Sections 6 – 9 in this post need to be revisited and amended at least annually. It’s a case of carrying out your MOT – Maximising Our Training.

If you are managing a Learning and Development unit, I’m guessing that you have a finite budget? I’m also reasonably confident that you will have more requests than you can meet with this finite budget?  In which case, you need to maximise those resources.

To deliverer optimum value from your budget, you need a process or processes to ensure that:

1. only those who really need the learning interventions get them,
2. where a course is involved, it is run at maximum occupancy, and
3. those who undertake such interventions have demonstrated that they have the new skills once they return to the workplace.

Section 6 – Organisational Needs Analysis

Based on my previous arguments around whether this Strategy should be a ‘Training’ or ‘Performance Improvement’ Strategy, it should come as no surprise that I advocate a Performance Needs Analysis (PNA) as opposed to a Training Needs Analysis (TNA). Very different entities. I have previously discussed a model for an effective PNA, and this section should summarise the process your organisation will use in relation to assessing its performance needs.

Section 7 – Prioritisation of Needs

Then comes the thorny issue of deciding which, and how many, of the needs you can address. My experience is that the organisation likes the L & D function to undertake this activity. My advice would be not to! The client side is responsible for prioritisation, the L & D side is responsible to effective delivery. If you have a finite budget and some needs cannot be met, who gets the (thorny) stick if L & D have undertaken the prioritisation? Yes, you do!

You should suggest an objective prioritisation process, and work with the client side to ensure that it happens, but not undertake it.

Section 8 – Addressing Needs

This is about getting the right people into the position for the correct needs to be met, and then checking that they have in fact been met. Key aspects of this process should be:

• The person requiring the performance need (or their manager) giving a clear explanation of the need.
• The manager explaining why they cannot address this matter locally (through coaching, shadowing, etc.).
• The manager showing clearly how by addressing this performance need, organisational performance will be improved.
• Agreement from local senior management that this is a valid need.
• The delegate creating an action plan at the conclusion of the intervention.
• Within three months of the end of the intervention, sign off by the line manager that the person’s need has been met – and they can now do what they couldn’t do before.
• Or re-submission of the need for a further intervention if the manager cannot give this sign off.

This can all be included in one process, and if you would like to see how, please let me know and I will send you further information.

By undertaking Sections 6 – 8, you will ensure that relevant needs at
organisational, team and individual levels are included.

Section 9 – Collaboration

In the past few years the world has seen the formation of a number of strategic alliances between passenger airlines. If you buy a car, there are many makes, but in reality there are only three or four producers in the world with each make falling under one of the larger umbrellas.

Who could you collaborate with to save on design time and maximise places on courses by sharing capabilities? Running programmes more regularly will benefit your organisation, it is easier to fill events to capacity with a larger pool of potential delegates and people will learn different ideas and skills from other organisations. If this works for you, you should include you organisations approach to collaboration within this section.

Section 10 – Design, Delivery and Evaluation

I would advocate a separate Design, Delivery and Evaluation Strategy – and for some organisations it will make more sense to have three separate Strategies covering each of these aspects. This section should make reference to their existence and where they can be located.

Section 11 – Sector / Organisation specific considerations

It may be that your organisation needs one or more specific sections – this is where to add them. An example could be a section on Diversity and Equality, where you might include:

• A statement of commitment to diversity and equality.
• The reasons for addressing this aspect separately.
• How diversity training will be included in programmes.

Section 12 – Monitoring

For some of us, perhaps getting a strategy up and running has been a challenge, and now it is done it can be put to one side and other matters can be focussed on. If that’s the case, what was the point in doing it? If it is mapping out a course we see as being the right direction, we need to keep making sure that we are on track. It needs refreshing and renewing.

This is a short section to write, covering:

• Who (or what meeting) will monitor activity against the Standards of Performance in Section 4?
• How often will performance be reported on (quarterly suggested) and who to?
• Who will review this Strategy?
• How often will it be reviewed and updated (at least annually)?
• Who (or what meeting) will the updated Strategy be presented to?

