Vintage Bank Vault (Brook Ward/flickr.com)

Death of the knowledge bank

Reda SadkiLearning strategy

The complexity of the networks in which our organization operates is scaffolded by a corpus of mostly-unwritten, tacit knowledge and ‘ways of working’ that we learn mostly from our peers. It would be impossible to justify time to study even a fraction of the written corpus of policies, procedures, regulations and other instruments of bureaucracy that provides the legal and operational framework – and even that would not provide access to the tacit knowledge that we need. So we learn as we go from our colleagues. In some contexts, we may proceed by trial and error, making adjustments when we receive negative feedback.

When asked where we learn such knowledge, sources may remain apocryphal. We seldom reflect on where, when, how, and from whom we learn.

Relegating learning about operational complexity to the informal domain may seem to present a risk for the organization. In practice, we find that we do tend to learn what we need, when we need it as we work. It would be costly and time-consuming (i.e., impossible, as stated above) to achieve the same ends through formal training. Instead, the organization stands to benefit from recognition of the value of what is learned informally and learn to trust its validity.

The organization’s mission and mandate – as well as its ability to deliver on these – is the subject of much internal discussion in both the central organization (“headquarters”) and the network.

What do we do if a formal review finds limited change management capability in-house to keep pace with the rapid change in the external environment? We know that this is a critical gap because of the increased competition in the humanitarian and development world between the traditional service providers and new providers who are looking to enhance value-for-money offerings. Worse, other significant gaps may be found in our ability to drive strategically-guided programs on the ground, leading to diluted service delivery.

Such diagnosis leads to a refocus on knowledge production, circulation or exchange, but often misses the point that learning is what brings knowledge to life. The knowledge bank model is bankrupt: accumulation (or transport) of knowledge is a costly dead end, because the nature of knowledge itself has changed. It flows and becomes obsolete faster than ever. It is process, not product. Quality is in the ‘pipes’ that connect networked knowledge. Learning is in the network. That is why it is necessary but insufficient to retool in order to move knowledge throughout the world.

Why do organizations confronted with the same problem so consistently fail to consider that learning is knowledge-as-process? The blog posts in this series on learning strategy have consistently highlighted both the centrality of informal and incidental learning and its lack of recognition and near-invisibility to the organization. The more highly developed the ‘pipes’ of informal and incidental learning – or the more politically volatile the environment–, the less likely it becomes that the value of what is learned outside of formal contexts will be visible or acknowledged. And what cannot be seen is, of course, unlikely to be taken into consideration in times of change or reform.

Photo: Vintage Bank Vault (Brook Ward/flickr.com)

Crop Circle - Waylands Smithy (Ian Burt/flickr.com)

Decentralization done wrong

Reda SadkiLearning strategy

Leave the global functions to headquarters, and shift responsibility for the field to those who are actually there (or close by). It sounds perfectly sensible. And, in fact, it is an approach to decentralization adopted by some organizations. What are its implications for learning strategy?

At the most obvious level, decentralization for those of us who work at the global – and, to a lesser extent, regional – level has reduced direct contact with the network. We often experience this as a constraint, limiting our ability to stay current with what is happening in the network to ensure that our work is closely aligned to the mission.

We duly note that privileged relationships with donors have been preserved at the global level, despite decentralization.

We observe mostly negative consequences of decentralization, even though in principle it should be the best support to take into account differences from one geographic region to another. In the organization’s culture of consensus and the political context for decentralization, such frustration may not be expressed publicly. Yet, decentralization is increasingly perceived as an important barrier to working with the network, much less working as a network. This is because responsibilities shifted but hierarchies remained to erect new walls that obscure knowledge and limit its flow.

How do we compensate when the ‘pipes’ of knowledge networks dry up or are dismantled? In working with those in the field, we leverage the fact that we are likely to be peers, often having ourselves “been there”. We rely on prior knowledge that we may have acquired through experience. However, we are keenly aware that what we know may be out of date. After all, how long can we be in a global position while being out of touch from the field?

Photo: Crop Circle – Waylands Smithy (Ian Burt/flickr.com)

The hub upon which all things turn (Nic McPhee/flickr.com)

The hub in a network

Reda SadkiLearning strategy

We sit at the hub of a distributed network. In the past, only some organizations sought to organize as networks – those that had to bring together, federate or otherwise affiliate disparate groups characterized by diversity. Today, an organization that does not distribute its functions is unlikely to leverage its network. Learning strategy therefore carefully considers how to decentralize the means while sharpening the aim. We explore the tension between the consequences and risks of decentralization and the benefits of learning in the network.

We share a collective vision and commitment to building the capacity of our network and leveraging our organization’s connectedness to improve. How well we execute on that commitment is measured by mission performance.

We are empowered as connectors in the network: from members to the hub, from the hub to the members, and members to each other. What is changing about the collective vision we share? What needs to change? How do we broker knowledge and learning in those relationships? What are the effective forms of collaboration (liaison, representation, coordination) with the members? What do we learn from working with the members, how and from whom? What is our role in brokering knowledge and learning from the global to the national level? What are the barriers and enablers to learning with members?

