Speakers 2018

 

[big_header]Experienced and Passionate Facilitators [/big_header]

Artificial Intelligence

 

Ray Greenwood – Machine Learning Architect – SAP 
Pawel Kaplanski – CEO Cognitum

Augmented & Virtual Reality

 
Angus Stevens – MD StartVR
Dean Millington – Antidote

Agile & Human Centred Design

 

Rowan Bunning – Agile Coach, Scrum WithStyle
Vikram Vetrivel  – Scrum Master

Building Learning Organisations

Nicole Thompson LearningCafe UnConference

Nicole (Clark) Thompson – Chief People Officer, APAC , Hudson

Capability to Drive Talent

John Forrest – Managing Partner, The Tangent Network

Leading Performance Consulting

Maree Howard – Global Head of Learning, Lendlease

Human-Centered L&D Service Deliver

Peter Hall Head of Leadership and Learning – Australia & APAC, QBE

Learning Business Partnership

Heather Schoenheimer – Organisation Development Consultant,
Human Strategy Consulting

Data & Analytics Driven Workforce Learning

Jeevan Joshi – LearningCafe

 

 

Posted on

Learning and Performance Management Should Tango

Session Overview

Recent changes in the work environment have placed L&D on a collision course with performance management.

First, traditional performance reviews are failing. Managers spend more than 200 hours per year on performance review activities with the average company spending around $47 million a year on related activities and technologies. Despite this investment, 95% of managers are dissatisfied with the way their companies conduct reviews and nearly 90 per cent of HR leaders say the process doesn’t yield accurate information.

Secondly, employee engagement is declining sharply across almost every workforce segment with future career opportunity emerging as the top driver of employee attrition. Whilst only 30% of employees are satisfied with future career opportunities at their organisations, 6 out of 10 heads of HR are predicting an internal skills shortage in the next three to five years.

Unfortunately, only 26% of heads of L&D agree that learning experiences align with employees’ career goals and around 11% of employees’ time at work is wasted on learning activities that are redundant or misaligned with future capability requirements.

Facilitator’s Point of View

Our approaches to both learning and performance management are failing because they are disengaging to employees and not meeting current and future capability requirements. In a world of constant change and disruption, we cannot talk about performance if we are not also talking about learning. As L&D practitioners, we have a rare window of opportunity to place learning goals at the core of a reimagined approach to performance management. By doing so, we can prepare our organisations for the future and help our employees thrive in their careers.

LearningCafe Point of View

LearningCafe considers the boundaries between learning, performance and knowledge management to be artificial. Learning should exist to support performance.

Big Questions

  • Should learning goals be part of the performance conversation?
  • What role should L&D play in performance management?
  • How do we get better at delivering learning that meets future capability requirements?
  • What role (if any) should L&D have in helping employees achieve their career goals?

Disruptive Thoughts

  • L&D is facing an immediate threat to its relevance because it’s not keeping pace with future capability requirements.
  • In a world of constant disruption, we cannot have a conversation about performance without talking about learning.If we do not know where the performance gaps are, how can we connect employees to the learning experiences that will have them bridge those gaps?

Next Steps

Resources

Facilitator

Mathias Otte LearningCafe 100

Mathias Otte, Head of Learning Services at Bupa ANZ

Posted on

Thinking of Learners as Consumers

Session Overview

What if employees were free to make a choice to consume or reject the Learning developed by L&D i.e. be consumers? Mandatory learning including compliance courses has been the engine that has driven the adoption of eLearning as it provides trackable, cost effective and a scalable solution to ensure that employees have acquired essential knowledge.

Mandatory learning however rarely addresses the higher level skills and mindsets required by organisations to stay ahead of the competition today such as innovation, resilience, customer centricity etc. Social, informal and workplace learning falls in the discretionary category and have a poor track record in most organisations.

Facilitator’s Point of View

 

LearningCafe Point of View

Earlier this year we released the “LearningCafe Digital Manifesto for L&D,” which is the result of thinking at LearningCafe about how L&D should adapt to provide value in a fast changing and digitally disrupted world. One of the principles of this manifesto is “Thinking of Learners as Consumers”.

