in a training environment, but in exclusive private schools, fundamentally religious-based institutions, or any institution or environment that prides itself on imparting values and character. That includes all the service academies, Ivy league and other prestigious institutions, regardless of academic prowess. That is not to say these insitutions do not offer a fantastic, even superior learning experiences. The question is not really academic, but behavioral.

Somehow the less prestigious, less rigid, less fundamental schools did not see the same significance in the study. Their students, in fact, were more practically bent and ready to work. Who could know? But let’s learn from it.

Of course, there are always exceptions, and it may be more important in one field where knowledge is more important than practical application. However, when flying jets split-second decisions must be made on practical application of what is learned and lives are at stake. That’s different. Not all practical application comes to that, but when a company needs someone to apply practical application on its behalf it’s important; it is certainly better than having someone sitting at a desk for two years until it dawns on them what is expected of them–or not. It does not work either.

I don’t have the details of the exact study and I apologize for that, but I can assure it was quite valid and backed up by evidence. It was a long time ago and I don’t think things have changed that much. We certainly aren’t seeing the results in rising productivity levels.

Granted, this is a blog–not an expose of teaching and higher education, but the information is worth pondering about for a solution. Maybe that is reason enough to incorporate practical application and real life scenarios into our training and learning environments. We do that now. Are we doing it enough? Do we monitor education and training throughout the first two years of a job? Not often. It cost too much. Internships help. Especially with a wise interpreter to take student to be the employee the company wants them to be.

Of course, an easier solution would be to wait two years to hire anyone from the those kinds of institutions. I can hear the groans from here. I’m not serious. We can’t do that.

This study, surprisingly enough, did not say this was the case with institutions of lesser prestige, or those that seemed more practically based–filling the education and training void for the immediate workplace. That kind of institution does attract a different kind of student–one looking to change his or her life for the better. a practical view of education and training. On the downside, it is their very background that makes them less productive or dedicated students; however, those that do well seemed to succeed at work. And, education for education sake has its place; I won’t deny it.

Ask yourself why that experience might be different for the students or trainees. We know that it is a maturity issue and can assume a relative carefree attitude of student life can contribute to not having the foresight needed for future success. All students have issues, rich or poor, so we can eliminate that factor; however, focus directed in the right direction matters. Priorities, too. I’m not suggesting students shouldn’t have priorities elsewhere besides leading toward success, but those will be the ones first in line. It’s not a perfect theory.

Yes sir, that education or that training is the ticket. All of my USAF academy students would be engineers and most pilots–some flying fighters and some going into the space program–and a few going on to graduate school to be scientists, lawyers and doctors. They are guaranteed jobs. That senior year is a little lax to say the least.

I was one of the working students all through my undergraduate education at a less than prestigious institution; however, the Air Force paid my way for most of my graduate work. I was paid a salary and the service paid for books and tuition. I found myself, for the first time in my life without survival issues while going to school.

I was essentially in the same situation as students who can pick their schools, have enough money to socialize and enjoy the campus environment, and the result: my grades were better before when I worked full time, lost sleep and social playtime. Perhaps, for me it was a matter of my focus. For others, having that opportunity meant a relief from the stress of having to worry about survival, and the result entirely different. My point is that it makes a difference always, and it is behavioral in nature. The human factor.

However, my concern and yours should be those that are just graduating and going directly into a job. At the time I was teaching at the Academy some students were put on hold in the Reserves, giving them time to process what they learned and apply. Is it critical in today’s society? Probably in some cases, but I suspect the numbers are so small, they are chalked up to training accidents, misfits, personal issues, or some other reason for failure to use what they learned in school.

Understand that I am not singling out the the U.S. Air Force or any other service school, or any other Ivy league or well-known private school. Any service school, and prestigious private and/or any Ivy league school practically guarantee placement through name alone and alums willing to sponsor. That, of course, is part of the appeal. Not to mention the fact having staff and personnel from those schools makes a company look good.

What can we do as trainers and developers? We start doing our job from the hiring process. Maybe even a little before, if we can insinuate our presence into the schools to let them know how a transition to work will take place. Gone should be the quick and dirty introduction, and you start next week. Or, “Here’s your guide,” another employee with time on his hands. Or, “It’s all online, you’ll get it.” Or, as happened to me once, “Here’s your Bible (not a religious reference), your how-to-do the job. Show me what you can do.”

