Just as I took a break I saw a great post from Martin Couzins. As he says:

 …vendors have built, or are building, AI tools focused on content predominantly. The other areas of the learning process – arguably the ones that could be most transformed by AI, just aren’t a priority.

It needs to change – we can’t keep doing what we’ve been doing and expect the L&D sector to change.

We change it by changing the incentives. I’m looking at the professional bodies for this.

They set the standards, awards and CPD. If CIPD, ATD, LPI and Learning Guild stop rewarding content volume and start rewarding practice, feedback, reflection and transfer, vendors will pivot.

Buyers will too. Publish RFP clauses and judge awards on behaviour and business outcomes. Shift what we count and the market will shift with it.

A few ideas:

• Competency updates which focus on performance and outcome.
• CPD credits for workflow integration, not hours of content.
• Awards where at least half the score is behaviour and business outcomes.
• A buyer pack with standard RFP clauses for practice, calibrated feedback, reflection prompts, transfer tasks and workflow telemetry.
• A quarterly vendor index that shows the feature mix across the five stages.

We need (ironically) to educate the profession as buyers. Ask questions of your practise like, where will practice happen? Any vendor intervention has to be tied into the performance improvement or it’s just pretending.

How are you using vendor tools to transfer tasks to inside work? If your learning tools are aligned and not integrated with workflow, you need complete clarity over how performance is being impacted.

What outcome signals link to performance, not clicks? The age old bums on seats are the wrong end of the person statement applies more than ever. Chasing engagement over experience has left us beholden to interaction over investment and outcome.

---

#LearningAndDevelopment #LearningStrategy #AI