This segment will be delivered using the Georgia LEARNS BYOL Plus format.
Remarkable Speaker: Paula Larson https://www.linkedin.com/in/paula-s-larson-559959b/
Moderator: Paul Terlemezian https://www.linkedin.com/in/paulterlemezian/
BYOL Plus Definition: BYOL – The Bring Your Own Learning panel format was introduced by Georgia LEARNS in 2015. Panelists have up to two minutes (30 seconds would be fine) to present questions related to what they want to learn from the audience as well as present what they believe the audience can learn from the panelist's experience. Each panel is followed by 20-30 minute breakout discussion sessions. In 2016 we improved BYOL by concluding each segment with the “Plus” - a 5 to 10 minute closing presentation by a “Remarkable” speaker who will describe what they learned from the panelists and breakouts. Critical to the success of the panel is the moderator role. The moderator stimulates interaction before and after the event via the online discussions for each segment. During the event the moderator manages the panel and the sequence of activities for the panel. They also monitor the online discussion and encourage people to submit their ideas into it.
What proof do we have (or need) that investments in learning have a positive impact to performance?
Have we set up control groups - and compared results?
Is there any proof that elearning is universally more effective or less effective than no learning, classroom learinng or social learning?
How would your role be different if validated proof was readily available to you?
Hi Everyone! As a panelist, my questions and thoughts regarding "Proof" center around discovering the effectiveness of learning events to assess what people actually have learned to improve their performance at work. The tools available to prove ROI of L&D programs tend to be much more descriptive and subjective, rather than numerical and objective. Post-training quizzes, one-to-one discussions, employee surveys, participant case studies, and official certification exams are some ways to measure training effectiveness; yet, we all know that this takes time and implementing all levels of the Kirkpatrick model can be an expensive and time-consuming process.
So what are best ways to tell the learning story and "prove" investments made to positively impact performance back on the job?
I would like to challenge what "proof" really means and why does learning feel it has to prove its relevancy in ways that other key functions do not. Is ROI and "proof" a trap that leaders are falling into and are there other ways to show value opposed to fighting to justify existence.