We believe that working together means learning together to strengthen our vision for a long-term, sustainable and resilient future. Strengthening our collective vision empowers us to translate our mission performance into innovation to adapt and grow.

Photo: The hub upon which all things turn (Nic McPhee/flickr.com)

Under the Bridge (Kim Hill/flickr.com)

Mind the gap

Reda SadkiLearning strategy

How do we establish a mentoring relationship? What do we do when we identify a knowledge or performance gap in a colleague? This is a sensitive issue. Pointing to a gap is more likely to lead to a productive process when mutual trust is a pre-existing condition.

When we mentor a colleague, we rely on our relationships as peers and our shared values. We deploy a range of context-specific approaches.

We use sophisticated strategies to provide support while respecting silo boundaries, personal pride, and limitations circumscribed by institutional culture.

When we establish a mentoring relationship, we take a careful, considered approach, respectful of the other person’s experience and context.

Developing mentoring is easier in smaller teams.

Because the concept of “mentoring” implies different levels of experience, we emphasize mutual support between peers.

One recurring gap is the lack of knowledge or experience in the organization or industry. Those of us who have a long affiliation feel a responsibility to induct “outsiders” to the values and practices we share.

We feel responsible to our colleagues, whether or not they are our direct reports. Our ability to collaborate is improved when we help others address gaps.

Photo: Under the Bridge (Kim Hill/flickr.com)

Chinese Garden of Friendship in Sydney Australia (Ajith/flickr.com)

Being mentored

Reda SadkiLearning strategy

Mentor was the name of the adviser of the young Telemachus in Homer’s Odyssey. A mentor is an experienced and trusted advisor. In the workplace, mentoring usually involves providing counsel to colleagues. Mentoring relationships may be purely informal one-offs or imply a deeper investment for both mentor and mentee. For mentoring relationships to deepen and become sustainable requires mutual identification and recognition.

The organization does not currently formally prescribe or support mentoring. And, for some of us, at times we have had to find our own way because there was no one to turn to for guidance or support. Yet, most of us can recall how support, counsel and advice received from more experienced colleagues both helped collaboration and furthered our individual development. By exploring when and how we received mentoring, we can better envision how the organization might be able to recognize and support it.

Line managers may be de facto mentors, although this role overlaps in complex ways with the guidance, direction and leadership as well as evaluation and feedback they are responsible for. When our line manager takes the time to provide context and explanation, we find this helpful. Unlike other relationships with colleagues, which require prior negotiation, turning to your line manager for guidance and support is perceived as legitimate. And, in fact, in our resource-scarce context, there is often no one else to turn to.

Some of us find mentors amongst our external partners as well as trusted colleagues and friends who may in completely different areas of work. Such mentoring relationships with people outside our immediate work environment provide additional benefits by connecting us to other ways of thinking and doing.

Photo: Chinese Garden of Friendship in Sydney Australia (Ajith/flickr.com)

Boarding Royal Carribean's Vision of the Seas in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic (Light Nomad/flickr.com)

Onboarding

Reda SadkiLearning strategy

How do we get newcomers onboard?

Onboarding refers to the mechanism through which new staff acquire the necessary knowledge, skills, and behaviors to become effective “insiders” of the organization.

The organization’s onboarding process, for most us, was very informal and lacked structure, except for various administrative tasks. We know that there are no shortcuts, given the amount and complexity of tacit knowledge that is difficult to transfer. When we started working in the team, we may have found gaps in our knowledge, skills, or experience – including ones that no one could foresee or expect.

Efforts to formalize onboarding inevitably run into the same difficulties as formal training. When a person arrives in a role, there are likely to be urgencies to attend to. In the process of dealing with these, newcomers have to establish themselves, begin building relationships with others, and make sense of the complexities of the workplace, often on their own (as everyone else is supportive but simply too busy).

This points to issues at the level of the organization (beyond the team) around succession planning and handover. For example, the budget for a post does not allow for the new hire to shadow outgoing staff, and there is no established mechanism to ensure a comprehensive handover.

Gaps in technical knowledge are possible, but less likely than gaps in “understanding how everything works together and the procedures and so on”. Other gaps will appear over time. Yet onboarding is a repetitive process, some gaps can be identified ahead of time, and there is a tangible benefit to abandoning the prevailing sink-or-swim” approach.

Photo: Boarding Royal Carribean’s Vision of the Seas in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic (Light Nomad/flickr.com)

Benjamin West, Calypso's Reception of Telemachus and Mentor (Daniel Reinberg/flickr.com)

Mentoring

Reda SadkiLearning strategy

Fostering relationships that enable and sustain collaboration and inquiry requires building trust about both technical competencies and each person’s interest in dialogue.

Therefore, two contexts require special attention. First, when newcomers come onboard to the team, they may or may not be familiar with the general organizational context or the specific working conditions. This requires thinking through how they are brought on board (“onboarding”). Second, when a performance gap is identified, in-service coaching and mentoring may be considered, especially if stopping work is not a possibility or the gap covers tacit knowledge that is not taught formally.

