You may have noticed the dramatic news articles about
insufficient workforce capacity.
Business wants to have the right people with the right skills working on
the right tasks in the right location.
The drama occurs when locally available workforce does not have the
right skills and cannot tackle the tasks.
Enter ‘capability building’.
Capability: A measure of the ability of an entity (department, organization, person, system) to achieve its objectives, especially in relation to its overall mission. (Businessdictionary.com).
For many, this definition jumpstarts our thinking and moves
us directly to ‘provide training’, but training is only one of the tools in the
capability market. Notice the phrases ‘a
measure’ and ‘achieve its objectives’.
In order for capability to develop, there must be a way to measure the
workforce in relationship to the work (achieving objectives). Sounds simple. In some cases it is. If all you need to measure is the number of widgets
produced per shift, both the measurement and the objectives are relatively
straightforward. However, for many
businesses, today’s work is very complex.
Instructional Design and Development
Consider the field of instructional design and development. The work and market are fragmented, diverse,
and undifferentiated (see blog, The
State of Instructional Design). In
this field, any one assignment may be simple to produce, where the next one may
be extremely complex. Individuals may be
required to use specific tools, specific methodologies, specific techniques,
and even specific theories. Others may
have a range of such tools, methods, techniques, and theory from which they are
expected to select the appropriate ones. Comparison of work production is nearly
impossible.
Only a fraction of the instructional design and development
(ID) workforce comes with degrees in the field.
Everyone else layers ID experience on top of their own (non-ID)
specialty where that specialty is could be represented by any other workforce
field in existence. Some simple have
talent that they hone through experience.
Others have knowledge and practice supplemented with insight and
wisdom.
Many business leaders would prefer to hire the cheapest
available talent, which often exists in distant markets and comes with little
or no experience or expertise. Many of
the most experienced and talented seek better assignments, living venues, and
pay. Some choose to move out of
full-employment into self-employment in order to fulfill their own dreams,
while others start there, and still others are forced into self-employment by a
market that refuses to hire experienced employees over age 50. In the meantime, individuals with newly
minted degrees in the field find it difficult to prove sufficient experience to
be hired. Once hired, their career path
is fuzzy, at best.
The field of instructional design and development, in
particular, is experiencing the pains of a workforce with capability issues. The
right workers are not in the right locations with the right skills and where
expert practitioners exist they often find it difficult to distinguish their
work from that of charlatans with low prices and expert sales techniques. For more detail on the state of the ID field see
the Whitepaper: ID
Practice Analysis and Survey Results published by The Institute for
Performance Improvement, L3C (TIfPI).
Standards Measure Competence
Standards provide that measure
toward which capability development can build.
Standards are the mark of a successful practitioner in any field. That is, the competent practitioners already
practicing in a field use standards that distinguish their work. These standards transcend practice venues
making them customizable for local needs.
In turn, this means that standards can transcend geographic borders, ideological
boundaries, language differences, and even variations in tool sets. Individuals in different practice venues,
geographies, cultures, regulatory environments, with different levels of access
to materials or equipment can still successfully demonstrate the ability to
meet a standard.
Think of the world of medicine, the techniques, tools, and
resources for suturing wounds vary around the world. However, every healthcare worker around the
world is expected to meet common standards in suturing, but meet them using the
tools and resources at hand in their part of the world. Standards like these define the competent
members of the field.
Likewise, instructional designers and developers (IDs) need
to have a common set of standards to help them build professional
competence. As of 2014, the most common
language for IDs is around the use of development models such as ADDIE, SAM,
Lean, Six-Sigma, or around theories posited by learning theorists. There are
secondary and tertiary languages around tools (Captivate, Articulate, Lectora,
etc.) and production processes such as project management and content management.
The complexity of variables abound when application of models, theories, tools,
content, and projects create unique results with unique parameters. Under these conditions, it is difficult to
compare work. In fact, the field does
not have standards upon which it can compare ID work.
Defining common standards that cross boundaries is not
difficult, even though it does require access to the people who know well the
work of competent practitioners and can identify competence and cull out the
incompetent. With standards defined, it is time to measure. Those who meet or exceed standards receive a
mark of distinction. Those who do not
need to have the opportunity to improve their level of competence through
training, effective supervision, and key work tasks that grow their skills. This is the real power of standards. When an individual is not meeting standards,
skill building begins. The knowledge of which areas need improvement allows one
to focus skill-building efforts, demonstrate success, and grow.
The Public Promise
Where a workforce needs to build public standing, the
individuals who succeed at meeting or exceeding standards need to be publicly
recognized. This is partially a personal
reward for their expertise. However, it
is more important as an industry marker showing that the industry has tools for
recognizing experts and marketing their expertise.
