Dick Handshaw had a great post about content and context last week. This really got me thinking.

Are we losing our trainers to developers? What happens to a training organization that replaces performance-focused trainers with an instructional design team. The training can definitely be pushed out more quickly but what is it doing to the learning? This makes me think of the template debate. Can an organization create a form or a template that a subject matter expert uses to plug in the content? If there is an instructional designer working on the content before it is released to learners, wouldn’t this be an effective way of quickly releasing needed information?

I love standards, don’t get me wrong. Past colleagues can attest that I am, perhaps, overly-fond of standards (Laurie! Loosen up!) but trying to take content and cram it into the same template is removing context and discounting the audience. It can turn it into abstract content and lose all effectiveness. The organization is lucky if some of their employees are able to apply this content to their jobs.

How do we stay nimble and still ensure effective learning? When does efficient gobble up effectiveness?

I don’t really have the answer. Coming from the high tech industry, I know the speed that is required to get information to employees and that doesn’t simply change because it makes learning a challenge. It makes sense that some content is directed through a consistent channel for information and that employees adapt and adopt based on the information coming through this channel. Clearly, not all learning can be directed this way but what (or who) determines how the content should be delivered?

What does an ideal, nimble, responsive, world-class training team look like?