Azimov's Laws of Robotics prove Prophetic when Applied to Learning in the 21st Century

As 2012 opens for business, and we continue to search for lessons to learn from 2011, it's time for a fresh perspective. The new year brings with it new pressures and paradoxes: it is important to identify initiatives to prioritise, and targets against we should test and measure our performance; but we must be mindful that when these pressures are applied together, we may end up running around in circles, fighting against ourselves and unclear about which priority supercedes another.

This is something which I think Isaac Azimov would have found amusing: 70 years ago, he was already forecasting the confusion of latter-day logic, as humans sought to improve their lives with improved technology and automated collaboration.  Azimov is, perhaps, best known for penning the short story "I, Robot", which later became a cinematic success for Will Smith, as he battled a futuristic reliance upon a potentially fallible robot-assisted human culture.

Recently, I saw an anecdote for Business Process Management, as I reviewed a link which took me to a Wikipedia entry for another of Isaac Azimov's science fiction stories: "Runaround".  [EHRworkflow Jan 30, 7:42pm via Twitter for Android Amusing transposition of I. Asimov "I, Robot" short story en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runaround RT @ebuise RT @adam_deane #BPM Runaround wp.me/pPwZ5-1rL].  This article explains how the robotic support for Azimov's hero got confused as his primary laws conflicted with one another: laws 2 and 3 came into conflict and the deadlock was eventually broken by invoking the importance of law 1...

1. "a robot may not...allow a human being to come to harm"
2. "a robot must obey orders"
3. "a robot must protect its own existence"

I was struck by the similarity between this neat little tale and many of the late-night, transatlantic conference calls I've been attending over the past few weeks...

Last year saw many organisations begin to turn the corner, as they re-discover the importance of funding their respective learning programmes.  My organisation, and others with which I am connected, are optimistic of significant increases to learning budgets in 2012, as a result of implementing new methods of demonstrating the tangible and positive impact which learning can hold over other business performance measures.  Of course, as more funds are granted, we are asked to make them go further.  This presents the CLO with a dilemma: how do I deliver extra, thus justifying the budget, without forgetting existing commitments?  How do we accept extra funding, but not make it available to those who had to cancel events at late notice?  How do we reach short-term business goals, whilst trying to invest in a long-term infrastructure?

The answer is to rely upon the very information which has brought us this extra funding: to ensure that we continue to demonstrate a strong ROI on any investment and to find a solid business case for those resources, technologies and content which will help to deliver the business outcome.  This is the guiding foundation for Learning Intelligence and even in times like these - when it's easy to assume that he who shouts loudest will get the most - that sound judgement and rational decision-making is at it's most important.

As an Humanist, I wonder whether Azimov would have any thoughts on our decision-making processes: as we continually, and alternately, invoke the importance of logic or emotion in our prioritisation of business imperatives - lurching from side to side like Speedy the robot in 'Runaround' - Learning Intelligence is the third law we need to pull us out of this continual loop.

How Valuable is Market Intelligence and Industry Knowledge?

I like my job.

This is my first blog post and will give you a very quick sense of who I am; but it will also explain why I find my area of expertise continually frustrating!

So, returning to my first statement: I like my job.  Not only do I find my colleagues engaging and professional, I also think that Corporate Learning is an area which is perpetually refreshing.  Training professionals are continually learning; knowledge champions are continually sharing their expertise.  For me, though, it goes deeper than this...

Falling through a gap - somewhere between what most marketeers and demographers call Gen X and Gen Y - perpetually, I am trying to learn more about technology!  Learning Intelligence is the juxtaposition between these two forces: how to apply technological advantage to make sense of training and knowledge effectiveness.

Very early in my career (with what used to be one of the 'Big 5' accountancy firms), my then-manager instilled in me the desire to become a "trusted business advisor"; long before this term was bandied about and applied to pretty much any support personnel, this was someone who informed and made recommendations, based upon sound judgement and industry knowledge.  I have always found the concept to be valuable, but at the same time, seeming just out of reach - I think this means that there is no right or wrong way to be a trusted business advisor, as long as you are credible and provide value, it is possible to develop, continually.  As I gain seniority, this is how I try to mentor my teams and mentees.

To quote Bob Dylan, though, "the times, they are a-changin'"!

Having built my reputation on providing insight to which others may not be party, or from which others may not have the time or resources to obtain, in recent times I have sought to utilise social media, for these purposes (check out http://twitter.com/#!/MTLawrence).  There is so much information available that, by using sources such as Twitter in the right way, you can get at much more information, much more quickly than ever imagined before.  Furthermore, it is possible to connect with other related professionals (like-minded, or otherwise), very easily - boosting the objectivity of my own opinions.  All good, right?

Well, so I thought.  Recently, however, I have found that my [previously] strong performance ratings have started to take a dent and the only feedback on offer was along the lines of "we're not interested in what others do, we just need you to push us forward".  Yes, there may be some impact on my time (- ironically, I note that I am drafting this blog during work hours - for shame!), but on the whole, 90% of my social media activity takes place on my own time.  I am concerned that my stakeholders may be missing the bigger picture:

That with continual cuts in budgets and resources, perhaps it is they who are impacting the time I have available to 'push us forward'; and that, without my knowledge of other relevant developments, case studies, or experiences, judgements may be ill-founded.

So, how valuable is market intelligence and industry knowledge?  With a nod to the seniority and deeper experience of many of my stakeholders, I would suggest that perhaps they re-consider.  

Recently, I attended the Chief Learning Officer Magazine Symposium (#CLOSym) and was fortunate to catch a keynote from Mark Miller, VP of Training & Development @ChickfilA, who was explaining their take on leadership, summarised by "Five Practices of Great Leaders":

1. Great Leaders see the future
2. Great Leaders engage and develop others
3. Great Leaders reinvent continuously (self, systems/processes, structure)
4. Great Leaders value results and relationships
5. Great Leaders embody the values (walk the talk!)

Part-way through this amusing and engaging presentation, Miller recounted witnessing the great Peter Drucker being asked "what is the most difficult decision a leader makes?" Drucker, apparently bowed his head for several minutes (causing the audience to wonder if the management guru had gone to the Great Business School in the Sky) before raising his head again and answering "Who does what?"

The point is that Drucker knew the in's and out's of leadership, and others such as Miller were there because they wanted to learn from Drucker.  Ask Jack Phillips about the Kirkpatrick model and he would have known it inside-out.  Ask Professor Gary Hamel about Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs or Tuckman's Situational Leadership model, for example, and he'd look at you as if you were on a planet he left many moons ago!  Even for acknowledged thought leaders [- yuck! Yes, I hate that phrase too, but you know what I mean!], it is crucial to live, eat and breath everything about your subject.  

To learn, continually.  After all, isn't that the business we're in...?