Growing into success is not an easy thing to experience. You will really get knocked around a bit as you determine to win in your chosen career. The biggest drawback you have to deal with is the fear of failure. It can lead to many disastrous outcomes.
The first thing fear of failure does is breed an overcautious approach to opportunity.

Knowing when and how to utilize opportunity is fundamental to career success. Having knowledge about the opportunity, you then need to determine timing. Pros and cons listed, you make your decision. If you have a fear of failure, you might be stalled in your decision even though the opportunity passes scrutiny.

Secondly, fear of failure can keep you from speaking up and making the kind of impact that could enhance your career.

A well-spoken word that solves a problem or sparks creativity could be just the thing to get you noticed as a valuable part of the team, but if you're sitting there stewing over the kind of response you'll get, then more times than not, you'll remain silent and miss your moment to shine.

Thirdly, fear of failure causes you to miss the point of personal and professional growth.

Failing is one of the best tutors in career development. Consider the story of a new bank president who went to meet his predecessor. Upon being introduced he quickly said, "I would like to know what have been the keys to your success." The older man looked at him for a moment and replied, "Young man, I can sum it up in two words: Good decisions." To that the young man replied, "I thank you immensely for that advice, sir, but how does one come to know which are the good decisions?" "One word, young man," replied the old man. "Experience." "That's all good and well," said the young executive, "but how does one get experience?" "Two words," replied the old man, "Bad decisions."

If you really want to succeed, be prepared to grow into it. Lose your fear of failure and risk doing something that's important to you. You'll be glad you did.

By Lou Stoops

 Experiential workshops occupy a unique position in the learning and development arena in that they satisfy the learning needs of all learning styles, unlike most traditional training courses or eLearning tools. This is perhaps best viewed in reference to Honey and Mumford's popular learning styles model - activists, pragmatists, theorists and reflectors.

Activists

Traditional training courses can often be one of the worst learning environments for those with a preference for active learning. Too much presentation, too much discussion, too much analysis and not enough action. Conversely, our workshops are both active and interactive. There is always something going on to occupy the activist learner and maintain their attention and engagement.

Pragmatists

One of the difficulties that pragmatist learners often have at traditional training courses is sorting the wheat from the chaff. From all of the information presented and the variety of options that might be explored, what exactly can they apply in the real world? Our experiential workshops provide an excellent alternative for pragmatist learners. Each exercise or activity always concludes with a review of how the learning can be applied back in the workplace, the primary focus being practical application. And each of our workshops also concludes with an in depth action planning session that is aimed at helping delegates transfer the learning to their own specific situation.

Theorists

Traditional training courses are arguably most useful for those with a theorist preference to their learning. Theories and models are often presented by the trainer followed by discussion or role play exercises to consolidate the presentation. Our experiential workshops are designed around a flexible structure. Our facilitators will often make a 10-15 minute presentation of a model or concept either in advance of an activity or more often, as a summary to the learning that has taken place. Most significantly though, our exercises and activities are primarily based on real play rather than role play. Delegates are not asked to play a character or adopt a role but rather, they are encouraged to immerse themselves in the activity and deliver the tasks and objectives according to the briefing they have received. It is as a result of this real play that delegates are able to establish the concept and structure that satisfies the needs of theorist learners.

Reflectors

The needs of those with a reflective learning style are only partially satisfied by traditional training courses. One particular problem is that delegates are often asked to move straight from presentation into group discussion before returning to a presentation of the next part of the course. This provides little time for individual reflection. By contrast, our experiential workshops are multi-layered so that delegates are given the opportunity to revisit topics from different angles while simultaneously considering a new topic. This integrated approach to learning, combined with plenty of opportunity for individual reflection and review, provides a great learning environment for those with a reflective learning style.

A key feature of experiential learning is that it genuinely addresses the needs of all four learning styles via a highly integrated learning strategy. This of course, was the whole point of David Kolb's original learning styles model upon which Honey and Mumford's subsequent research was based. Over the years, most trainers and training providers have moved towards a programmed learning environment that is highly flawed. Firstly, it is primarily knowledge based learning. Secondly, it does not address the needs of all four learning styles. But most of all, it does not lend itself to the easy transfer of learning once delegates return to their normal working environment.

