Archive for June, 2015
The 702010 Forum recently launched a 70:20:10 Practitioner Certification program (watch a video overview). I participated in the pilot of this program last year and see tremendous value in the way it supports me to improve the application of the 702010 framework in my organisation, while also recognising my development as I do my work. There is real integrity in the 702010 approach that is built into the certification.
I’ve decided to post my certification pathway and progress reviews on my blog rather than just on the 702010 Forum so that I can share it more widely. In this post I share how I have scoped my work requirements and certification pathway. Participants are asked to apply a performance analysis approach to the scoping step, which is then used to structure this initial post.
Overview of Situation
Coca-Cola Amatil (CCA) produces and distributes a range of beverages and some food items including carbonated soft drinks, fruit juices, water, dairy drinks, alcoholic beverages, fruit, coffee and tea. In early 2012 CCA established the Supply Chain Technical Academy. After a number of years of capital investment, a need was identified to ensure that we could continue to develop the capability of our people to use these platforms and systems. The Academy developed competency-based blended learning programs. These programs include theory (10), learning from others (20), and learning from experience (70). The three elements were included in structured programs, culminating in skill assessment on-the-job.
By early 2014 the Academy had largely delivered on the initial mandate of developing training programs to support the major capital investment program, which had come to an end. CCA’s market conditions had become tougher and profitability was reducing. Supply Chain’s business strategy had been updated, shifting focus to productivity in order to realise the benefits of the capital investment program. It was time to refresh our Capability strategy.
I had joined the 702010 Forum in September 2013 and became aware of how many different ways there are to support social and experiential learning. It struck me that CCA had narrowly interpreted the 702010 framework, and were missing many valuable, lower cost opportunities to support learning and improve our business results.
While I commenced individual 702010 certification as part of the Forum’s pilot in September 2014, I have used the Forum to support development and execution of the refreshed strategy described in this journal post.
Who is Involved?
Sponsor – My manager, the Head of People and Productivity – Supply Chain, is sponsoring my certification.
A Supply Chain Technical Capability Governance Board was established in mid 2012. The Board consists of a range of senior National and State managers. It sets and oversees Capability strategy. The Board helps me to align capability activities to business strategy and priorities.
National and State managers of functions such as manufacturing, maintenance and logistics – The Capability strategy must help them to improve their team’s business results. I work with them to develop specific learning programs that suit their team’s characteristics and working environment.
Capability Community – This group are both stakeholders in my certification and support in that they are co-contributors to the work that is in certification scope.
Academy team – five people in addition to myself, who develop and coordinate national learning programs.
Additional ‘Capability Consultants’ – people who take a lead role on development of specific Capability, but are not a permanent part of the Academy team.
State Capability Managers – one per Australian State (geographically structured role). These roles report to State Supply Chain Managers. They plan and execute technical and compliance training locally using a mixture of Academy and other programs. They are key local change and communication agents for the Academy.
Indirect Support – I shall work with IT and HR on specific initiatives. I shall also use my external Personal Learning Network for support. I may also engage external specialists to assist with specific initiatives.
The business context in early 2014 was introduced at start of this post. Key business performance factors were:
– Reducing business profitability due to changing market conditions, with a negative impact on share price.
– Business cost reductions, reducing workforce size.
– Completion of a multi-year program of investment in a range of Supply Chain platforms and computer systems.
Capability performance was reflected in a SWOT analysis undertaken in March 2014. I conducted individual discussions with the Governance Board members and Capability Managers gathered input from functional managers in their States. The SWOT was finalised at a 2 day Capability Community strategy workshop.
In summary, we had embedded a new consistent, clear model of competency-based Capability development aligned with business priorities, and the Community had earned credibility in the business. This has been a significant shift from the previous model where each State independently developed technical capability. Managers across Supply Chain told us that we had focussed on the right capabilities, and they felt that the programs met their needs. However, activity metrics showed that utilisation of formal programs was low. Engagement of local teams with Capability needed to improve in most States. We were also concerned that knowledge sharing across States was low.
Performance Outcomes to be achieved:
The Supply Chain business strategy was updated in late 2013 and emphasises productivity. Specific 3-year stretch targets have been set in the following business KPIs:
– Overall equipment effectiveness (OEE)
– Unplanned equipment downtime
– Reducing finished goods inventory
– Cost of finished goods
To support these business outcomes, the Capability strategy must:
– rapidly develop emerging technical skills required in the business. For example, improve maintenance planning skills in order to reduce unplanned equipment downtime.
– use more responsive learning strategies. While the competency-based programs provide a foundation by sustaining critical core technical skills and knowledge, they do not enable continuous learning while working. They also require a lot of resource and time to develop.
Implications of Doing Nothing
Our Capability Strategy clearly needed to be refreshed to maintain alignment with the business strategy. To continue developing capability-based learning programs would mean that we invest a lot of resource in increasingly lower priority business capabilities. We simply could not keep up with business needs and risked becoming irrelevant.
