Tom Walter

How to Screen a Company for a Good Culture Fit

Learning methodologies are cheat sheets. The ADDIE methodology (analyze, design, development, implement, evaluate) was developed by Florida State University for the U.S. Army as a repeatable and standard set of tasks to create training. At the time of its creation, similar methodologies emerged in other areas. For example Tom DeMarco, Ed Yourdon, and Larry Constantine were developing SSADM (structured systems analysis and design methodology) for data processing's growing complexity. In all cases, methodologies allow teams to follow a repeatable series of steps, adjusted for the context of their project, to drive speed and quality. These methodologies were called Top Down and later Waterfall, and that's where the problems began to emerge. David Parnas (U.S. Naval research), in “A Rational Design Process: How and Why to Fake It,” writes: "Many of the \[system's\] details only become known to us as we progress in the \[system's\] implementation. Some of the things that we learn invalidate our design and we must backtrack." Top Down doesn't backtrack easily. It's more start over than backtrack, and no one wanted to do that. Imagine painting a family portrait and then having to add another person to it. The IT industry tried to mitigate Parnas' reality by creating RAD (rapid application development). Requirements were gathered and upfront focus groups with critical stakeholders and iterative prototyping were used to drive design and development. This solved most of the backtrack problem, but many IT teams struggled with prototyping that would never end. They called this death spirals.  SAM (Successive Approximation Model), created by Allen Interactions, has emerged as an alternative to ADDIE, especially when doing e-learning solutions to drive performance improvement. The kickoff focus group is called Savvy Start, and the risk of death spirals has been mitigated through three design and three development iterations. Allen Interactions's philosophy maps the purpose of this methodology toward driving performance. The current iteration of methodology is “Agile.” This approach challenges not only the accountability of roles and ownership of deliverables, but also flies in the face of current multitasking project work. The primary difference in this approach is that smaller chunks are completely finished through locked-down teams in a fixed period of time (sprints). This is not prototyping—the deliverables are complete, useable components. In my opinion, true Agile is difficult to implement in typical corporate organizations and cultures without creating a new and independent organization. The chief energy officer of Torrance Learning, Megan Torrance, has been successful in using Agile approaches to deliver e-learning to their customers through LLAMA (lot like Agile methods approach), their unique approach to agile. So, there you have it: a brief breakdown of the methodology wars. It’s up to you to decide which works best for your design plans. For a deeper dive into the various learning methodologies, join me for the next online workshop, Essentials of Learning Design Methodologies: ADDIE, SAM, Agile, and More.

Methodology Wars: ADDIE vs. SAM vs. AGILE

The next generation of high-potential leaders has different behaviors and expectations than those of previous generations. High on the list of expectations are trust, passion, and inspiring purpose. It’s no surprise that their learning styles are technology-driven, and the preferred leadership style is that of a partnership. This type of partnership will demand consistent and frequent feedback. The main delight of this generation is making a difference.Personally, I have found the characteristics of the Millennial generation and Generation Z to be refreshing. When compared to the workaholic work habits of the Baby Boomers and the now and up-and-coming workaholics of Generation X, the new and upcoming generation values meaningful work, relationships, autonomy, and mastery.How are companies addressing the leadership needs of this generation? Companies such as Whole Foods, The Container Store, Medtronics and Tom’s Shoes to name a few are embracing the organizational behavior movement, conscious capitalism, and its four pillars:Higher Purpose – focusing on a deeper purpose than profit.Conscious Culture – values that foster care and principles and practice that build trust among team members and stakeholders.Conscious Leadership – focusing on transformation through servant leadership and serving the purpose of the organization.Stakeholder Orientation – recognizing the whole business ecosystem and engaging employees, customers, suppliers, funders and supportive communities for sustainability and resilience.One might argue that conscious capitalism works great in the public sector; however, the government sector is faced with different challenges, such as:building a workforce with a faltering “B-team”lack of transparencycontracting outdeferred maintenance.Although budget cuts, some form of mediocrity, and lack of control will most likely always be a part of the government culture, those factors do not need to become excuses for unconscious leadership. For government managers and employees, each will need to ask the question, “How conscious is my own leadership and how conscious is the team?”Leaders will need to engage their internal “action log” interpreting their surroundings and reacting when issues of power and timing are at stake. There are eight transformations of leadership in relation to conscious capitalism: opportunist, diplomat, expert, achiever, redefining, transforming, alchemical, and ironic. Learning how to move through these leadership styles is crucial for working towards conscious leadership in a more controlled work environment.Conscious capitalism advocates a way of being that requires a long-term process of well-being and serving a larger community. To that end, authentic leadership will play a critical role in implementing a conscious capitalism culture that attracts and retains high-potential leaders.Additionally, acting from a place of purpose and passion can prevent us from becoming victims of our ego. Open communication and the ability to establish enduring relationships with the support of mentors and coaches will provide a culture of accessibility. Likewise, self-discipline and staying grounded with personal and professional advancement will help present opportunities for mastery.Bottom line: Intentionality and clear navigation will be the leadership qualities that influence the development of this next generation of workers. Extraordinary organizational cultures and remarkable employee and client experiences just don’t happen. Being open to leadership transformation will be the key to attracting and retaining the high potential leaders of this next generation.For more insight, join me for my session, “Next Generation Leadership Development: Learning for Every Phase,” at Government Workforce: Learning Innovations. I will discuss what you should be doing to develop the next generation of leaders, as well as overall government trends and how individual agencies are meeting the training challenges of next-generation leadership development.