We can’t not care because we can let go those who don’t perform. We stand the risk of losing some potentially valuable employees because they can’t help where they come from. Interns should learn from the best we have. If there ever is a time for working mentors–mentors that lead and teach as we need them to; the time is now. They say you learn best by teaching. Why not bring new employees into training to train others? It’s a wild perspective, I know. But we learn best when we train others what is expected. That interaction can’t be bad.

Well, I guess I awoke on that side of the bed today as I contemplate getting into hybrid teaching–a new job myself and my learning was a long time ago. Fortunately, I have applied that learning since, and consider I am always learning. Some of it will be new. The technology and technique didn’t exist then. That will be new. Exciting, I hope. My goal will be to teach the practical. How to use what we learn and why it is important. Hopefully, I will succeed.

For now, let’s blog about learning and its immediate practical application, talk about it, live it as part of how we train. It may be the Cave Man in me again, looking toward simple changes in the way we operate. I follow the trends of technology as much as the next guy but I think about the non-technical side of us all the time–the people we train and teach. Technology is a tool–a good tool. Paper is a tool. Humans are not.

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

Enough for now. For a look at the human side of training from my Cave Man perspective, please check out my book, The Cave Man Guide to Training and Development. I don’t have all the answers, but I try to put them in different terms like everyone else. Hopefully, my ideas are worth thinking about, jog your memory, make you think of something else we can do to do our jobs better. By all means, feel free to disagree and let me know about it. Offer yourself as guest blogger. I don’t have the lock on ideas. My website is still there where more ideas await the curious–waiting for you. Happy training.

We all seem to have answers for success, but they aren’t the same. Are there stereotypes of success? It’s not just about training stereotypes for success: that is people who look and act like us and have the same education and training. It’s a start, but there’s more.

As trainers, it is important for us to think about what it is our companies want to gain from our trainees. Maybe we should be training the keys of success. What does make someone a success in a company? It varies, but some things remain the same. How do we gauge success? If we understood that, then maybe the hiring process gets a little easier, productivity better, personnel issues better understood. Is it simple communication?

Basic communication should, of course, make the cut of being able to communicate what needs to be said and understood by another party. It makes sense in this country that most people can understand one another pretty well; however, we do have our issues. Because we have a large number of Spanish-speaking people does that mean our company has to accommodate them. In Quebec, acceptance its bi-lingual nature is the law; that is not the case here in America–not yet. So, a non-English speaker can expect for that to be a handicap, initially; however, there are environments, even in the U.S. where that is a plus, not a negative.

Probably the first thing the Cave Man did was try to understand the language of other tribes after spending a good deal of time trying to kill all those who were different. Eventually, he came to realize if he wanted to learn from these strange people, he had to understand them and language was the best way. We do it today–or at least we try to make ourselves understood, realizing many may not understand our language.

For example, we say on the phone click one number for English and another for Spanish. A least we will speak the language–sort of. But in other situations if we use big words or slang the other person doesn’t understand, have we accomplished communication. Have we offended either party with this conversation that is marginally understood?

I’m going to look at communication, language, education and training success based on our use of language, and in my own Cave Man basic way try to make some sense of it.

Now, let’s assume we speak the same language. Does that always mean we are successful? I saw an interesting article, the Best Kept Secrets of Successful Business People, but found many of its ideas fit anyone who seeks success. Xianhang Zhang says, “If you feel like you’re the smartest guy in a room, that’s probably because someone is fleecing you.” Too often students listen to others and feel the way to success is to get the diploma, but it’s always more than that. We know the diploma may get you in the door; it may even get you hired, but it will not guarantee you success.

And, this happens to trainees, too. “I’ve got the education or training now so promote me.” How many times have we heard the term “proven success?” It seems sometimes workers don’t hear it. That means a track record of accomplishments. Training and education is one thing–accomplishments another. Success is not a simple matter.

With education and training, it is important to apply it. It is almost a no brainer to most of us who sit in observation. You can be booksmart, but not have the character to use it. With common sense you go into the education or training with the idea of what’s in it for me? What can I do with this information? Every piece of learning can be connected to a practical issue. If you aren’t connecting it to something you can do with it, you are connecting it to something you have done with it in the past. The result either way is a practical connection.

