Knowledge + Learning = Performance

Instead of looking to the American Heritage Dictionary for our definition of performance, today I’ll lead with what I believe performance is (based on my experience as a workplace learning and performance improvement professional). I would say that performance can be defined as:

The ability of individuals and organizations to take action in a desired manner, as measured based on observable skills (in the individual) and changes in business results (for the organization).

Given this definition, one can begin to see how it is that knowledge and learning provide the building blocks for achieving desired performance, for without knowledge and learning how can an individual or organization be expected to perform as desired? (Unless by serendipity or an amazing stroke of luck!)

As I pursue my doctoral studies, I’ll be exploring this concept of the interaction of knowledge, learning, and performance. Specifically, my aim is to apply my existing knowledge of workplace learning and performance improvement, add to it from the emerging field of knowledge management, and combine these to maximize organizational and individual performance.

I sincerely believe that there is untapped potential between the two fields of instructional design and knowledge management that can be used to help people and organizations to be the best they can be, e.g., helping them maximize their knowledge assets, getting them the right information and skills just-in-time and just-in-place, and creating an environment where they can innovate and create new knowledge and continuous learning.

Thus by combining the best of both these fields in a practical manner, I hope to maximize the effectiveness—and performance—of individuals and organizations. This in turn can help improve the profitability and viability of individuals and organizations in the increasingly complex and demanding corporate world.

- Robin

Copyright Robin Donnan 2007. All Rights Reserved.
Performance Associates, Inc.

We're in the home stretch now of our journey through epistemology. Today we'll look into how a team leader would implement Senge's discipline of dialogue.

As Senge (2006/1990) emphasized, the skill of dialogue is an important prerequisite element to the discipline of team learning. In the follow-up book to The Fifth Discipline (Senge, Kleiner, Roberts, Ross, & Smith, 1994), William Isaacs outlines the levels and stages of dialogue beginning with conversation and ideally ending with true dialogue rather than discussion or debate. Isaacs and Smith go on to discuss the basic components of a dialogue session and how to design a dialogue session. For example, key elements of a positive dialogue session include an invitation to the dialogue session, generative listening, allowing for silence to consider individual and team thoughts, suspending judgment, and using disagreements as an opportunity to identify areas the team needs to explore further. Additional dialogue session guidelines offered by Isaacs and Smith include allowing at least two hours, checking in with every team member at the beginning and end of each session, not having an agenda or being overly prepared, not meeting over a meal, speaking to the center of the group and not to each other, and agreeing to meet for at least three times to allow adequate opportunity for the conversation to grow into dialogue (Senge, Kleiner, Roberts, Ross, & Smith, 1994, pp. 377-380).

With these recommendations in mind, as a team leader I would take a multi-pronged approach for implementing a discipline of dialogue. First, ensure that upper management supports and models the use of dialogue within the organization. Second, provide training and practice in critical dialogue skills such as listening, suspending judgment, and brainstorming. Third, implement a method—similar to the Army’s After Action Reviews—that uses dialogue to capture key learnings at the end of project efforts, posts those to a shared knowledge base, and then uses those key learnings to help shape future projects. Fourth, publicly recognize and privately reward those who practice positive and productive dialoguing. Also, another important element per Senge (2006/1990) to support dialogue and the learning organization is to allow time for reflection (both within and between dialogue sessions). For this, I would recommend adopting 3M’s “Fifteen-Percent Rule” that supports employees spending up to 15% of their time in individual learning and knowledge-building pursuits that benefit not only them as individuals but also the organization in innovation (McElroy, 2003).

- Robin

References:

McElroy, M. (2003). The new knowledge management: Complexity, learning, and sustainable innovation. Burlington, MA: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.
S
enge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization (Rev. ed ed.). New York: Doubleday. (Original work published 1990)

Senge, P. M., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, R. B., & Smith, B. J. (1994). The fifth discipline fieldbook. New York: Doubleday.

Lifelong learning, training and development, and corporate education all make claims that they contribute to both individual and organizational performance improvements. Using the structure of the Malcolm Baldridge National Quality Award, this paper explores how learning has indeed contributed to organizational performance excellence for one Baldridge award winner: Pal’s Sudden Service.

