My passion is simple: finding new and innovative ways to train leaders to be the best that they can be and refocus bad habits.
This means taking a long, hard look at the “tried-and-true” methods that continue to make up a lot of the current leadership development programs. And it means questioning whether or not they’re still relevant to today’s workforce.
For example, people in the industry love to quote the 70:20:10 model. Attributed to the Center for Creative Leadership, this approach states that 70% of leadership development occurs through hands-on experience, 20% through peer to peer learning and 10% through formal classroom training.
This model is the basis for many leadership development programs; the problem is that it’s based on research conducted between the early 1960s and the mid-1990s.
I think we can all agree that the world has changed a lot since then. Just think of how social media and the proliferation of mobile devices have completely revolutionized the way we connect with one another and the way we conduct business today. When I look back on when I started 15 years ago, I’m shocked at just how different the industry looks.
So, with everything that has changed, why are we still using research from the 20th century to develop our 21st century leaders?
How can we say that 20% of leadership development comes through peer to peer learning which includes social learning, when the theory was created before the creation of social learning platforms? Social learning is now part of our everyday culture as we like, click and share ideas on our smartphones. Surely we can learn more from each other using technology than 20% suggests?
How can we say that 70% of learning comes from hands-on experience, when things that used to be huge mysteries can be solved with a simple web search or YouTube video? Maybe this should be 100%, as it should be happening every day?
In my opinion, the time for change is now. The time for critical thinking and assessing on new approaches has come.
Every day, more millennials are taking on leadership roles in their places of business. These are the people who grew up with the technology that’s completely changed the industry in the past decade. These are the individuals we need to train to take on leadership roles. Maybe they need more face time than previous generations, as they have relied too heavily on social learning, and non-human interaction. Is 10% enough to set up someone for leadership success, who has not had as much human interaction as people did in the 20th century?
How can we expect them to learn in the same way that previous generations did? They come from a different world, and I can’t help but wonder if, just maybe, they deserve a different approach.
That’s why I’m so excited to be helping our future leaders find their way. Anyone who knows me knows how much I love changing things up and challenging the status quo. I can’t wait to continue finding – and refining -- better ways to train people in industries that are continuing to grow and change. 70/20/10? Or more like 50/50? Formal vs informal? I encourage you to share your thoughts...