Learners can now choose what, when and where they learn. L&D currently focuses on mandatory and compliance learning which is never a competitive advantage. Learning should be relevant and deliver value for money, time and cognitive bandwidth so that learners turn up. http://bit.ly/lcmanifesto

Big Questions

  • Uptake of discretionary learning has had a poor track record, not many start and fewer complete it. What are the causes?
  • Does discretionary learning require a different design and implementation approach which is more customer centric?
  • How does L&D make a business case for discretionary learning where success is not guaranteed?

Disruptive Thoughts

 

Next Steps

 

Resources

 

Facilitator

Brenda Smith, Learning and Organisational Development Content Lead at Telstra

 

 

Posted on

Is Learning Design Overdone?

Session Overview

Rapid change is the new fabric of doing business. Products and services that were revolutionary two years ago are rendered obsolete if they don’t adapt to market changes fast enough. VUCA – a volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous and is the term coined to describe the new environment.

In this VUCA world we discuss the current state of Learning design.  Join the discussion and hear from your peers in the room and consider whether we as a profession are addicted to “beautiful”.

Facilitator’s Point of View

In the corporate world we have moved away from designing what is needed for learners and moved more and more towards complex and ‘impressive’ learning offerings.

LearningCafe Point of View

LearningCafe has long held the view that “one size fits all” high end design approach undermines the value that L&D is perceived to deliver. We need to have solutions that fit the budget and timelines that business have available.

Big Questions

  • As a profession is Learning addicted to ‘beautiful’? Why?
  • Is there a place for ‘home made’ or ‘ugly but effective and cheap’ Learning in organisations?
  • What can be done to change this? Are stakeholder and business ready for this?

Disruptive Thoughts

  • How do people learn every day?
  • Perhaps we have linked our value to ‘beautiful’
  • Where does the expectation that all Learning should be beautiful, come from? Is it the business or L&D or vendors?

Next Steps

  • Register for “Agile in Learning Design” LearningCafe workshop.

Resources

  • “Agile Learning featuring ADDIE – Tango or Face Off” LearningCafe webinar recording https://vimeo.com/125133137
  • “Outsourcing of Learning – Good, Bad, Challenges & Opportunities”. LearningCafe webinar recording https://vimeo.com/125204540
  • “Learning on a tighter budget – The mindset for the future”. LearningCafe webinar recording https://vimeo.com/125200110

Facilitator

 Ashely Spowart, Head of Learning & Development at Guild Group

Posted on

Disrupting the L&D Business Model

Session Overview

The traditional L&D business model looks something like this:

  • A budget is set aside for L&D which is allocated to various project and expense heads.
  • L&D go to business to find out training needs.
  • Based on the budget and time available a solution is identified
  • L&D either builds the learning solution or outsources it.
  • Training is delivered and feedback collected but ROI is not really tracked.

This business model is one where L&D is sole provider of learning in the organisation with guaranteed income (budget allocation). Any monopolistic business model gives rise to inefficiencies.

In this interactive session we discuss other possible business models such as:

  • What if employees were allocated a development spend and were free to choose internal L&D courses or external providers as long as learning outcomes were met?
  • What if a variable part of the L&D budget depended on helping achieve organisational outcomes?
  • What if L&D used the sharing economy approach and jointly developed compliance courses with other organisations?

Put on your thinking cap and join the discussion.

Facilitator’s Point of View

 

LearningCafe Point of View

Business like everyone else expects best service at the lowest cost. L&D should constantly improve the value proposition by look for smart ways to reduce costs and/or improve service levels.

Big Questions

  • Does the monopolistic L&D business model stop us from being nimble and take risks?
  • Should we think of Learners as consumers and work hard to get their business? Do you have any other ideas for business model?
  • What new skills will be required to adopt a new business model for L&D?

Disruptive Thoughts

  • Can we get rid of the L&D function by providing employee the required information and tools to find it. This is starting to sound like knowledge management.

Next Steps

  • Read Business Model Canvas to map business models. http://www.businessmodelgeneration.com/

Resources

  • “Digital Disruption – Opportunity and Threat for L&D” – LearningCafe webinar recordinghttps://vimeo.com/153318403
  • Assumed Constraints and Elephant Thinking – LearningCafe bloghttp://bit.ly/1SJafpL

Facilitator

Jeevan Joshi LearningCafe Jeevan Joshi, Producer/ Founder at LearningCafe