Pal’s Sudden Service

Pal’s Sudden Service is a quick service restaurant serving “primarily drive-through customers at 17 locations, all within 60 miles of Kingsport, Tenn., where its first restaurant opened in 1956” (National Institute of Standards and Technology, 2002, p. 1). Pal’s employs “465 people, 95 percent of whom are in direct production and service roles” (p. 1). In 2001, they became the first restaurant to receive a Malcolm Baldridge Quality Award. Pal’s continues to be the only restaurant to have ever won the Baldridge award, and they also are the proud recipients of two Tennessee Excellence Awards in 2001 and 2007 (Pal's Sudden Service, n.d.).

Organizational Performance Improvement

The Role of HRD in Improving Organizational Performance

In looking at learning’s role in organizational performance improvement, what have researchers found? The field of Human Resource Development (HRD) provides some insights. Swanson & Arnold (1996) define HRD as “a process of developing or unleashing human expertise through organization development and personnel training and development for the purpose of improving performance” (p. 16). They further argue, “when practiced in productive organizations, [HRD] should strive to contribute directly to the organization’s goals” (p. 16). Furthermore, Swanson & Arnold remind us that it is important to remember, “HRD is broader than training or adult education. There are HRD interventions that involve much more than training, and some (however rare) that might involve no training at all” (p. 16). What is needed is for HRD “to focus on systems and processes that ensure that individuals in the organization have the knowledge, expertise, and attitudes to produce quality” and deliver on the organization’s goals (p. 15).

At the same time, performance improvement for the sake of meeting organization goals should not be the only focus for HRD. Bierema (2000) argues that there is “value in striking a balance between organizational and individual goals… [and that] human values must be the starting point when considering workplace learning” (p. 279). Bierema further cautions us not to lose the human in Human Resource Development for the sake of improved organizational performance (and profits).

Baldridge Organizational Performance Excellence Goals

The performance excellence goals and criteria for the Malcolm Baldridge Quality Award offer a formalized program that defines, measures, and rewards organizations who exemplify the principles of an organization that is actively taking steps—and reaping the results of—being a high-performing organization. Three Baldridge criteria areas are particularly relevant to the subject of learning’s contribution to organizational performance: workforce engagement, workforce environment, and workforce-focused outcomes. Workforce engagement and workforce environment fall under the category of workforce focus; this category “addresses key workforce practices—those directed toward creating and maintaining a high-performance workplace and toward engaging your workforce to enable it and your organization to adapt to change and succeed” (Baldridge National Quality Program, 2008, p. 41). Within the category of workforce engagement are the aspects of a positive/supportive work environment, compensation and recognition linked to organizational goals (i.e., reward for performance), workforce satisfaction measurement, plus training and learning opportunities and systems. Additionally, workforce environment includes different methods for supporting the workforce such as learning and training development opportunities that are not strictly focused on employees’ job responsibilities. As Bierema (2000) recommends, this is how the more humanistic goals of lifelong learning and providing opportunities for individual improvement that do not focus strictly on job-related skills can be addressed.

The third Baldridge criterion relevant to the subject of learning’s contribution to organizational performance is the results category of workforce-focused outcomes. This set of criteria provides objective evaluation of the organization’s results and how those results support the achievement of the organization’s overall strategy. Per the Baldridge National Quality Program (2008), these criteria measure the effectiveness and outcomes of key indicators of workforce engagement and satisfaction (e.g., increased retention or promotions) and can also “include generic or organization-specific factors…you assess for determining your workforce engagement and climate,” e.g., turnover, satisfaction, and training opportunities (including retraining and cross training) (p. 46-47).

Learning’s Contributions to Organizational Performance Improvement at Pal’s

Pal’s aim is that to learning be pervasive throughout the organization, whereby training and development has been designed to “support improvement in operational and business performance” (National Institute of Standards and Technology, 2002, p. 2). “Employees at Pal’s are challenged to produce excellence in [their] operations…; to exhibit positive energy, well-being, and self-control; to make the right decision at the right time; and to be dedicated to continuous learning, development and growth” (Pal's Sudden Service, 2001, p. 20). Moreover, “organizational learning, employee development, and continually improving results are basic characteristics of the Pal’s culture” (p. 5).