Against this, experiential learning ticks all the right boxes. The learning addresses knowledge, skills, attitudes and behaviours, in depth. A well designed experiential learning event accommodates all four learning styles. And significantly, delegates find it easy to apply what they have learned upon their return to work. This is not an automatic rite of passage. Our experiential workshops have been expertly designed and are continuously adapted and improved. They are supported by high quality facilitation and regular coaching interventions to ensure the right learning outcomes are achieved. And we do this by putting delegates (rather than the trainer) at the centre of the learning experience. 
    
Source Experiential Learning Centre Limited

You may be familiar with the term pedagogy which is used to describe the 'traditional' methodology of child education. Quite often it is used as a synonym for 'teaching' and certainly represents learning focused on the teacher. In other words, in the pedagogic model of learning, the teacher decides what is learned, how it is learned and when learning takes place.

Whether or not this is the best model for child education, it is clearly inadequate for adult learning, particularly when it comes to work or career-related learning within the process of human resource development. HRD requires a more active approach from the learner which takes account of individual experience.

The term 'andragogy' was publicized by Malcolm Knowles, initially in his book, "The Modern Practice of Adult Education: Andragogy Versus Pedagogy" published in 1970. In this book and later works such as The Adult Learner: A Neglected Species, he suggested a comprehensive adult learning theory, building on earlier work by Lindeman (author of The Meaning of Adult Education, 1926). The latter had picked up the term andragogy - coined by a German teacher, Alexander Kapp in 1833. The following comment by Lindeman gives you a flavour:

"...the teacher finds a new function. He is no longer the oracle who speaks from the platform of authority, but rather the guide, the pointer-outer who also participates in learning in proportion to the vitality and relevancy of his facts and experiences."

Andragogy has been extensively used as a term for adult education in continental Europe. In the English-speaking world, however, it was not commonly used until Malcolm Knowles began to write on the subject. Knowles used andragogy to define and explain the conditions that adults required for learning. Initially defined as 'the art and science of helping adults learn,' the term has taken on a wider meaning and now refers to learner-focused education for people of all ages.

For Knowles, andragogy is process-based rather than content-based (pedagogy) and anchored on four (later, five) main assumptions about the characteristics of adult learners which, arguably, make them different from child learners. But even Knowles agrees that (the first four, at least) differ only in degree between adults and children.

1. Self-concept: As people mature, each person's concept of self moves away from being a dependent personality towards being a self-directed human being.

2. Experience: As people mature they accumulate their own individual, growing reservoirs of experience that provide an increasing resource for learning.

3. Readiness to learn: As people mature their readiness to learn becomes increasingly oriented to the developmental tasks of their social roles.

4. Orientation to learning: As people mature their time perspective changes from one of postponed application of knowledge to immediacy of application, and, as a result, they shift from a subject-centred to a problem-centred orientation toward learning.

5. Motivation to learn: As people mature the motivation to learn is internal (added in 1984).

Granularity of training - how it is broken down
Integration of different training units into a coherent programme
Individualisation of learning programmes.
What is driving these trends?
These trends are driven by the needs of organisations - the need for efficiency, for productivity and ultimately for greater competitiveness. These needs constantly drive change and transformation, consequently changing how training, learning and development are provided.

How have these trends been driven in the past?
Until a few years ago, organisational training was delivered primarily through three to five day training programmes, generally delivered off-site. While this type of event can bring real benefits, it is not always appropriate for every learning topic or every learner. Similarly, technology based learning, including CBT (Computer Based Training) and elearning itself (from the mid to late 1990s onwards), was delivered in large, lengthy units. Some of Academee's own early elearning courses took eight hours to work through, primarily because they were attempting to reproduce all the content delivered by a face-to-face event.

Integration

In the past, a training programme would most likely be delivered through one medium, often the traditional 'chalk and talk' face-to-face event. Occasionally, there would be some pre-workshop notes. At this time, CBT and elearning were thought to be alternatives to face-to-face methods or were treated as add-ons, supplemental to face-to-face training and not fully integrated. Initially, elearning was predicted to save organisations millions of pounds by entirely replacing face-to-face training methods.

Individualisation

In the early to mid 1990s, one programme would typically be delivered en masse - you attended the same management training programme as all your colleagues. Although these programmes would often have a measure of effectiveness, it's now evident that they often failed to meet the individual's needs both in terms of learning style and actual training requirements.

Where are we now?

The duration of training programmes has been significantly reduced. One day programmes are now commonplace and generally considered to be highly effective. For some Academee clients, successful face-to-face events last no longer than half a day. Organisations are becoming more and more reluctant to take their workforce from their place of work for more than a day - the driver for this being the need for productivity and efficiency .Elearning has become an increasingly popular mode of training: units have been reduced to an hour or less, and workers can be trained sitting at their desk - in the case of some customer service applications, units have been broken down into just 10 minute sections.