It takes longer to undertake. It entails considering and documenting:

• If the organisation’s Statement of Values has changed, this document needs to reflect it (Section 1)
• Have the strategic objectives changed, and so need updating? (Section 2)
• Do the Guiding Principles require updating? (Section 3)
• Bearing in mind the above amendments, do you need amended Performance Standards? If not, do the measurements of success need updating due to the current levels of performance? (Section 4)
• Do the responsibilities need updating? (Section 5)
• Sections 6 – 8 then need amending in light of all the above information.
• Is there anyone else we could collaborate with to deliver a more effective service for the organisation? (Section 9)

And that’s it – Training for Performance Improvement (TPI) Strategy successfully completed!

Paul

Section 4 – Standards of Performance (Success Criteria)

This section deals with what you are going to deliver, and how your unit’s performance will be assessed. You need to make the Standards both specific and measureable, yet also relevant for the 5-year lifespan of the Strategy.

This is where you really show whether you are a “Training” or a “Performance Improvement” unit or department. Are your standards of performance going to be “Output” focussed or “Outcome” focussed? Your ‘Scotch Corner’ moment, as I have previously described it.

Here are some examples of Standards of Performance that you could consider using:

1. Number of days training and development invested in staff per month (i.e. a 5 day course for 12 people equates to 60 days investment)
2. The % of managers undertaking at least one Leadership or Management Development Course each year
3. Rating of internal interventions by delegates – % of delegates indicating that the learning event will be of direct benefit to them in their current role
4. Rating of all interventions, 2 – 4 months after a learning event – % of staff indicating that they have improved their performance as a result of the intervention
5. The % of managers stating that (your unit) has delivered an improved level of performance, as measured against the previous year

For some of these standards (such as 1 & 2) it may be that your target is the same throughout the 5 years, assuming you are not anticipating any significant changes in your organisation’s staffing levels. For others (such as 3 & 4) it may be that you want to increase the performance percentage for each year of the strategy’s lifecycle.

What would these Performance Standards indicate about the particular unit? If I saw statements 1 and 2 above as the style of Standards of Performance being used in a 5 year Strategy, my initial impression would be that this unit is very “Output” focussed and has little focus on improving performance. The unit is being measured in a relatively simplistic manner. It appears to be a “Training” function.

If, however, I saw statements such as 3, 4 and 5, I would get a very different first impression. These Standards are very “Outcome” focussed, seeking to demonstrate the value of the function to the rest of the organisation. The Standards are more difficult to measure and are more testing to achieve – in order to achieve them, they require more detailed communication and more effective relationships with other parts of the organisation. They indicate that this is a “Performance Improvement” function and that across the organisation there is a more mature culture.

Remember that what is measured generally happens. The measurements you select will become important. If you measure relatively unimportant activity, it will become important – and that will be detrimental to both you and your organisation.

Section 5 – Responsibilities

It is helpful if everyone is aware of their responsibilities in relation to the Strategy. The responsibilities need to be discussed, negotiated and agreed from the outset. Getting clarity and sign off at this stage will save you time in the future.

These are the roles I suggest that you have responsibilities listed for:

• Staff
• Line managers
• Senior Operations managers
• Members of (your unit)
• Head of (your unit)
• Head of (overall part of the organisation within which your unit sits)
• Senior Leadership members
• Chief Executive / Head of the Organisation
• Board members (where appropriate)

Here are a couple of examples of what you might list under two of the above groups.

All members of Staff are expected to:

• Take responsibility for their own learning and development
• Learn from their workplace experiences
• Identify, through the PDR process, and address, with the assistance of line managers and (your unit), their particular learning and
  development needs
• Make use of self-help facilities
• Keep up to date with the organisation’s policy, practices and procedures

Senior Leadership members are expected to:

• Set and review the strategic direction of the organisation
• Set an example by being effective in managing staff
• Value and action their own training and development needs, and those who they line manage
• Monitor and quantify the improved performance delivered as a result of staff undertaking learning and development activities

If you would like examples of the responsibilities that you might list under the other suggested roles, just let me know - I will be happy to send you some.

The third and final part of the TPI Strategy template will be the focus for my next post.

Paul

Such a template can be very useful as a guide, but it should only be used as a guide. If taken too rigidly it will hinder your creative thinking or the adding of aspects that might be of particular importance to you and your organisation. I offer you this template with those words of caution.