Pal’s Approach to Training and Development

In staffing their human resource (HR) functions, Pal’s does not have professional HR staff. Instead, they rely upon clearly stated policies that operations staff and management use for all hiring, compensation, training, etc. decisions. This operations-drive approach also extends to who delivers their training. Pal’s does not rely on training instructors, but rather uses only operations personnel to lead their classroom training sessions. Senior leaders are involved in teaching classes and attending training sessions, which are considered by the organization to be an opportunity to “personally drive the Business Excellence Process” (Pal's Sudden Service, 2001, p. 8). Additionally, “owner/operators and assistant managers have primary responsibility for staff training” (National Institute of Standards and Technology, 2002, p. 3).
In the design and development of training, the leadership team annually assesses the organization’s training needs. This has resulted in the creation of a variety of training modules designed to meet Pal’s business needs. Following “a four-step model [of] show, do it, evaluate, and perform again,” Pal’s uses a combination of self-teach and classroom training modules (National Institute of Standards and Technology, 2002, p. 3). In stores, they utilize on-the-job training, “computer-based training, flash cards, and one-on-one coaching” (p. 3). In addition, much like other leading quick-service restaurants:

Visual standardization is a critical element of Pal's training and development program. We thoroughly train/coach our employees on our precise work procedures and process standards. This training focuses on developing a visual reference to verify product quality and usability. Operational procedures, service standards, and in-process control measures for all core processes, each product, and support services are carefully designed and documented in the Pal’s Operations Manual. (Pal's Sudden Service, 2001, p. 26)

Workforce Engagement

When looking at the criteria of workforce engagement, the Baldridge criteria (2008) asks the question, “How do you engage your workforce to achieve organizational and personal success?” (p. 42). Pal’s utilizes a number of techniques and programs to ensure a positive and supportive work environment, compensation and recognition linked to organizational goals, measurement of workforce satisfaction, plus ample training and learning opportunities. For example, “individual training and personal development plans are established for all employees at all levels to ensure that knowledge and skills required for defined responsibilities at each position are acquired” (Pal's Sudden Service, 2001, p. 22). Considered an important part of their Communication/Feedback process, organizational learning is a key tool for “quick deployment/sharing of the information/learning throughout Pal’s operations in all stores” (p. 8). This Communication/Feedback process is designed to take the output of the process’s inputs, analysis, and rapid prototyping, and share them across the stores. This process is also credited with encouraging “organizational agility and organizational and employee learning” (p. 8). In fact, Pal’s Communication/Feedback process “often produces rapid learning and decision-making that is shared company wide within the same day (or same hour)” (p. 20).

Feedback, coaching, and mentoring also play an important role in Pal’s workforce engagement. “Through training and coaching, [they] instill in [their] staff a positive, helpful, can-do focus on [their] customers, which also contributes to building good customer relationships” (Pal's Sudden Service, 2001, p. 14). “Feedback and coaching are provided by store owner/operators and assistant managers as appropriate to build customer service skills” (p. 14), thereby making “feedback, coaching, and reinforcement of applied knowledge and skills…natural parts of [Pal’s] work execution” (p. 22). Mentoring from owner/operators working directly with employees in the operations areas, “coupled with the developmental aspects of peer reviews and [Pal’s] training processes, effectively supports employees in developing and utilizing their full potential” (p. 21).

An intriguing reward and recognition program used by Pal’s is their “Caught Doing Good” (CDG) program. CDG has been designed to “provide an abundance of immediate, public, non-monetary recognition for staff contributions in support of employee development, customer satisfaction, continual improvement, and organizational learning” (Pal's Sudden Service, 2001, p. 21). To ensure the link between individual performance and organizational goals, “a special effort is made in CDG to identify behaviors that are consistent with [their] training programs and that are clearly linked to desired performance results” (p. 23).

Workforce Environment

When looking at the criteria of workforce environment, the Baldridge criteria (2008) asks the question, “How do you build an effective and supportive workforce environment?” (p. 43). In response, Pal’s utilizes a number of techniques and programs to support the workforce including learning and training development opportunities that are not strictly focused on job responsibilities. For example, Pal’s learning opportunities cover not only the skills needed to support operations, but also listening, health and safety, and organizational culture. For safety training, they have “adopted the National Restaurant Association’s ServSafe training and certification, an industry best practice for food safety education” (Pal's Sudden Service, 2001, p. 9). Additionally:

Pal’s frontline staff training program includes intense instruction on effective listening skills. These skills are not only critical for high performance on the food preparation line…but are also beneficial for gathering valuable customer information about needs, expectations, and satisfaction.” (p. 13)

Pal’s also strives to prepare their employees not only for their job at Pal’s, but beyond. They acknowledge, “Most of our employees’ ultimate careers are with other companies. Therefore, we strive to provide skills, knowledge, a principle-based mindset, and work habits required for producing excellence and practicing life-long learning” (Pal's Sudden Service, 2001, p. 21). Pal’s also extends its contributions to their communities believing that “a major responsibility to our local communities is the shaping of our employees into positive citizens. By helping our people grow, develop, and become better citizens, Pal’s helps make our business more successful while also making our communities a better place to live and work” (p. 10). This echoes Bierema’s recommendation that HRD needs to expand beyond just “performativity” and help contribute to social and political change.