Although coaching and mentoring require specialized skills, most of us recognize that the mentoring and support we receive helps develop our capabilities. Having received support, we are also willing to provide it, with or without institutional support. When we identify a gap in knowledge, skills or experience in a new colleague, how do we provide support to address this? When and how do we mentor colleagues?

Yet, like other dimensions of informal learning, mentoring may no longer be assumed to “just happen”. Despite our recognition of its importance, it is seldom included in formal tools such as job descriptions or performance reviews that are supposed to identify competencies, experience and achievements. This needs to change.

Photo:  Benjamin West, Calypso’s Reception of Telemachus and Mentor (Daniel Reinberg/flickr.com)

Synchronicity of Color (DWPittard/flickr.com)

Encourage collaboration and team learning

Reda SadkiLearning strategy

Our areas of work are siloed due to limited resources and time, the huge scope of our global mandate, the high level of specialization required, and internal politics. Collaboration and learning as a team (beyond the unit level) requires leadership and concerted effort. It is hard to sustain over time.

Yet, to collaborate we build, sustain and renew many individual relationships based on trust and need. These are much less subject to fluctuations in our environment. We may get to know each other and become friends first, perhaps because we work next to each other in the office, share lunch or coffee breaks, or engage in the same activities outside of work. Being in the field together is a powerful accelerator. We also share the commitment to the mission, despite our frustrations with the here and now. This is how, on one level, we come to establish trust, by being human together. For collaboration to lead to results, the quality of human relationships is a critical factor. “Good colleagues” are those whom we trust.

On another level, we learn to be careful given the volatility of our environment. Perhaps we first test the waters of both technical and collaboration competencies by asking for input on a concept paper or inviting a colleague to contribute to a meeting. We observe how they behave to determine how and to what extent we can collaborate with them – and how much value can come from collaboration. Only then can we begin to be transparent with each other to achieve shared understanding.

What about those of us who are not technical experts, but provide support, for example, for planning, project development, learning or communication? Negotiating collaborative learning is a necessity. Asking questions of others is legitimized by the recognition that your own expertise is in another area of work.

Even though much of relationship building depends on the behaviors of individuals, our organization can do much to provide an enabling environment to foster dialogue and collaboration. We also need to rethink the rules of engagement that, in some cases, provide the appearance of consensus but slow our ability to identify and tackle a problem.

Photo: Synchronicity of Color (DWPittard/flickr.com).

Crossing Golden Gate (Noël/flickr.com)

I have no idea

Reda SadkiLearning strategy

What do we do when we cannot achieve certainty?

We increasingly accept that we need to make decisions without the comfort of certainty. It is okay to not know. It is healthy to accept the unknown as we no longer seek certainty. It is when we are no longer certain that we learn.

In some cases, uncertainty opens the door to knowledge that we were not seeking. This is incidental learning.

The organization still expects certainty. Some of our leaders demand it. As working professionals, we are expected to provide answers, i.e. to know. Yet our expertise is increasingly in our ability to respond when faced with new contexts (for example, new technologies, reduced budgets, or changes in political leadership), new challenges (for example, Ebola or noncommunicable diseases) where learning is the process of constructing viable but context-specific answers.

We straddle between expectations that we know (as experts) and the unknown that is part and parcel of our daily work. There is some comfort in certainty, as well as lower risk we may value because of the political nature of our environment. This is, in part, why we may pull back, as we may fear others seeing that we do not know.

Noah and Reg discuss teaching and learning theories

Teaching and learning in The Walking Dead (S05E14)

Reda SadkiCulture, Learning

In this episode, the young Noah has asked to meet with Reg, an elderly architect or engineer who had the know-how to build the wall that protects the community of Alexandria, which some believe has survived zombies and other predators mostly by sheer luck.

Noah recognizes that it’s more than luck – and wants to Reg to pass on knowledge and expertise that is different from that needed only to avert death. Reg shows him a notebook in which he’s kept personal notes on events, and offers one of the notebooks so that Noah can begin to keep a record.

Outcome? Noah dies in the next episode. So much for transmissive learning and container views of knowledge.

(It appears that YouTube will prevent viewers in some countries from accessing the brief excerpt I’ve posted there. Apologies if you are unable to see it.)

– How is it that you called this extremely early morning meeting, yet I’m the one bringing breakfast?
– ‘Cause you’re a good guy.
– The evidence seems to go in that direction.
– What’s up?
– Can we start meeting in the mornings?
– So I can bring you steel-cut oatmeal and ask you why we’re meeting?
– So you can teach me how to build things.
– You want to be an architect?
– I want to make sure those walls stay up.
– Do you think they could fall?
– I think they could get knocked in. Could be years from now, could be when I’m your age.
– (chuckles) I’ll still be around when you’re my age.
– Well, it wouldn’t hurt if I knew some of what you knew. For the walls, the houses. Some new buildings.
– So you’re in it for the long haul?
– Yeah. What are you writing?
– Oh, I write everything down. Everything of note. Now you should.
– There’s gonna be a lot to remember.
– This is the beginning of this place. You should record all that. Along with everything I’m gonna teach you about building things. (turns off water)
– Oh, no, thank you.

Transcript source