Welcome to the first module on Learning Transfer. And in this module, we're going to take you through the issues that are involved in defining Learning Transfer. Since it's been an enduring problem in psychology and education for the last 100 years, researchers have debated the nature, context, and prevalence of transfer, and what's emerged is that, it's very complex and dynamic process. If you think of a training program, I'm going to give you a definition by Goldstein & Ford in 2002. They define learning transfer in a training program, as the extent to which learning that results from a training experience, transfers to the job, and leads to a meaningful changes in work performance. That is the primary concern of organizational training efforts. That's a really interesting definition because there are a number of key points and issues that are raised. Is it learning that we're interested in? Or is it results that come from a training experience? And how do we know that the training experience resulted in the learning? If it's transferred to a job, what context are we talking about when we're talking about transfer? And how many variables are involved in that transfer? So, can we predict that one training experience results are transferred to the job and it isn't something that's handled on the job that hasn't. And when it comes some meaningful changes, meaningful changes to who? To the individual? To the team? To the work? To the manager? To the organization itself? And in work performance. What is the significant and meaningful changes in work performance? Is it merely producing more widgets or is it something more significant? And that's a paramount concern for organizational training and efforts, and so much money that we'll show you that's been wasted by not actually looking at how the learning is an impact in other values. For example, leadership training programs often present a model of leadership and includes some case studies. While this training may be beloved by participants, the extent to which such programs positively affect the leadership behaviors in managers while on the job, is the crux of the transfer issue. And learning on an individual basis, either happens to us or we can make it happen. And the act of learning can be deliberate or unintended. The pursuit of learning has its benefits in its own right. The simple acquisition of learning is a fruitful exercise and a well practiced principle. But when we sent on training programs, either voluntarily attend a class or create our own opportunities to learn, is that having an impact and adding value. And the motivation to attend those programs, is often some people see it as a jolly, a period away from the stress at work. Some people see it as a reward, being invited to take part in programs because they've done well. Others may see it as an inconvenience, a distraction from the real world or a waste of time. In attending the program, they have not been able to apply their learning post program, and it merely is a distraction. In a highly competitive world, those views are no longer acceptable. As governments, clinicians, business leaders, and individuals, now want more impact from their investments, and an indication that their investment is actually adding value. With a learning for its own sake or whether learning has tough impact, adding value is often the issue of application and context. When we do want learning to have impact and add value, a lot of the energy is put into design and measuring the process. To verify whether what we've learned was what was intended. And when people attend learning programs as a group, generally it comes to applying the learning, Group learners can usually be divided into three broad categories. A few learners usually learn little or nothing and are unable to apply their learning at all. A few learners usually find the learning enlightening and worthwhile for themselves, and are able to apply, to obtain substantial results. Some people apply their learning for themselves, and it's not transferred into other areas and applied. And the great majority of learners use some form of learning but accomplish little and/or don't give up trying. They're often like pinballs in machine, they bounce around for a while making scores but always end up back at the beginning, needing a boost. So, when it comes back to looking at defining Learning Transfer, we really need to be specific about three key components. Is learning about knowledge, skill, or capability? And how do we know that it has occurred? And how do we know that was the real influence? Is it about behavioral change? The extent to which people change their behavior, their performance, their motivation and capability has been increased. And when we look for evidence of the results, the things, outcomes, results have changed, what benefits the learning has brought to both the individual and to the business is critical. At these three levels that one was that we offer real insights into a definition of what is learning transfer. The issue we've got to get is when we're looking at those three key areas, what is it that we can do that make sure that those three issues are integrated? And that's the purpose of our program over the next few weeks.
