Assuring Relevance: Don't Forget the Participants

In executive programs the level and degree of buy-in from within the client business is clearly significant and any supplier of development interventions must achieve a high level of engagement and commitment.  However the participants themselves are not always as intimately engaged in that process as might be liked. Although their involvement, enthusiasm and prioritisation of the intervention is critical to its success, too often assumptions are made about what might be “good for them” or “what they need” without scoping any triangulation of those assumptions.  Central budgets are likely to seek a solution to centrally conceived problems.  This is, of course, right and proper but it can also involve overlooking how the initiative might be seen on the ground.  The notion that it might be the participants who make a contribution to the shape, style, content and outcomes of a program or intervention remains a somewhat unorthodox position to take.

The danger with this kind of model is that the initial mindset for participants is that the program on which they are about to embark is something that will be “done to them” rather than something they might “wish to own”.  Of course, for many,

there is also an assumption that a learning opportunity with a Business School is going to require them to be predominantly passive and for them to subordinate their own experience to the gods of theory which drives the university experience, and a lot of time can be spent demystifying and debunking these preconceptions. Warwick’s expectation is that a significant degree of enthusiasm, a willingness to be challenged, and a practical curiosity around alternative approaches, is what is required for the initiative to be successful.

Designing Interventions

But it is not only the passivity that is a challenge to learning.  There can also be a lack of awareness of the scope and possibilities that the program/intervention may present in terms of individual and organizational change.  This raises a number of challenges around internal communication, line manager engagement, and the short-term imperatives that often drive organizational priorities.

These are standard risks to any intervention irrespective of its calibre and relevance.  At Warwick they have taken a more direct route to tackle this and are seeking to minimise those risks by endeavouring to engage participants in the shaping of their learning experiences ahead of delivery.  Nick Barclay, client director at Warwick explains “we have been working with one client, the bank UBS, to address issues of relevance and method.  The client has centrally set out the overall objectives for the program they want to see introduced.  However they have been concerned that:

a) the participants will not necessarily recognise the development needs that have been identified for them as a high priority; and

b) that the “attention spans” of the participants, (extremely senior professionals), will inhibit conventional methods of delivering learning. 

“We have been working with the client to develop an extended diagnostic piece in which the cohort of participants, in conjunction with ourselves, shape the focus, content and style of the workshops they will undertake.” 

The intention here is to move away from the passivity of receiving learning to one of proactively co-creating learning.  In this way evaluations of effectiveness and impact move away from placing the onus solely on the provider to one where there is joint ownership of the experience.  Barclay anticipates that this will create a more dynamic learning forum in which the essential learning ingredients of curiosity and humility will drive the overall experience.

Working with UBS

The Operations function of the investment bank UBS has partnered with Warwick Business School for a number of years.  Warwick contributes to a two-year program UBS run for their young “high flyers” that join the program from all over the world.  The school’s contribution is founded on two guiding themes; 

a) learning that can be taken back and applied immediately, and

b) learning that will perhaps not be of direct relevance for a few more years until more senior positions are achieved. 

The faculty is very clear with participants that there is a tension for them and their development with this twin focus but that the merit of the program comes from both foci. 

Working with a global business requires sensitivity to a range of learning styles and expectations as well as a consideration of cultural elements which can determine diverse practices across the business. 

Human Capital Management is one such area where quite significant differences in style and approach begin to emerge.  Faced with seeking a mechanism which might surface these differences within the group albeit in a non-threatening and confidential format Warwick identified that a range of issues were of concern to the participants.  Many were in their first roles as team leaders or supervisors and were bewildered by the range of challenges which they faced.  The departure point for managing these challenges was often a consideration of their cultural context.  (What might be possible in Australia or the States, would be unthinkable in Asia, for example).  It was important for the school to find a way of surfacing these issues so that it could service the need that clearly was there. Rather than mining the data centrally, it decided to send out a questionnaire directly to the participants ahead of the programme, which gave them the opportunity to articulate their concerns.  Twenty questions were posed and they covered the following key themes;

• Developing talent
• Energising and Change
• Corporate values
• Job Design
• Rewards
• Risk taking and Innovation
• Team Climate
• Motivation
• Trust
• Career Development

The results were tabulated and significant comments were captured.   These were then reproduced for cohort consumption and the results subjected to extended scrutiny by tutor and group.  No-one was forced to “own” a specific comment but as the process progressed and the value of this form of inquiry became apparent, confidence levels rose and the engagement of those more used to a formal/passive style of learning became involved too. 

Outcomes

The workshop was a huge success as participants came to appreciate the potency of having their challenges scrutinised by their colleagues as well as a tutor.  Many were able to consider and reframe their current challenges into more solution-based formats. 

Others were energised by exposure to new models/concepts that clarified why their current strategies had not worked. The idea that “I do not need to have an answer for everything” was seen as both empowering and liberating. The session became a form of peer consulting and the prospects for post-program networking were heightened too.  Most significantly there was impact in terms of participants’ practice in their respective workplaces. Those involved were subsequently reporting increased team performance, higher levels of motivation amongst their staff; increased levels of involvement in decision making; and a group of leaders who were more confident in their capabilities to make a difference within UBS

In the evaluations many emphasised that working on relevant material that resonated with their own circumstances was a key distinguishing feature in the strength of the program.  Participants felt that they had been able to progress their own agendas, help with their colleagues’ challenges, and enhance their broader understanding of how the company works at a variety of levels.  One participant called the approach a “coaching/discussion based format”; another commented on how pleased they were “how much was left to us. … We were guided through rather than told,” they said.  One participant commented that they found the questionnaire “very stretching to complete, yet it really set the scene for the course.”  A final comment captures the mood of the participants on departure:  “I feel of all the external courses I have been on this one was by far the most “realistic” and will definitely make me a better leader within the organization.”

Implications

In the same way that the business of leading and managing in organizations is characterised by ambiguity, so is the process of identifying, developing and delivering learning opportunities within organizations.  Although senior personnel may have a very solid sense of what needs to be done and how that might be carried out, the recipients of that development might have different perceptions.  This can lead to a number of operating assumptions on the part of providers like Warwick, which are challenged as the interventions get under way.

So there is significant advantage to be gained by finding ways in which participants feel an immediate connection with a program that is for them to shape and mould too. 

Barclay comments “we are often challenged by participants, sometimes overtly, which is easy, but also covertly, which is tougher, to demonstrate relevance. 

“This isn’t just about a distrust of Business Schools.  It is also about seeking clarity on the aims, purpose and possibilities that will be available in the programme/intervention itself.  The more we, as providers, can do to ensure that the client group are ready to fully exploit the opportunity through their involvement, the more effective the programme will be and the greater impact it will have back in the business.

“We are good at telling organizations how flexible, agile and responsive they need to be.  Our practice needs to be similar.  It brings a whole new meaning to the term ‘bespoke.’”

The customised programs and interventions that Executive Education at Warwick Business School delivers, emphasise the importance of partnership with clients.  Barclay is clear they “do not take generic material off-the-shelf.  We undertake research and diagnostics that enable the co-creation of the intervention, although we also seek an understanding that any intervention that accurately reflects corporate imperatives will be dynamic and, therefore, subject to change as the future unfolds.”

See the Warwick Business School profile on IEDP