Integration

The early predictions of elearning as a replacement for face-to-face events were misplaced. Instead it's been recognised that an integrated programme of face-to-face events and elearning modules can be both highly effective for learners and economical and efficient from the perspective of the organisation. The buzz word today is 'blended' learning.

The survey also found that most respondents favoured the blended approach with 80% saying that elearning worked best when combined with traditional methods of training. Currently, 13% of all organisational training is currently delivered in this way - a figure predicted to rise to 19% in 2005 and 24% in 2006. The survey also found that one of the main reasons behind the predicted growth in blended learning is that 67% of organisations are seeking to reduce participant time away from the workplace by 50%. The blended approach offers a range of benefits and still represents savings for the organisation. Unfortunately, many blended learning approaches are simply elearning programmes shoe-horned into an existing face-to-face programme - they are not tailor-made to run together.

Individualisation

The development of programmes into shorter, more concise modules makes it easier to tailor programmes to organisations and individual. Putting the correct components together is another challenge. More and more this is being facilitated by the development of more sophisticated, technologically-based training needs analysis and diagnostic tools. Academee is now designing and developing an increasing number of online profiling tools, online versions of client 360-degree surveys and online development needs diagnostics. The technology is key here, since it allows sophisticated analysis of respondents' answers to the diagnosis to determine their individual learning plan or training programme. The technology also allows this to be carried out for large numbers of individuals - a whole organisation if necessary.

Where are we going?
Nowadays Academee sees a more intelligent approach to learning and development emerging. First, there is usually an intelligent diagnosis of an individual's needs based on identification of their current skills gaps, and development needs, in relation to their job role. Then there is the intelligent provision of learning and training through so-called 'multi-touch' learning delivery modes, allowing the delivery of knowledge, understanding and practice through the most appropriate methods at the most appropriate time. Consequently the learner's progress can be supported as the learning is applied, with the learner being helped further through coaching and community learning.

 Article by  Dr Jo Cheesman

If it is better work performance that we want, and if we wish to instill ambition in our employees, before trying to counsel them on the ways and benefits of "career" advancement, we must first do a lot of groundwork ourselves with a view to transforming the workplace into a "learning organization". We must define our goals and objectives; analyze our resources, our people, and the work environment; list down the gaps in all three areas, and try to diagnose the causes of those gaps, which represent our organizational problems. It is only after correct diagnosis that we can attempt a cure.

A step in the right direction would be to make the goal-and-objective setting, the analysis, and the definition of problems and their causes, an all-out organizational effort, involving people at all levels. The format, style and sequence for such team effort also require careful planning, bearing in mind past experiences and the personality of the organization as a whole, which has been shaped by different factors.

We can take note of a few proven principles to guide us in our master-plan:
1. Generic models and systems written by others should be used only as guidelines.

2. Each organization has its own personality and unique needs.

3. Managers must view themselves as mentors and coaches, and act accordingly.

4. The concept of "work" must be changed from an obligatory activity for which remuneration is given to that of an opportunity offering a "professional challenge" and a "learning experience".

5. Supervisors and employees should be encouraged to instigate and take responsibility for their own learning (professional training and self-development).

6. Company training and development activities should not be limited to the actual performance of a task or duty, but leading towards the business, professional and self-development of all employees.

7. There must be formal and informal networks of communications (one-on-one when needed, and group meetings.

8. Group communications meetings, at regularly scheduled intervals, must include relevant and interesting "lessons", facilitated by an expert Manager or Supervisor.

9. Employees should be encouraged to attend formal educational and professional courses offered by the outside world.

10. Trainees and Management Trainees must be incorporated into the organization - not only do they offer a fresh point of view, but serve as an excellent example to employees and help create the concept of work as a learning experience.

11. Cross-training and "job" rotation are an excellent professional development tactics that lead towards improved understanding and improved communications among departments (for the bold, a further step can be implemented under guidance: "King for the Day" cross-training, such as letting a line worker play Supervisor for one day).

12. Supervisors and employees must be encouraged to compete with their own selves rather than against each other.

13. Supervisors and employees should receive ongoing informal feedback, in addition to formal feedback as laid down by company policy.

14. Acknowledgments and rewards should preferably be directed towards groups and teams rather than individuals - individual contributions and accomplishments can be rewarded in a more personal manner, such as a thank-you note, increased responsibility, a promotion or financial reward.