There are 3 distinct parts within this Strategy template:

• Part 1 – The Foundation Stones
• Part 2 – The Standards and Responsibilities
• Part 3 – The Supporting Processes

Within this post, I will cover what I see as the Foundation Stones for a beneficial Strategy. These are required – as the name suggests – in order to ensure a sound platform for the remainder of the Strategy.

Section 1 – Statement of Values

This section should include a statement on behalf of the organisation setting out its commitment to performance improvement / staff development / training.

If your organisation has a Board of Governors or similar, the statement should be agreeable to both the Board and the Senior Management Team. This is important in terms of unity and clarity, and so that you can gain organisational acceptance for your TPI Strategy.

If you have your own Vision, this can also be included within this section.

Section 2 – Strategic Objectives

Consider these questions:

• What  are the long term objectives of your organisation?
• What  are the core skills required within your sector?
• What  are the likely influences on your organisation over the coming years  -you might want to undertake a PEST / PESTLE  analysis (consider adding as an appendix the key documents you have considered)?
• What  are the national learning and development issues that are likely to impact on your organisation?

As a result of this Strategic Assessment, you may well come up with several specific objectives, or you may decide to use just one, such as, “To develop the skills and improve the performance of our managers and their team members”.

Do which works best for you, but remember, whatever objective(s) you do come up with need to long term (5 years) and also link into the organisation’s long term objectives – and the links need to be obvious.

Section 3 – Guiding Principles to Underpin the Strategy

This section can be particularly useful in less mature organisations where you are still seeking to embed effective development processes.

The sorts of principles that you might see benefit from incorporating could include:

• The PDR / Appraisal process will be the effective link between personal development and organisational effectiveness
• Learning and Development is a critical support function working to enable the organisation to deliver improved organisational performance (particularly useful to include if your unit’s title is ‘Training’ or ‘Learning and Development’)
• The focus of activities will be on improving the performance of staff and the services we provide (the comments against the previous bullet point also apply here)
• Staff will be encouraged and supported to undertake appropriate self-development activities
• The content of programmes will be stimulating and challenging
• Leadership skills and valuing diversity will be key threads throughout learning activities
• Where possible, learning and development activities will be linked to nationally recognised qualifications
• Monitoring of transference of skills to the workplace will take place in order to ascertain the value of learning and development activities

So those are the Foundation Stones – in the next post I will explain Part 2 – the Standards and Responsibilities for the TPI Strategy.

Paul

If you are looking to create a Learning and Development (or Training) Strategy, you may have created your own Departmental Vision if your unit is large enough, or it may be that you have a company Vision which you use. This is a helpful starting point for your Strategy.

Here in England, just north of where I live and about 100 miles from Scotland, there is a road junction called “Scotch Corner”. Most people hardly notice it now, but in years gone by it was a hugely significant junction. Before getting to this point, the traveller needed to have planned their journey and decided whether they would be going up the east coast or west coast of Scotland. The decision had to be made a long time before reaching Scotland. Once they had decided which way to turn at Scotch Corner, it was expensive, time consuming and complicated to change course. The same is true of a strategy.

So before you go any further, why are you creating a strategy? The dictionary definition of a strategy is, “a long-term plan for success; a plan to achieve an advantage”. Nowhere does it suggest its definition is, “a paper exercise; the ticking of a box”. Sadly though, too many strategies are created for this second purpose – and such an approach can also become a millstone, or worse – a stick with which others can metaphorically beat you.

For a strategy to give you this long term plan and a competitive or organisational advantage, you need to put time, thought and energy into its formulation. It should enable you to clearly express where your function is heading and most importantly how it will support organisational performance, improvement and success. Once you have achieved this, you should be able to gain support and acceptance for your approach from your organisation’s senior management. This ‘sign off’ gives you further clarity, and can be very useful if you need to ‘challenge’ other parts of the organisation if for any reason they do not support your activities or seek to alter your direction.

So far I have referred to the document as a ‘Learning and Development’ or ‘Training’ Strategy, however, I would suggest that you really think hard about what you call it. Its title will set the tone for what you do and how you are seen. I have previously set down my thoughts on what can happen when a person is called a Trainer (“Sell your crunch, not your apples“), and how this can be unhelpful. As an aside, since writing that post, I have been on a course where the attendees were people who coach, train and develop others. The job title of one delegate was “Performance Improvement Consultant” Music to my ears! Having said that, the person worked at a group of hospitals in Orlando, Florida and so my concerns as to whether the title would be understood in the UK still exist.