Want to know why most people don’t get the jobs they apply for? I has nothing to do with race or other obvious or often thought of stereotypical attributes. It’s because they look good on paper, but in person they lack something very important–a confidence and knowledge of application. A company doesn’t want to know if you have the knowledge but can you apply it; HR wants to know if you have the knowledge to separate you from those who admit they don’t. The company wants to know if you’ll be able to use what you know to their benefit. At this point, they really don’t care about you. Later that may change after you have proven yourself.

So being the smartest guy in the room doesn’t make you the most marketable. Now the company has hired the “smartest guy” in the room, they want to know, not only are you capable of applying that knowledge, but if you will fit into a company that has people who know what you do and apply. Surprise! You may not be the smartest guy in the room right now after all.

Businessman Frank E. Rider makes some some simple but sensible points:

• Work Hard
• Be Smart
• Be Lucky

“By ‘Work Hard’ I don’t mean lift heavy boxes or work 80 hours a week. Do the things that are hard, the things you don’t understand or don’t want to do. Do the hard things.

“By ‘Be Smart’ I don’t mean be Einstein. The first rule of being smart is “don’t be dumb.” Think things through, be street smart, get at least one good nugget from every person you come in contact with. Behind every successful businessman/woman there are several thousand people (mentors, advisors, peers, competitors, employees, customers, vendors etc.) The human wiki.

“Don’t leave out luck. It’s a state of mind. Working hard and being smart will put you in position to take advantage of luck when it presents itself.”

So what distinguishes you? Character. Leadership. The ability to get along with others. The ability to leave your ego at home. Attitude is key to fitting in. Being the stereotype.

Fitting in. It doesn’t mean changing yourself until you are unnoticeable. Are you so shallow that if you can’t speak the way you always do, that means your less than yourself. We like people who speak other languages. Successful people speak a company language–usually a standard English (unless you have a job with a foreign company) so we speak the most common language of our customers.

If we do something more individual in nature like use “street talk” or “slang,” we may be cool but we don’t speak for the company. If this is too much of a challenge, you should look for another job where that language is appropriate. I don’t know many like that. At least not ones that pay well or are legal. You see these companies don’t care, and the products are in so much demand by an unsophisticated public.

Ax yo’self whad it means. Insulted that I should assume you speak that way. Insulted I should assume anything about you. That is exactly the point. We shouldn’t have any reason to assume anything about you. At first, language used in such a way my be charming; its certainly individual, but it will lose the respect of those you serve. Company speak, notice I did not call it standard English, is not as interesting.

It is assumed by people of color (to use their own term of acceptance here) that someone is a hiring person is prejudiced by race or color. Experience tells them you have certain attitudes and speak to customers in a certain way if the interview does not bring out the opposite. If you are well spoken in company speak, that fact will be ignored by most. I will admit a few prejudiced souls are still out there, but try dressing like the company and acting like the company and you most likely will fit in.

If you do not get the job, look at your other qualifications, education, work history, availability, and general attractiveness. The last is actually one of the more significant, unspoken rules of business. Image of company is everything. Short people beware except in a petite shop. Tall, good-looking people rule; product knowledge and procedures can be taught, while genetics are what they are. We have laws that prevent overt prejudice, but older people don’t apply to a younger company that sells to a young clientele either and vice versa. Certain businesses seek young female sales persons because the clietele is largely female. Seen very many males work at Victoria’s Secret, and some seek men to talk to businesses who have predominately male customers, i.e. John Deer.

Often the world deals in stereotypes. Being a stereotype also means you fit in to an expected norm. So much so, take one look at theatre or film and you’ll see it full of stereotypes so much so it’s news when someone breaks that barrier. Take Denzel Washington. Like many African American actors, he could have allowed himself to be stereotyped and indeed he was until he first rose to prominence when he joined the cast of the medical drama St. Elsewhere, playing Dr. Philip Chandler for six years. That made a wider range of people take notice; however, early one he had to accept that stereotype and change it–for himself anyway. Later we see him the hero. He is well spoken and when he puts on the hood vernacular we are somewhat surprised. Success is based on changing up that stereotype.