Workforce-Focused Outcomes

As Swanson & Arnold (1996) argue, “performance takes place and can be measured at the organizational, process, and individual levels” (p. 15). When looking at the criteria of workforce environment, the Baldridge criteria (2008) asks the question, “What are your workforce-focused performance results?” (p. 46). To answer this question, Baldridge recommends measuring the effectiveness and outcomes of common indicators of workforce engagement and satisfaction (e.g., increased retention, promotions, turnover, satisfaction, and training opportunities (including retraining and cross training)).

Pal’s requires cross training “of all store-level staff to ensure their complete understanding of all production and service procedures as well as quality standards” (National Institute of Standards and Technology, 2002, p. 3). Specifically, cross-training is used so that “staff members have a complete understanding of all production and service procedures and quality standards to allow smooth transition from work station to work station and cooperative, flexible responses to volume cycles and unplanned reassignments” (Pal's Sudden Service, 2001, p. 20).

Pal’s measures their organizational performance with their SysDine management information system, which is also used to analyze operations for a company-wide balanced scorecard. Some important workforce indicators of Pal’s success include the following:
1. “Pal’s leads the industry in low staff turnover. The industry annual average in our market is over 300 percent while Pal’s turnover rate for 2000 was 127 percent” (Pal's Sudden Service, 2001, p. 24).
2. Pal’s “group of store operators and senior leaders has lost only three individuals in the last twenty years, which gives [them] a major advantage in leadership continuity over [their] competitors” (p. 31).
3. Employee satisfaction surveys reveal steady improvement in the period from 1995-2001 with all categories (communication, training, motivation, excitement, harmony, and management’s ability) rated a 4.12 or higher on a 5-point scale (p. 31).

Operationally, Pal’s has also seen the following performance improvements resulting from their learning programs:
1. Staff productivity and sales per labor hour have been on an “improving productivity trend [reflecting] the effectiveness of [their] selection, hiring, training, and work designs” (p. 31).
2. “Over the past several years both the timeliness and satisfaction of complaint handling have been improved through training and by empowering the staff to instantly resolve complaints” (p. 15).
3. “On-the-job injury/accident claims [at Pal’s] have declined seventy-five percent since 1992” (p. 23).

Looking to the future and continuing to ensure sustained results, Pal’s also utilizes benchmarking to “determine best-of-class practices and performance and to set stretch goals to reach and exceed best-of-class performance levels” (Pal's Sudden Service, 2001, p. 17). “After [they] have analyzed and learned as much as possible from [their] benchmarking partner’s processes and performance data, [Pal’s uses their] Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) piloting and continual improvement approach to incorporate any learning [they] gain into [their] own processes to produce equal or better results” (p. 17).

Conclusion

Through a focus on workforce engagement and environment, Pal’s has experienced significant positive and measurable workforce-focused performance results. The quick-service channel in particular faces many challenges—a dwindling labor pool, increased cost of raw products, pressures from customers to provide variety and keep prices low, and an increasingly health-conscious public. Despite this, Pal’s has been able to create a workplace that has the lowest turnover in the industry (for both their front-line and management employees) and some of the best results on key operational measures such as sales per labor hour, order accuracy, and time spent in drive-through.

References

Baldridge National Quality Program. (2008). Criteria for Performance Excellence Retrieved April 11, 2008, from http://www.quality.nist.gov/PDF_files/ 2008_Business_Nonprofit_Criteria.pdf

Bierema, L. (2000). Moving beyond performance paradigms in human resource development. In A. L. Wilson & E. R. Hayes (Eds.), Handbook of adult and continuing education (pp. 278-293). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

National Institute of Standards and Technology. (2002). Pal's Sudden Service. In Baldridge Award Recipient Profile. Retrieved April 11, 2008 from http://www.nist.gov/ public_affairs/pals.htm

Pal's Sudden Service. (2001). 2001 Malcolm Baldridge National Quality Award Application Summary Retrieved April 11, 2008, from http://www.quality.nist.gov/PDF_files/ Pals_Application_Summary.pdf

Pal's Sudden Service. (n.d.). Pal's News. Retrieved April 16, 2008 from http://www.palsweb.com/news.htm

Swanson, R. A., & Arnold, D. E. (1996). The purpose of human resource development is to improve organizational performance. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education,(72), 13-19.