Put yourself in the shoes of your senior operations manager – or similar – for a moment. Do they want a function that provides ‘Training’, ‘Learning’, ‘Development’, ‘Performance Improvement’, or something else? I see this as a continuum to which you could potentially add other words or phrases.

I’m pretty sure that the majority of senior operations managers would put themselves towards the right hand end of this continuum – they want performance improvement. That’s how they are measured, that’s how they demonstrate success, that’s what keeps the business competitive or the organisation successful.

Why then do so many people have ‘Training’ Strategies? Possibly because that’s the way they have always been done, or possible because of where the function sits within the organisation. Often this function is part of HR. Within the HR profession, ‘Training’ is still an all too popular generic title. If this function was moved to be part of the Performance Management arm of the business, would its primary purpose still be seen as Training? I think not.

Consequently, this Strategy is far more than a piece of paper. It will say what you are about, and how you are positioned within the organisation. It should make you think long and hard about what impact you intend to make. So before you even start to write it, think about these crucial questions.

Will you be having a ‘Training Strategy’ or a ‘Performance Improvement Strategy’? This is your ‘Scotch Corner’ moment.

Paul

For a Vision to be effective, not only does it need to meet the suggested criteria listed in the previous post, it also needs to be owned by the company or departmental staff, and both understood and valued by the customer base. The following process will enable you to achieve all this.

1. Brainstorm or board-blast words and short phrases that describe what your organisation or department is to be about. This activity can be undertaken both internally and with customers, although the sessions should be run separately.
2. Having undertaken this with one or more groups, look at all the words and phrases you have generated. You will see some themes and overlaps. Some words will have similar meanings. Group the words and phrases together where possible – using one colour for customer comments and another colour for staff comments.  This will give you an indication of which themes are numerically most important to the people you have consulted with, together with a check of the weighting from each of the two groups.
3. Now prioritise your themes. Which are shared by both staff and customers? As the leader of the company or Department, which ones meet with your long term view? Which are most important to the success of your venture?
4. Within each theme, is there a word that encapsulates, as far as possible, what the theme is about? If so, make a note of it. If not, is there a two-word phrase that sums it up? This step of the process is all about simplifying the theme and looking to take it forward as succinctly yet as accurately as possible.  You will never fit all the comments people have made into a sentence of a few words – so you will have to be prepared to accept inclusion by implication – and this is what you should be seeking to achieve with this step.
5. Put your prioritised words together in a phrase. As I have mentioned previously, the phrase needs to be memorable, and as many people as possible need to be able to understand how their contribution has helped form and been included within the sentence.

If you get to this point, well done! It isn’t easy to get to this position, and it is time consuming – but it is well worthwhile.

The last time that I undertook this process was when I was leading a large Learning and Development function within an organisation. The Vision that I settled on was “Partners in Developing Performance”. This reflected the requirement to work with other parts of the organisation in an Adult and objective manner, together with the recognition that we existed to develop people, and that our Department needed to make a positive impact on organisational performance.

I found it very helpful in articulating what we were all about, and ensuring that all our activities fitted with this Vision or value. The most pleasing impact was when one of the trainers – on his own initiative – had delegate desk name plates (i.e. a folded card where the delegate wrote their name as a part of their introduction) printed with the Vision on. Proof that it was owned and valued by staff!

Furthermore, due to its positive impact, the HR Department adopted an amended version of it – “Partners in Managing our People”– for their own use.

So if it can be so effective, why don’t more organisations and departments do it? There are many potential reasons – here are some of them:

• Looking for instant results – if that’s what you want, you probably will not invest the time in a Vision
• Bureaucratic – it can be viewed as such where people don’t understand its value
• Fear or embarrassment – it can be seen as a bit different if people haven’t been involved in such a process before
• Inadequacy – some people tell themselves that they couldn’t lead such a process. Remember, there are facilitators who would be able to assist you with the process
• Fatigue – there will be many other things on your plate, and it can be an easy one to push off the side.

But try it – clear these potential blockages and set out your Vision.  Be clear on where you and your team are going.