All things being equal in theatre, an actor can lose a part to another who is more stereotypically the part, all talent being equal. It’s the same in the real world. Stereotypes stay what they are if you let them. There are stereotypes as long as we reinforce them. But you can change them by broadening their focus. Some actors love stereotypes–that is, if it gets them a lot of work. Take the actors who have dark features: they can play, Native Americans, Spanish, South or Central American, North African, Arab or Muslim, and sometimes Eastern European or even Indian or Pakistani. I’m a blond, which has limited me to particular parts, California, Irish, German, Danish, etc., however, if I tried to convince others I could play ethnic roles I would be disappointed. There are two many who already fit that stereotype so why waste time with me. In Hollywood, in the past, those same characters would have been played by a caucasian actor of note, i.e., a very bad John Wayne as Ghengis Khan, and, we scoffed. But Hollywood was made to take the ethnic because the audience (and the union) demanded it, but the experience was better all around. These actors accepted the fact that they were a stereotype in one way, but still had to fit into the company. Speaking only one way would have limited them severely.

Perseverance is what has made these character actors successful. Not only persistence in getting what they wanted, they listened to what was being said and noted the trends. They fit themselves into the trends. This is idea is not new. Ever hear of the man of a thousand faces? There is actually an old movie about Lon Chaney, a horror film star you may have hear about. The film starred James Cagney, another actor, who certainly didn’t fill the stereotype of tall, good-looking, but he played this role of an actor who wanted to work so bad that he disguised himself into whatever the film company was looking for, and got the part, proving that anything is possible if you try to fit in. Lon Chaney became the “man of a thousand faces” setting the standards for the movie industry to use people who were good actors to play parts they may not fit physically and use make-up, costumes and special effects to create the whole effect. Attitude, perseverence, using the ego to motivate or persevere, but do not wait for success, make it happen is the way to do.

By the way, there are may theories on success, read them, contemplate them, apply them if they fit. Don’t try to be the first to apply your own theory, you may not even get the job. You’ll have a lot of people during it their way; do you really think they want you working against them. Fit in with them and use your way if it brings you success, but only then. Use it before, unless you work for yourself, and you won’t fit in. We like being individuals, but the world is made of people who live together, and they can’t help putting stereotypes to their world. If you want to be like them, you have to a stereotype with a difference but still one they appreciate.

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

I always remind folks that this is my opinion and I hold no one else responsible for the way my mind works. But I am open and been known to change my mind for another point of view. We are all learners here. This a long blog or article even for me. If you are interested in hearing some of my other views, check out my website under the category of What I Say. Be sure to check out my new book onThe Cave Man Guide to Training and Development and look for my second, The Cave Man Guide to Communication coming soon. Happy training.

It’s no joking matter. Moderation and facilitation at a conference or meeting are serious business, and remain among the best methods to gather and discuss information in a meaningful way. It is a way of organizing specific information productively as well. Facilitating and moderating are part of the trainer’s most important tools.

At first glance, the moderator’s job doesn’t seem all that scary. “I’ll be doing what I always do at meetings and these are my colleagues, too.” A good idea, but it’s not the same; and prospective moderators or facilitators need to be made aware of that. There are differences, according to most experts.

Still, some organizations may use the terms interchangeably, which doesn’t help. You have to wonder if the organizations know what they want. Hopefully, they have their own definitions and stick to them for consistency. And, I have mine. I’m in the camp that sees differences. I suppose, as long as you know the job, it doesn’t matter what it’s called–except in a medium like this where communication needs a broad spectrum for clarity.

The moderator’s job depends more on his or her personal knowledge of the subject to lead and direct others along more information-rich, specific issues. A moderator in contrast to a facilitator is much more in tune with the nuances of the subject. Differences matter here.

The facilitator may be someone who does not have the same knowledge base as the others, but is experienced at organizing material and soliciting the responses from the group. A facilitator is perceived as being a leader of the discussion to set the tone and bring in all manner of diversity to have a fruitful discussion. To do this job, a person has to be more of a trained communicator and less of a subject matter expert–someone comfortable in handling the environment.

It should be no surprise to learn the government and other non-profit organizations may not be thinking about communication in the same way a company does that deals with sales of products or services.