This is where credentials come into play. A credential defines the competence of the
individual as one who meets standards. A
competent individual is the implied public promise of all credentials. Most credentials also indicate whether that
credential (and associated competence) is a one-time, lifetime award or one
that must be maintained and regularly renewed through professional development
or reassessment.
In addition, the purveyors of credentials must provide
public information describing the methods that they use to define the
standards, measure them, track individual’s maintenance of the credential, and
ensure that the credential’s standards remain current as work in the field
changes over time. The rigor involved in
setting up and managing credentials provides those purveyors with “authority”
for backing the credential. When in
doubt, check the source of the credential to be sure that they are actually measuring
competence against standards. Authentic purveyors of credentials will be
willing to explain the standards used and the measurement and evaluation used.
A credential is any mark of distinction; a way to identify
competent practitioners within a field of shared knowledge, skills, and
behaviors. On the sidebar that describes
types of credentials and some of their unique characteristics you may notice that
certifications, some degrees, and some accreditations come with “marks”. A mark is that set of letters used to promote
the credentialed individual or organization as one that meets standards. You may see these marks as initials – CPA,
MD, and Ph.D. are common one – or as icons – ISO or UL marks are common.
About Badges
Badging like gamification has become a buzzword in the
learning industry. Many organizations wish to ‘badge’ their employees and
students for work related behaviors. Badges have become difficult to assess. Badges are used across a wide range of
credentials and do not match specific types of credentials. Therefore, two credentials with very
different requirements may have very similar looking badges.
A badge is merely an icon representing the completion of
something (e.g., scouting badges, sports patches) or the acquisition of
responsibilities and attendant rights (e.g., law enforcement badges, employee
badges).
In the world of credentials, a badge signifies both the
completion of something and the acquisition of attendant rights and
responsibilities. However, it becomes
the public’s responsibility to determine what was completed and what the badge
holder’s rights and responsibilities are.
Then, they must match their own
needs with those of the underlying credential.
Enter badge verification software. This software allows badge earners to share
their iconic badge through social and electronic media (e.g., email,
websites). Clicking on the badge connect
the interested public with a website that houses critical information about:
- The credential,
- The credential holder,
- The organization providing authority to that credential,
- What the credential holder did to acquire the credential,
- What the maintenance requirements are, and
- The credential holder’s status.
Badges are a symbol (icon) for the credential. Employers and clients will want to look deeply
into the performance evidence required by each credential. At this time. there are badges available for
degrees, certificates, awards, endorsements, and certifications. The digital badge itself is a marker. Any two credentials may have similar badges
while being very different in the performance requirements needed to achieve the
badge. The value of the badge is in the
authority of the credential. Seek out the
authority backing your badges.
Emerging Standards and Microcredentials for IDs
TIfPI has completed a practice
analysis that defines nine new standards for instructional designer and
developers. They have defined the
standards and the performances expected for each as they relate to learning
solution development, a subset of the overall field of instructional
design. Therefore, they are making a
series of learning solution development microcredentials with digital badges
available to IDs.
The objective is to strengthen
the field by providing evidence-based credentials validating that individual IDs
have demonstrated their ability to apply international, theory-free, model-free
standards in the development of one or more types of learning solutions. Individuals providing evidence of their
ability to meet all nine standards will be awarded a microcredential (with digital
badge) for the development of one of 19 learning solution types. Individuals may acquire as many
microcredentials as they wish.
Individuals receiving
microcredentials will be able to assert that two expert instructional designers
evaluated their work against standards and that they have met standards. The ability to show competence increases
individuals’ standing within the field, makes it easier for employers to choose
competent candidates, and builds professional credibility for the field. Standards are the key to measuring and
evaluating performance, which in turn creates a language of competence and
opportunities for continued growth as well as opportunities to build key skills
in order to meet standards.
Watch this blog for more on each
of the nine standards for Instructional Design and Development (ID), which
state that the competent ID:
- Addresses sustainability
- Aligns the solution
- Assesses performance (in learning)
- Collaborates and partners
- Elicits performance practice
- Engages learner
- Enhances retention and transfer
- Ensures context sensitivity
- Ensures relevance
To learn more about the 19
learning solution types, standards, available whitepapers, and application
process for learning solution development ID Badge, or to join me for one of
the free webinars, Overview of ID Badges,
provided by TIfPI, go to www.tifpi.wildapricot.org/idbadges.
As always, comments and
discussion are appreciated. Please share
your thoughts and insights.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Keep the dialogue going. Share your insights.