Once you have your Vision, you can develop your Mission – which will be your over-arching objective or overall aim. This could be your objective for where you will be in 5 years’ time. You can then work backwards setting objectives as to what needs to be in place or happen to get you to that point. Your path will have clarity for your staff and stakeholders.

Which takes me back to where this all started – the writing of a Strategy. The Vision can make this easier, and in my next post I will outline a template for creating a meaningful Learning and Development Strategy.

Paul

I believe that there is a key step that should take place before writing the strategy – a step that can make the difference between the resulting product being a living document and a paper exercise. But very few people or organisations undertake it.

It’s the creation of a Vision. The creation of a Vision can conjure up ideas, enable ownership of a shared dream of the future, motivate people and focus everyone’s thinking.  It can be undertaken by whole organisations, or key departments within organisations.

What is your company or Department’s Vision? If it has one, can you remember it? Do you have ownership of it? Does it motivate you?

Think of some of the Visions that other organisations have.  Two of the best ones that I am aware of are John Lewis’ “Never Knowingly Undersold” and Ikea’s “Affordable solutions for better living”. So what makes these so good?

Well, a Vision needs to be:

• Achievable
• Communicable
• Memorable
• Sustainable
• Probably not longer than 7 words
• Use terms that everyone can recognise, relate to
  and remember
• Describe what you see
• Inspirational

And it should avoid being:

• An intention
• Like an objective
• Bureaucratic
• Committee-speak
• Measurable

Both my previous examples fit with these requirements, as does my personal favourite – FedEx’s “The world on time”.  Those four words give such clarity as to what FedEx wants to be, yet so simply and memorably.

But not all are this good. Nike’s, “To bring inspiration and innovation to every athlete in the world”, and Amazon’s, “To be earth’s most customer centric company”, are reasonable, but the use of the word ‘To’ at the start making them sound too much like objectives.

Moving down my leader board, we arrive at Virgin Atlantic’s, “The success of our three year strategy requires us to build on these foundations by focusing on the business and leisure markets and driving efficiency and effectiveness”. Memorable? Inspirational? I don’t think so.

And, in my opinion, the worst of all belongs to Heinz. Their 73-word offering is, “Our Vision, quite simply, is to be ‘The world’s premier food company, offering nutritious, superior tasting foods to people everywhere.’ Being the premier food company does not mean being the biggest but it does mean being the best in terms of consumer value, customer service, employee talent, and consistent and predictable growth. We are well on our way to realizing this Vision but there is more we must do to fully achieve it.”

If they had left it as the ‘quite simply’ part, then it would be good – but someone felt the need to, “Yes, but …” it, and the moment was lost. And with it went any inspirational, communicable or motivational qualities it may have had. But perhaps it’s more difficult when you need to include 57 varieties!

If your company or Department has a Vision, how good do you think it is? If it doesn’t have a Vision, would you benefit from having one? In my next post I will give suggestions as to how to create a FedEx quality Vision.

Paul

And so I was watching the Malaysian Grand Prix last weekend – which was made more eventful by rain. As it drew to its conclusion, the Mexican Sergio “Checo” Perez driving for Sauber – usually one of the less competitive teams – was in second position, and appeared to have the chance to win the race. He gradually reduced the distance between himself and Fernando Alonso’s Ferrari. Finally, he was within a second of it with half a dozen laps to go. The chance was there.

Then he received a message over his radio from his pit crew. “Checo be careful, we need this position, be careful”. They needed the position because points bring in cash in Formula 1, and perhaps because this was the nearest that Peter Sauber, the team principal, had been to victory in almost 20 years of Formula 1. But ‘be careful’? And twice in the same sentence?  Checo had contended with torrential rain whilst driving at 150mph and with visibility down to a few yards for the first part of the race. Now with a relatively clear track and dry conditions he is told to “be careful”!

Almost as soon as he had received the message, he ran wide off the track, lost several seconds and that was the end of his challenge for first place. He did manage to regain control, and so finished in second place, but what could have been?

And more importantly, was the loss of control the result of being told to “be careful”?