- Robin

Copyright Robin Donnan 2008. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.perfassocinc.com

In workplace learning and performance improvement, determining the strategy and direction for individual employee development is a critical task. Ideally, the process begins before the employee enters the workplace—with the development of a competency-based development structure—and extends throughout their tenure with that organization. Once within an organization, individual development should include components designed to aid in acculturation, to enhance self-awareness and lay the groundwork for further learning, and to maximize both formal and informal learning methods to facilitate both informational and transformative learning.

Competency-Based Development Structure

Beginning in the 1990s, many organizations learned that to compete in a global marketplace, it was critical to capitalize on the core competencies that differentiate the services and products they offer (Prahald & Hamel, 1990). Based my observations as a workplace learning and performance improvement professional, the predominant approach has been to define leadership competencies that are common for all positions in the organization and then to define functional competencies specific to particular job clusters. This approach helps to not only ensure consistency in the organizational culture, but also ensures that “individuals… efforts are not so narrowly focused that they cannot recognize the opportunities for blending their functional expertise with those of others in new and interesting ways” (Prahald & Hamel, 1990, p. 5). As such, the beginning of any employee development plan should begin with the definition of core leadership and functional competencies. These competencies can then be used as criteria for recruiting, whether external hires or internal transfers and promotions. Competencies can be used to help identify the learning and knowledge needs of both incumbents and new employees. Competencies should also be used as criteria for performance assessments and each employee’s development planning.

Acculturation and Self-Awareness

Once hired, new employees need to be acculturated to the organization. Klein & Weaver’s (2000) research “revealed that employees attending…orientation training were significantly more socialized on 3 of the 6 socialization content dimensions (goals/values, history, and people) than employees who did not attend the training. Employees attending the orientation training also had significantly higher levels of affective organizational commitment than nonattendees” (Abstract). Additionally, new employee orientation has been shown to have a positive impact on employee retention, with employees “69% more likely to remain with the company after three years if they completed a full orientation program” (as cited in Sims, 2002, p. 6). This is an important argument for conducting new employee orientation when considering the thousands spent on recruiting and hiring a new employee, as well as the cost to the organization of recruiting and training new employees if turnover is high.

New hire orientation can be an important opportunity not only for acculturation, but also to lay the groundwork for future work and learning during employment with that organization. For example, learning and personality instruments such as the Strengths Finder and Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (Buckingham & Clifton, 2001; Kroeger & Thuesen, 1992; Lawrence, 1979/1982) can be effective tools to enhance self-awareness and thus improve team and learning results (Lankard, 1996). Experience has shown how having the work force complete the same instrument creates a common language and understanding that employees can use when resolving conflicts, deciding how best to approach others with ideas, and ensuring balanced team composition so that multiple perspectives and abilities are represented.

Formal Learning

With core leadership and functional competencies defined and employees acculturated and self-aware, it is time for on-the-job work experience and workplace learning to play their role. Curriculums should be designed to support the organization’s competency model, and employees need to have different development opportunities available for them should they find themselves deficient in a particular competency area. Deficiencies may be identified through self-assessment or assessment of the employees’ work (Lankard, 1996).

Formal learning programs need to be designed with respect to Knowles’ concepts of andragogy, in particular addressing learners’ need to know the rationale/why of what they are learning, supporting the self-concept of the learner, and providing opportunities for learners to share their prior experiences and relate new learning to current challenges (Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 1973/2005). To ensure workplace learning is transformational as well as informational, it is critical to incorporate action learning, hands-on experience, feedback, and reflection (Burton, 2006; Imel, 1998; Pedler, 1983/1987). Incorporating problem solving on actual work problems or using case studies that simulate common work problems will have the greatest impact and retention of new knowledge and skills (Lankard, 1996; Pedler, 1983/1987). Additionally, performance support such as job aids and access to online resources (e.g., Help systems and knowledge bases) can provide formal support and reinforcement after the learning program.