Too often, (and I’ve seen this a lot in government), people are given moderator or facilitator jobs because they seem appropriate to their level of position. While these people may not be the subject matter or communication experts, they are placed in a position to lead the discussion on a particular topic. It may go with the territory as “the way we do things in this office.” It’s not necessarily a good way to go, I’ll grant you, but government and other non-profit organizations can be very rank and position conscious. Only when people have to sell those programs are they aware of how complex dynamic communication can be when transferred to a more formal environment such as a seminar or conference.

Good communication (facilitation) may appear to the observer to be just “a matter of conversation with peers.” However, it isn’t just “a matter of conversation;” it involves many more skills that require knowledge, training and practice. It looks easy, but it’s not. It may be that this one type of communication, facilitation or moderation, seems natural and the other (public speaking) not so much.

Facilitating is outwardly more dynamic and focused on both subject and audience, bringing out the most diverse view possible, whereas moderating looks to consolidate and merge views toward a common goal.

A manager can be a good facilitator and, if he or she has a good working knowledge on the specific subject, a good moderator only if he or she is able to separate from being the manager of subject-matter experts and become a communicator and information flow expert.

Check out the Free Management Library page: All About Facilitation, Group Skills and Group Performance Management for more useful information. For the most part, facilitation and moderation are found under a heading of leadership; however, I think both can fall as strongly under the heading of communication in the same way a leader is not perceived as a leader unless he or she is able to communicate that fact. Facilitation and moderation involves complex communication centered on business and organizational management.

Body Language
Coaching
Conflict (Interpersonal)
Feedback (Sharing)
Handling Difficult People
Listening
Morale (Boosting)
Motivating
Negotiating
Power and Influence (Managing)
Presenting
Questioning
Trust (Building)
Valuing Diversity

To be fair, while I think subject matter experts should also be communicators, not all communicators can be subject matter experts. There are times when you need someone with enough knowledge on a subject to be able to move people who have similarly well-developed knowledge on the subject to relevant discussion and action.

Nadejda Loumbeva is an international organization professional working in managing of knowledge using information and communication technologies, and all aspects of organizational development. Here’s what she thinks on the subject from her blog.

Moderation:

In my view, moderation of meetings, events, networks and communities, focuses on keeping the information and communication flow clear and accessible to all who participate, at all times. In this sense, the moderator is at least in some ways an information manager. In an online environment, s/he monitors the communication flow, makes summaries and digests, approves participants’ requests and posts, and even maintains the online environment. The moderator is often quite invisible for those who participate in meetings, events and communities, but nevertheless indispensable!

Facilitation:

To the contrary, the facilitator of meetings, events, networks and communities is much more visible and active. S/he steers the communication flow and keeps it on track. In this way, facilitation focuses on including all participants in the discussion, even the ones who are less comfortable with speaking and contributing, ensuring all voices are heard and discussion is vibrant, interesting and useful to those who participate. The facilitator makes it clear to all when milestones as part of the meeting, event, or network/community activity, have been achieved and then moves on to the next milestone. Having good people skills, the facilitator enables a comfortable and inclusive environment of openness and trust for those who participate.

Ms. Loumbeva has a solid yet brief definition I can work with. Keeping the communication simple is always key. We know most people are uncomfortable with public speaking, and on the surface this does not seem like public speaking. In fact, facilitating or moderating a public discussion involves more than public speaking; it involves leadership traits and organizational skills as the “script” changes moment-to-moment.

You still have to know the basics of good communication and apply them. You have to know your audience (and participants in this case), know your subject and know yourself. Most importantly you have to own the stage and control the environment.

When you are a public speaker you own the stage but there is little you can do at the moment to control the environment. When I first started public speaking, I was nervous. I hardly notice it now that I own the stage when I come out. But the same holds true for anyone in any speaking environment. If you have been asked to contribute, you need to “own the stage.” Do that and the nervousness will go away in time–or be channeled in a useful way.

As for controlling the environment? That can be trained. You have to understand the dynamics of interpersonal communication as well as public communication to be successful as a moderator or facilitator. It is a worthwhile experience to have as a communicator and as a trainer. To some, it may even be more satisfying than public speaking alone–especially for those who enjoy the feeling of immediate accomplishment.