Key Activities or Solutions
The refreshed Capability Strategy contains five elements as per the diagram below.
The strategy, endorsed by the Governance Board, states that we will focus on:
1. Continuing to develop and drive utilisation of evidence based programs for key capabilities
2. Driving leader engagement with, and accountability for, Capability Development
3. Building a continuous learning culture
4. Facilitating effective Communities of Practice for key capabilities
5. Implementing modern technology enabled approaches for learning
6. Implementing strong governance practices
We have a three year road map of key initiatives for each element by year.
I shall focus on knowledge sharing as part of building a continuous learning culture for my 702010 Certification. This includes Communities of Practice and other forms of embedding and extracting learning through knowledge sharing. However, I shall also use the 702010 Forum resources and community to support other activities included in the strategy.
Following development of the strategy my next steps in regard to building knowledge sharing were to:
– Improve SharePoint infrastructure so that it could be used effectively for knowledge sharing.
– Engage and enable the Capability Community to support knowledge sharing by other groups in the business.
– Develop knowledge sharing across CCA’s (1) Maintenance and Engineering teams, and (2) Systems Super Users and Key Users.
International Work Out Loud Week (#WOLWeek), 15-21 June 2015, took me a little by surprise. Realising it was happening only 3 days out I scrambled for ideas of how to use the opportunity to promote the benefits and practices of working out loud in my organisation. For context, I have been talking to people in my business unit Capability Community about WOL over the past year, and since February 2015 have included it in the Work, Connect and Learn program which we run to introduce people to skills and behaviours for building a network and participating in a Community of Practice. Of course, people have been sharing their work with others in a range of forms as a natural element of how they work for a long time before the terms ‘work out loud’ or ‘show your work’ were invented. What we see now is a movement which encourages doing this in a purposeful, open and generous way to amplify the benefits to the individual and those who see their work and engage in conversations with them.
Every Monday at 9am people who work in my business unit on the same floor of my building gather and briefly talk about one or two things they are working on that week. I enthusiastically introduced WOL Week and let everyone know that what they were doing right then was a form of WOL.
Next I got onto our Enterprise Social Network, SharePoint, and introduced WOL Week in a post on the home page where everyone in the organisation could see it. I included a link to a punchy introduction to Working Out Loud that I’d prepared using the new Microsoft Sway tool. (This is the public version – the version I shared inside the organisation included links to examples of WOL on SharePoint as well as the internet.) At the end of the post I asked the questions “What is one thing you are working on or learning at the moment? How are you doing this?” No-one replied, 1 person liked the post.
I made a fresh post sharing a link to Jane Bozarth’s explanation of how (and why) to show your work which I find clear and practical. I did include the WOL Week image (always try to add an image to my posts so they are more noticeable). However, the text was a little longer and the link to the article was only revealed after clicking on ‘show more’, along with the question “What was something you did yesterday? What problem did you solve or what did you learn?”
I role modelled replying to my own post, sharing a model for having engaging conversations. 8 people liked the model. No one else shared or asked further questions.
Day 3 – what else could I do? I decided to run an experiment – SharePoint versus Flipchart. I kept it simple. I wrote “What Have You Learned Recently” on a flipchart and stuck it on a wall in a corridor leading to our well-frequented cafe, along with an A4 poster about WOL Week. I also took a photo of the question and posted it on SharePoint. I made one reply in each location to get the sharing started.
Bearing in mind that the number of people who passed the flipchart was in the hundreds, while the number of people with access to SharePoint is in the thousands (a ratio of 1:8 at least) – what do you think the outcome was after 3 working days, not counting my replies?
FLIPCHART – 6
SHAREPOINT – 1
More people replied on the flipchart than on SharePoint.
What did happen on SharePoint was follow on conversation. I had posted that I had learned “In-box domination” – how to get my in-box to zero at the end of every day. Two people commented or asked questions about this. There may have been conversation generated by the flipchart, but I wasn’t there to hear it. This is a key difference between the two modes – conversations are accessible by more people on SharePoint, and you get the opportunity to interact with people that you may not have physical contact with.
Another observation is that the simplest of my three International WOL Week SharePoint posts got the most responses. So, I shall keep posts brief, continue using graphics, and ask direct questions to encourage interaction.
I posted a photo of the flipchart on SharePoint, compared the number of replies and asked why people more had replied to the flipchart. The one response to this question was interesting:
The implication then is that there was not a lot of traffic on SharePoint. It’s a pity I can’t get data on how many people visit their SharePoint newsfeed daily – probably fewer than visit the cafe on my floor. Apart from traffic, I’m sure there are other reasons why people didn’t post a reply, although not specifically which reasons were in play here. What I do know is that this number is higher than it was 6 months ago as more people are interacting with me on SharePoint. I have faith that over time it will continue to grow so long as people like myself continue to champion enterprise social within the organisation.