Informal Learning

Supporting formal learning, informal learning can have additional informational and transformational learning benefits. Informal learning can be defined as the individually driven lifelong learning that occurs outside training or a classroom. Lifelong learning, in turn, encompasses many of the meta-learning skills that can be applied to everything that one learns over a lifetime including an individual’s ability to “take responsibility for learning, learn through research, reflect and evaluate, [and] use information and communications technology” (Kerka, 2001). Progressive companies that strive to be knowledge-enabled learning organizations need to pay attention to these transformative elements of learning as well as the more common human capital and information learning elements.

Some important methods supporting informal learning include communities of practice and the growing number of Web 2.0 collaboration and social software tools. As Rozwell (2008) shared in a presentation earlier this week, social networks are self-forming communities and groups that often form knowledge collectives. These communities and collectives can be an unlimited source of knowledge sharing and creation that make up an organization’s ‘learning ecosystem.’ Some of the most common tools for informal learning include mentoring, coaching, internships, offering access to experts, and providing virtual meeting and collaboration space for communities (e.g., via web conferencing and discussion boards). The benefits of investing in these informal as well as formal methods of learning are to create channels for collaboration, do more with existing resources, and improve communication, teamwork, problem solving, and learning (Rozwell, 2008).

Mentoring in particular can have many positive benefits for employee development—for both the mentor and the one being mentored. As Hansman (2000) argues, mentoring is “integral to learning in the workplace, to receiving career help, and for developmental and psychosocial support” (p. 494). In addition to employee development, mentoring can also further support efforts to transfer knowledge, bridge gap between different work groups, and develop high potential employees (Hansman, 2000). To structure a mentoring program for employee development, it would be important to provide the opportunity for mentors and protégés to be able to select one another; in lieu of that, group mentoring may be an attractive option. Additionally, executive coaching using external professionals would be the most effective approach for ensuring that high-level employees in the organization are also receiving the feedback and guidance they need to improve their individual (and therefore the organization’s) performance.

Conclusion

To develop an effective employee development program, it is important to think holistically and act systematically. Aim for development of the whole employee—as not just a receptacle for important informational learning that will enable them to contribute to the organization, but also as a lifelong learner with important underlying core competencies and intelligences that can equally benefit the organization by improving how work gets done. In implementing the employee development program, act systematically so that there are clear links between hiring criteria, performance expectations, workplace learning opportunities, and job responsibilities. Making the growth of employees a priority and showing them a clear path with options customized to meet their needs can help organizations reap the benefit of having a workforce that is more innovative, engaged, and loyal.

References

Buckingham, M. & Clifton, D. (2001). Now discover your strengths. New York: The Free Press.

Burton, J. (2006). Transformative learning: The hidden curriculum of adult life. Work Based Learning in Primary Care, 4(1), 1-5.

Hansman, C. (2000). Formal mentoring programs. In A. Wilson & E. Hayes (Eds.), Handbook of adult and continuing education (pp. 493-507). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Imel, S. (1998). Transformative learning in adulthood (ERIC Digest No. 200). Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult Career and Vocational Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED423426)

Kerka, S. (2001). The balancing act of adult life. Retrieved March 7, 2008 from http://www.cete.org/acve/docgen.asp?tbl=digests&ID=114

Klein, H. J., & Weaver, N. A. (2000). The effectiveness of an organizational-level orientation training program in the socialization of new hires [Abstract]. Personnel Psychology, 53(1), 47-66.

Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (1973/2005). The adult learner (6th ed.). Burlington, MA: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.

Kroeger, O., & Thuesen, J. M. (1992). Type talk at work. New York: Delacorte Press.

Lankard, B. (1996). Acquiring self knowledge for career development. In ERIC Digest No 175. Retrieved April 25, 2008 from http://www.cete.org/acve/docgen.asp?tbl=digests&ID=28

Lawrence, G. (1979/1982). People types and tiger stripes: A practical guide to learning styles (2nd ed.). Gainesville, FL: Center for Applications of Psychological Type.

Pedler, M. (1983/1987). Action learning in practice (3rd ed.). Brookfield, VT: Gower Publishing.

Prahald, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1990). The core competence of the corporation (HBR OnPoint Article No. 6528). Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation, Harvard Business Review.

Rozwell, C. (2008, May). Web 2.0 in the learning ecosystme: Challenges and benefits of adoption. Poster session presented at Saba and Gartner's Web 2.0 in the Learning Ecosystem, Webinar.

Sims, D. (2002). Creative new employee orientation programs. New York: McGraw-Hill Professional.

- Robin

Copyright Robin Donnan 2008. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.perfassocinc.com