15. The basis for such an organization is Management Commitment and its columns are made up of understanding, acceptance, participation, and input by all its members.

By Claire Belilos

You may be familiar with the term pedagogy which is used to describe the 'traditional' methodology of child education. Quite often it is used as a synonym for 'teaching' and certainly represents learning focused on the teacher. In other words, in the pedagogic model of learning, the teacher decides what is learned, how it is learned and when learning takes place.

Whether or not this is the best model for child education, it is clearly inadequate for adult learning, particularly when it comes to work or career-related learning within the process of human resource development. HRD requires a more active approach from the learner which takes account of individual experience.

The term 'andragogy' was publicized by Malcolm Knowles, initially in his book, "The Modern Practice of Adult Education: Andragogy Versus Pedagogy" published in 1970. In this book and later works such as The Adult Learner: A Neglected Species, he suggested a comprehensive adult learning theory, building on earlier work by Lindeman (author of The Meaning of Adult Education, 1926). The latter had picked up the term andragogy - coined by a German teacher, Alexander Kapp in 1833. The following comment by Lindeman gives you a flavour:

"...the teacher finds a new function. He is no longer the oracle who speaks from the platform of authority, but rather the guide, the pointer-outer who also participates in learning in proportion to the vitality and relevancy of his facts and experiences."

Andragogy has been extensively used as a term for adult education in continental Europe. In the English-speaking world, however, it was not commonly used until Malcolm Knowles began to write on the subject. Knowles used andragogy to define and explain the conditions that adults required for learning. Initially defined as 'the art and science of helping adults learn,' the term has taken on a wider meaning and now refers to learner-focused education for people of all ages.

For Knowles, andragogy is process-based rather than content-based (pedagogy) and anchored on four (later, five) main assumptions about the characteristics of adult learners which, arguably, make them different from child learners. But even Knowles agrees that (the first four, at least) differ only in degree between adults and children.

1. Self-concept: As people mature, each person's concept of self moves away from being a dependent personality towards being a self-directed human being.

2. Experience: As people mature they accumulate their own individual, growing reservoirs of experience that provide an increasing resource for learning.

3. Readiness to learn: As people mature their readiness to learn becomes increasingly oriented to the developmental tasks of their social roles.

4. Orientation to learning: As people mature their time perspective changes from one of postponed application of knowledge to immediacy of application, and, as a result, they shift from a subject-centred to a problem-centred orientation toward learning.

5. Motivation to learn: As people mature the motivation to learn is internal (added in 1984).

Effective learning needs to meet the needs of individuals. This is widely accepted. Really effective learning is driven by the individual. When individuals have an element of control over the learning experience, the learning outcomes become more potent. Peer-to-peer learning is also very powerful. This is also widely accepted. Combining a focus on individual needs with support from co-learners can lead to mutually beneficial, lasting benefits.

Action learning helps individuals to identify their own challenges draws on the ideas and experience of others to create solutions to these challenges. It is a valuable method of learning which benefits individuals, teams and entire organisations.

What is action learning?
Action learning is a dynamic process that simply put, combines action and learning. It involves a small group of people, known as an action learning ‘set,' working together on real problems, taking action, learning how to overcome their challenges and learning about themselves. Action learning is very different from traditional training methods which focus on the presentation of knowledge and skills. It's not like a formal meeting or seminar. Nor is it like counselling or therapy.

Action learning does not revolve around a “knowledge expert” . Everyone, including the facilitator, is a co-learner. Participant have a equal opportunity to tackle their own challenge. These challenges may be ones that others in the set share, but they don't have to be. Others in the set help the individual to explore the challenge and plan what to do about it. It is important that participants come together voluntarily. Often they are invited by their organisation, but they need to want to take part rather than feel they have to. A typical set contains between four and eight people. One of these people is the facilitator. The role of the facilitator is described in more detail in the next section.

Participants take turns to present their challenge to other members of the set. Others ask questions to help define the challenge more clearly. These questions build group dialogue and cohesiveness and generate innovative and creative thinking. The group reflects together on the issue rather than leaping to conclusions. The simple rules of action learning encourage participants to think critically and work collaboratively. An additional benefit of the process is that it helps develop team working and leadership skills. Action learning can help solve dilemmas of all sizes. It can be particularly useful when addressing a complex problem which the individual finds difficult to solve using traditional methods.