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

In my book, The Cave Man Guide to Training and Development, I talk about how the idea of training and development began in the cave, how we learned what we know today from the cave men and women who were motivated by survival. Only our organization’s survival is at stake today, not our lives. Imagine what problem solving facilitation and moderation might have looked like in the cave council. The only difference would be the campfires to keep the cave warm. Facilitation and moderation had to evolve from the chaos of everyone wanting to be heard. At first, the head of the cave clan or tribe probably ran the program until he or she decided someone else could do the job better, and the first facilitator or moderator was born.

If you would like to respond to my views, please do so here. I can also be found on my website. There you will also find articles on other subjects under the What I Say category. Let me know if I can help with your next training session, coach you through your next keynote, or anything else training or communication-related. Happy training.

Taking advantage of technology, a teacher in Potomac, Maryland conducts her Advanced Placement Calculus class a little differently. In fact she has turned the traditional method on its head by having her students view her lectures via podcast and bring their homework to school. This has phenomenal applications for experiential training.

According to Gregg Toppo of USA Today in his article, “Flipped Classrooms Take Advantage of Technology,” students are less stressed and teachers lecture less–or so it seems – and teach more. It’s the latest way technology is changing teachers’ jobs — in this case it’s literally turning their workday upside-down. But teachers say flipped, or upside-down, classes offer greater control of material and more face time with students.”

The Method:

The teacher (in this case, Stacey Roshan) records her lesson on her tablet using it as virtual blackboard and uploads it to ITunes as a podcast. Students view the podcast at their convenience, once or as many times as needed. When they come to class, they bring out what would traditionally be “homework” to work on in class, first by themselves, then with a fellow student, and finally with the teacher. If something wasn’t clear in the lecture, time can be taken now to clarify it. Time is not wasted on what was easily digested and understood, but on the areas that plagued the students, and contacting a peer or problem solving didn’t resolve. It seems a wonderful application of hands-on experiential learning.

The Arguments:

The Cons. Disadvantaged students don’t have access to the technology, or what they have is unreliable. That sentiment was echoed in the comment section as well, also pointing out that “again we’re proving anything works for top tier students.” The technology becomes the focus, not the lesson. Lecture is still lecture however leisurely its delivered, and not the best way to teach; “it is still bad pedagogy,” say one detractor. Interactive lecture in class is better, constantly checking on the student’s grasp by asking questions as you go.

The Pros. On the plus side, according to Toppo, the teacher, Roshan “says it’s all about helping students understand difficult material. Flipping the classroom, she says, has made her students more independent, less-stressed learners, because for many students, the hardest part is applying the lesson to problem sets.” It also offers the students more face-time with the teacher.

The Training Application:

The idea of experiential training is nothing new to trainers, and neither is idea of passing out “lecture” materials to trainees and having them review them and bring (homework) to class to work on in teams or alone with instructor guidance. Also, although personally I haven’t seen it yet with the corporate universities, I can’t imagine it isn’t part of their curriculum. The idea, of course, is the hands-on approach to problem solving, and the kinetic approach to learning. In simple terms, we learn best by doing.

Similar to this approach is the hybrid education I have mentioned previously here in, “Are Hybrid Online/ Classrooms the Answer?” In fact, hybrid education and training seems to be the future, with so little time being available in today’s fast-paced world. The very technology making some things easier for us is also making us work harder because we are constantly available and answers can be researched and delivered in a matter of minutes instead of hours and days.

By the way, I will soon be teaching two hybrid public speaking classes, and I suspect during and after that experience I may have more to report on the subject of hybrid learning and its applicability to training and development. So far, I am very intrigued by this approach and can’t wait to start my learning process. Two different audiences, two different environments and the same class and teacher may make for an interesting discussion at some point.

What are your thoughts on experiential learning and the “flipped classroom” scenario? Do you see any applicable training applications? Give us some examples of techniques you’ve used in your training. Let me know in the comments section here. Also, if you want to contact me or check out my Acting Smarts website feel free. I have a new eBook out for anyone interested in my Cave Man approach to training, The Cave Man Guide to Training and Development. It includes a lot of helpful ideas and insights for all levels of trainers. Happy training.

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.