This focussing of people’s minds on the potential pitfalls rather than on their achievements is something I come across on an almost daily basis in workplaces. I saw a sign recently on some stairs which read, “Do not spill your drink – this causes a slip hazard”. I wondered which members of staff in particular attempted or wanted to spill their drinks on the stairs. And when a drink is spilt, it appears that you don’t need to clean it up! Perhaps a better sign could have been “If you spill liquids, clean up to avoid slips – thanks” – same amount of words, but perhaps a different focus for the message – and a different message?

I also hear it a lot where children are involved – and this is the most concerning issue for me. “Don’t spill your drink”, “Be careful with your plate”, “Don’t fall over”, “Make sure you don’t fall off the climbing frame”, and so they go on. The vast majority of children have no intention of doing any of these things – they are probably already concentrating on achieving (or perhaps not failing) before hearing these ‘words of wisdom’, so what help are they? Or what hindrance are they?

“Well done for carrying that full cup”, “You carried that plate beautifully”, and “You’ve done really well getting to the top of that climbing frame” could be so much more effective. The child will grow up looking at the world in a more positive way, and they will have more self-belief.

And as they move into the work environment, perhaps we would then see fewer notices like the one above – and Checo and Peter Sauber may have won their first Grand Prix.

Paul

If 6CIA is good for coaches, then the 6 Dimensions of Facilitator Style (6DFS, or sometimes 18DFS) is great for trainers and facilitators! This model was developed by John Heron to complement 6CIA, and create a helping tool for people working with groups as opposed to individuals.

Whereas 6CIA has just the 6 Categories, 6DFS has 6 Dimensions (you will see some similarities with the 6CIA Categories) together with 3 Modes.

Heron used the Modes to describe the exercise of power in the running of the group by the facilitator – moving from Hierarchical, where all the power is with the trainer, through to Autonomous where the group has the freedom to finds its own way. As each Mode can be combined with each Dimension, this gives eighteen possible combinations (hence why it is sometimes called 18DFS).

As I explained in a previous post, I find that one of the best ways of explaining this model is to imagine, as a trainer, you have a ‘mixer’ – as a producer would use when recording music. On the producer’s mixer there are 6 controls managing the loudness or softness of each instrument making up the track, which they can change as they see fit – thus enabling them to create the perfect sound. As a trainer, change the instruments to Dimensions, and the loudness / softness control to the Modes. You then use your mixer to set the Dimensions and Modes at their appropriate level for the needs of the group, amending them as you see fit.

Here’s an explanation of the Modes and Dimensions:

Modes

Hierarchical: Power resides with the facilitator who directs and acts on behalf of the group – leading from the front on behalf of the group. The facilitator makes decisions, interprets, gives meaning, challenges, etc for the group and takes on responsibility for all the dimensions described below (“does it for the group”).

Co-operative: Shared responsibility and power with the facilitator ollaborating with the group in the management of the different dimensions. All views are valid and the facilitator’s view is not final. It is part of an agreed or negotiated outcome (“does it with the group”). The facilitator prompts and helps the group when dealing with the different dimensions.

Autonomous: Here the group has the freedom to find its own way with little or no intervention from the facilitator – as the facilitator is respecting the autonomy of the group. This doesn’t mean that the facilitator has a purely passive role, but works to create an environment and conditions whereby he group is self-directing (“gives it to the group”). The facilitator has created an environment and the space for self-directed learning.

Dimensions

Planning: The aims and plans of the group and what should happen to achieve these. It involves the consideration of objectives, methods, resources, times, assessment and evaluation.

Meaning: How the group acquires understanding and makes sense of the learning. This includes the assessment process. Covers different sort of learning – e.g. ideas, theories, experiential. Knowledge, understanding, skills, attitudes and behaviours.

Confronting: Dealing with resistance in the group that can hamper the learning. This can come about through habit, anxiety, inexperience, wanting to take an easier route, etc.

Feeling: The management of feelings and emotions within the group and enabling catharsis. The emotions can be positive and/or negative, but need managing so that they create learning and growth and, where necessary energy is redirected.

Structuring: The implementation of decisions regarding the design and methods used. How best to carry out and structure the learning activities that the group will be involved in.

Valuing: Creating the appropriate environment in which the learning will take place. An environment where people feel valued, can be authentic, can shares concerns openly, can disclose their needs and interests, increase their self-respect and are therefore able to thrive.