The set provides space and support for individuals to resolve problems or issues. Feelings can be expressed and explored. This helps the individual to take responsibility, decide a course of action, and move on. A typical session lasts between a couple of hours or half a day. Conclusions do not have to be reached during one session. Often participants will spend time between sessions exploring options, reading and engaging in other learning and discussion. They may also communicate with others in the set before meeting up again formally.
Practical learning occurs once action is taken. Following the exploration and discussion, it is important that the individual identifies actions that they can take in the workplace to help progress, or even to resolve the original challenge.

Where did action learning originate?
Action learning was originated by Professor Reg Revans shortly after the second world war. Previously a Cambridge physicist, he had been appointed director of education for the newly formed National Coal Board in Britain. Revans encouraged some colliery managers to join together in small groups (later described as sets) to share their challenges and search for solutions. He stressed to them that there were no ‘right' answers – this was an opportunity to explore a range of potential solutions .Revans believed that learning was best derived from mutual reflection on real issues, where the owner of the problem would ultimately have to do something about it, helped by discoveries made with others in the set. He was convinced that this type of learning was much more powerful than the ‘telling' style of training which was prevalent at the time.

He saw that this new type of learning was beneficial to the colliery managers. Through open and honest discussion, they learned from each other and developed new strategies to cope with their challenges. This learning was addressing the managers' actual needs. It was completely different from sending the managers to an external training course where much of the content would not relate directly to their individual challenges. Revans saw that through action learning, they learned to cope with real-life situations effectively .Revans went on to take action learning to other organisations around the world. As more and more organisations and academics became convinced of the benefits of action learning, its use became widespread. It became accepted as a valuable type of learning and was widely adopted.

As action learning became increasingly popular, Revans became concerned that some organisations and academics were focusing too much on the process, and undermining the spirit of mutually beneficial support and the importance of practical outcomes. Professor Mike Pedler commented in his book, Action Learning in Practice, that, "The ‘Reg-centricity' of action learning is both a bulwark against packaging and a block on the spread and growth of the idea." Revans died in 2003 and his ideas and techniques continue to be applied and developed by organisations and academic institutions all over the world. Professor Pedlar himself is based at The Revans Centre for Learning and Research at Salford University in the UK.

Why is Action Learning still relevant today?
Action learning is arguably more relevant today than ever before. Unlike traditional forms of learning, action learning has no “expert” input. There is no single person who plays the role of providing the correct answer. The challenges of 21st century organisations are increased ambiguity, complexity and uncertainty as speed of work, geographies, cultural differences and technology increase. In such conditions, who really is the “expert”? In reality, leaders and managers are simply looking for the best available ways to deal with the challenges of the day. Action learning starts from the premise that the people who work closest to the problems have the greatest stake in examining, exploring, developing and implementing new solutions to new problems. With the aid of a facilitator they learn and take action on the unique issues that the 21st century throws at them.

The role of the facilitator
The facilitator plays a critical role in action learning. The facilitator may be an external consultant or an experienced member of an action learning set. Because of the non-hierarchical nature of action learning, it is important that the facilitator does not dictate what happens or try to control the group. A good action learning facilitator is a role model, helping other participants to agree ground rules and exemplifying these. The facilitator does the same things as other participants - asks questions, contributes ideas and provides feedback - but may do so less than others because of his or her additional responsibility.

A good facilitator will:

Begin by clarifying with the group what is to be discussed during the session
Help build a safe environment of openness, trust and mutual respect
Clarify what processes the set is employing, and the implications of these processes
Help others reflect on both what they are learning and how they are solving problems
Explore what assumptions may be shaping participants' beliefs and actions
Acknowledge the part played by feelings in the discussion
Help the team focus on what they are achieving and what they are finding difficult
Encourage a measured, thoughtful pace by summarising and making sure questions are asked one at a time
Ensure that everyone in the set is participating and if not, explore why not
Only ever interrupt if it another individual's contribution is inappropriate
Allow time for reflection
Ask the set to evaluate the process by considering their experiences and the impact of others' contributions
Ensure that an issue is resolved before moving on
Take notes and bring these to any future sessions.  

Action learning is not a replacement for other types of learning. Rather, it complements them. The philosophy of action learning has had an impact not only on learning facilitators but also on learners themselves. Having experienced effective action learning, individuals are often more keen and more able to take responsibility for their overall learning journeys. The spirit of action learning – creating a safe environment, encouraging openness, exploration, creativity, mutual respect and shared problem-solving – is reflected in many of today's forward-thinking management practices.

 
Article by David Kesby