1 of 16

Strategic Impact Framework (SIF):�Maximize Value

Jill Hutchinson| Learning Experience Designer | CSG Enablement

Sarah Mottaghinejad | Manager, LXD | CSG Enablement

2 of 16

A tale of two stakeholders

Nick VanBuskirk

Regional Vice President,

Success Management

April 2021

“I’m tired of waiting. I

think we can get something out by the end of the month. We just need to start getting this in front of the team.”

“This work, while

ongoing, placed the SMs

directly in the path of a more strategic, value-based talk track that we anticipate will ripple down from Ryan Aytay through the

entire Tableau sales org

in FY23.”

Nick VanBuskirk

Regional Vice President,

Success Management

June 2021

3 of 16

4 of 16

5 of 16

Business Results

Leading Indicator

Lagging Indicator

Performance

Intervention

Profit

Business

Benchmark

Leading Indicator

Lagging Indicator

(5 min)

This should happen from the business perspective— if we get this training portfolio right, then what happens to the business?

Business Benchmark

Clearly articulated and measurable
Requires alignment for this GOAL with the business
We are hyper-focused on this goal; it’s a “requirement” of the project success.
Must be something that we can measure today.

Goal: Not a guarantee

Leading/Lagging Indicators

Qualitative or sometimes just directional (CSAT improves)
We watch these to signal for success, but they are not required to move in order to complete the project

How do we know you are ready to proceed?

Business benchmark - what is the primary objective we need to improve?
Leading indicators- how do we know we are on the right path to improving?
Lagging indicators- how do we know the business goal supports the overall business?
Without answers to these questions, any behaviors we target changing aren’t strictly supporting the business.

6 of 16

Example Business Results Workshop

7 of 16

Key Behaviors & Barriers

Why

aren’t people doing this one thing?

ENVIRONMENT

MOTIVATION

KNOWLEDGE

SKILLS

Will

training solve this problem?

8 of 16

Gap Analysis

9 of 16

Pilot

10 of 16

Agile-ish

Traditional waterfall approach:

Iterative approach:

Implement

Develop

Design

1st delivery

Evaluate

Analyze

Does it work?

1st delivery

Stakeholders:

Solve environmental issues that affect performance

Support learning solution and monitor outcomes

We know it works because it’s been working.

11 of 16

It might not be a course.

12 of 16

How can this help our friendly FELs?

(and of course CSG and Salesforce)

Using this method, we create solutions that lead to:

Measurable Impact
Behavior Change
Learners who want use the solution

13 of 16

Appendix

14 of 16

Brinkerhoff Study – How was training resourced?

Let’s open with some data to ground ourselves in where we are heading.

Rob Brinkerhoff, a professor at Western Michigan University and one of the world authorities on training evaluation, began studying factors that lead to on-the-job application in 1995. Here he conducted a study in 2006 which has been replicated numerous times by various researchers.

They had two groups:

The first group did what most training professionals do: they really focused on the training event - the design, development and delivery of it. They invested very little in what happened before or after the training. We call this “the old training model.”

Here’s what happened for group 1. After the training was complete:

15% of the training graduates never bothered to try to perform the new behaviors they learned in training.

70% of them tried, but failed for some reason. This was due to a variety of factors in the job environment. For example, they may have had a boss who said that they would do things a different way in their department. They may not have felt comfortable doing the new skill, so reverted to the “old way”. They may not have had the necessary equipment or tools. Or perhaps they just did not see a reason to put forth the effort to try something new, and there was no punishment for continuing to do what had always been done.

Only 15% of the training graduates in this group managed to sustain new behaviors on the job.

15 of 16

Brinkerhoff Study – Sustained new behaviors

Summary: we want to train your team is training is part of the solution- but we need to acknowledge that there may be additional supports & accountability required to get the behavior change you need to see.��Guidelines for what to do and say

The second group, which, by the way, took a lot longer to find, used a different approach to the training.

They invested a quarter of their time in talking with business leaders to identify targeted Level 4 outcomes, preparing training participants and their supervisors for what would happen during training and their roles before, during and after it.

They invested another quarter of their resources in the training event itself.

They reserved half of their resources to support performance of critical behaviors on the job.

Guidelines for what to do and say

The results for the second group were dramatically different than the first. Remember, they did not use more resources; they simply used them differently.

Only 5% of the training graduates never bothered to try the new skills.
Only 10% tried, but failed for some reason.
A full 85% of the training graduates were successful in sustaining the new behaviors on the job. Many (most?) of the 70% that were lost in the earlier model were saved here due to even a small amount of support.

What are the implications? (Take a few volunteers from the group. Look for responses like: we need to stop focusing on just the training event. Training professionals and department managers need to work together before and after training. We need to do things differently than we are now.)

15% application is NOT going to bring about any significant Level 4 results. And think of the impact this balanced approach will have on those 70% from the first group who were well-meaning and enthusiastic to apply what they learned, only to become discouraged and give up.

16 of 16

Elements of Successful Onboarding

Business Result

An Onboarding Business Result is a metric that includes:

Time to Ramp
Definition of Ramped

The definition of Ramped tells us what measurable way we can assess that someone is ready to do their job.

Ex: [Fill in Tech Support’s metric]

Behaviors & Barriers

The business can list the key behaviors that support the Business Result and define the barriers to those behaviors (specifically barriers that pertain to new hires). Behaviors are global (or regional differences are explicitly called out).

Success Measurement

The business can easily track progress on the key metrics with assessments that evaluate readiness. Example of this would include Skill Belts, demo calls, etc.

What does it take?

Virtual Design

Onboarding plan that accounts for three week boot camp and 2 - 12 week post-boot camp program with a mix of self-study and live sessions, designed to be virtual.