MindLeaders: Fueling the Learning Revolution

Is Learning 2.0 a long tail?

Tony Karrer has posted a very thought-provoking article about the Corporate Learning Long Tail and Attention Crisis. It's an interesting corollary to the impact that Web 2.0 and Learning 2.0 has on our learning audiences. Tony says, in part:

The list of issues [in this article] represent what can truly be considered a crisis for corporate learning organizations.  It's a crisis born of the Long Tail and the Attention Economy. ... Corporate learning functions will either continue to focus on the front of the tail and an ever smaller portion of the total information needs of knowledge workers or will look to expand into the long tail.

I agree with what Tony is saying about the deep impact that today's attention requirements is having on training. Today's learner expects on-demand, the whole on-demand, and nothing but the on-demand training resources.

This means that today's training needs are spread out more - there's less need than ever for long training that covers everything and more and more need for short bursts of information that meet the learner's requirements at the moment.

But is that really a long tail? I know that Chris Anderson would argue that everything in a marketplace has a long tail, but I think that the office organization creates a limited marketplace. The tail is lengthening and flattening - as trainers, we're under demand to produce more and more training pieces that are faster and meet more specific needs - but I don't think that the tail is infinite. We've gone from a hamster tail to a mouse tail, but there's still an end to the tail. Our learners need training that meets their needs quickly and helps them in their job. But it's limited by the needs of their job, so I think there's a limit to those needs.

Just a small addendum (and I'm open to hearing otherwise if people think it's wrong) to a main point that I heartily agree with: The learning market is changing, and all of us are facing the challenge of meeting those changes or becoming irrelevant to our audience.

Is "Human Resources" an out-of-date name?

Recently, I and other bloggers have questioned recently whether we should use the term "human capital," or whether it's a de-humanizing term. Today, Seth Godin talks about "Marketing HR" and makes a similar case for the term "Human Resources."

He links the name "Human Resources" back to the factory days when people were just another cog in the machines and, therefore, needed to managed as such. He proposes that HR departments should be called "Talent" departments instead, and notes that some companies are already making such moves. (And my personal favorite, departments of "People.")

I had never made such a connection to the term "Human Resources" before. Maybe it's because the term "resources" can also be about the things that are being made available to us employees, not just how to use what we have to offer. Maybe it's because it feels much more natural, like - well, "natural resources" - than "human capital."

But on the other hand, names have power, and I'm all for anything that shakes up our assumptions a bit and puts our focus squarely on how we're impacting (and hopefully improving) the people in our organizations. Even if you don't want to go through the redtape of a department name change, maybe just a campaign reminder that "HR (or training) is about talent" will serve a suitable pants-kicking to wake people up a bit.

What's your company's training or HR department done lately to remind them and everyone else that they're there for the people and the talent in their organization?

A great way to celebrate Valentine's Day - and not just because it involves a Mr. Rogers reference

I wasn't planning to write anything Valentine's Day-specific today, but then Janet Clarey posted this excellent VDay thought. Check it out for a warm fuzzy and a great way to remember the important people:

Educators you’ve loved - on Valentine’s Day

ASTD's 2008 BEST awards are open for application

ASTD (the American Society for Training & Development) has announced the opening of their 2008 BEST awards for the leading companies in applying workplace learning throughout their organization and to best support their workplace goals.

Fill out this award application is a great project. Even if you're not confident in winning (or in our case, not eligible because we're a learning provider, which I pout about a lot), the application is still very useful. It's a great way to step back and get a widescreen perspective on your organization's learning programs and their implementation, effectiveness, and support.

The BEST web site
The application
Tips for maximizing your submission
Our story about the 2007 BEST winners