I find a great way to use this model is when training trainers or when reflecting on a day’s facilitation. I have a grid with Modes along one Axis and Dimensions along the other – let me know if you would like a copy – and then make a note of where the facilitator or trainer is (or was if it is my reflections) at different times of the day. Was I in the right Mode? Did I spend too long in one Dimension? Were there any Dimensions I didn’t operate in, and if so, is that a problem? Where do I need to be operating from tomorrow / the next time I run such a session?

Try it – I’m sure you‘ll find it valuable. Find out if you are 6D!

Paul

I have been asked for examples of each of the Interventions, so here goes:

Within Heron’s model, the 6 Categories of Interventions are classified into two main groups, Authoritative and Facilitative as shown in more detail below below.

Authoritative                    Facilitative

Prescriptive                        Cathartic

Informative                        Catalytic

Confronting                        Supportive

Heron described each of the Categories of Intervention as follows, and I have added a couple of examples for each:

A Prescriptive Intervention is intended to direct the behaviour or actions of another person by a demonstration, the giving of advice, a command or making a suggestion:

• “You need to Speak with Sam before lunch”

• “Send me your Action Plan by email”

An Informative Intervention seeks to impart knowledge or information to the other person by telling them or giving them a presentation.

• “People with colour-blindness often struggle to read green lettering”

• “The bus is cheaper than the train.”

A Confronting Intervention is intended to raise a person’s awareness about an aspect of their attitudes or behaviour.

• “Do you realise that during that session, every question that you asked was a closed question?”
• “On occasions you interrupt and talk over people, which tends to frustrate them.”

A Catalytic Intervention seeks to bring about self-discovery,
self-directed learning or problem solving.

• “How could you deliver that more effectively next time?”
• “What was it that you did that led to him reacting in that way?”

A Cathartic intervention is intended to enable or encourage a person
to divulge or discuss their feelings about a particular issue.

• “How did my comments make you feel?

• “What emotions did the discussion generate for you?”

A Supportive Intervention seeks to enhance a person’s self-esteem,
for instance by giving positive feedback.

• “You did a good job there.”
• “You handled that situation very skilfully.”

The examples above are given to illustrate each of the types of Interventions. This model is not an ‘exact science’ and so it will not always be possible to categorise every Intervention into one of the Categories. You also need to bear in mind that each Intervention is not merely the words that are used – it is also the body language that accompanies the Intervention.

I also said in my last blog that I would cover ‘Perverted Interventions’. Whereas Degenerate Interventions are rooted in a lack of awareness, experience or training, Perverted Interventions are something rather darker. They are deliberately malicious, and intended to bring harm to the client. There are suggested reasons for why people use them – generally around such practitioners being emotionally hurt or scarred earlier in their own lives – however, as this blog is about how to be helpful and skilled, I don’t intend to spend any further time in this area.

So, as a coach, facilitator, trainer or manager, how can you best use this model? Well, I have found it really useful in co-coaching, facilitator development and similar scenarios.  Using an observer to note the type of interventions made by the practitioner will lead to a beneficial discussion on the spread of interventions used, which were used least and most and whether this was best for the client. This can also be undertaken in terms of the groups – Authoritative and Facilitative – to discuss whether the best fit was achieved here, too. The practitioner can then consider where they need to develop further and action that for future occasions.

As I said in my first post on the subject, this is one of the best trainer and coaching models I have ever come across, and yet it is known and used by so few people. Hopefully this will increase its use!

Paul

One such subject is 6 Category Intervention Analysis (6CIA). I think the reason that I have so many hits regarding this subject is because there is so little about it on the internet – which is both surprising and a shame as it is a great coaching model. I originally wrote about it in the blog post in “Two of the best trainer models?”, where I explained the model and explored how it can be used.

In this blog post I will explain “Degenerate Interventions” and in my next blog post will look at “Perverted Interventions”.

There are four specific types of Degenerate Interventions (DI) within 6CIA. A DI is a misguided intervention as opposed to an intervention that is being deliberately maliciously or is Perverted. They usually occur where the practitioner or helper has a lack of experience in or understanding of using the interventions effectively.

Unsolicited Interventions

The first of the four categories occur where there is no formal practitioner – client relationship, and a person simply self-appoints themselves as the practitioner. Without being asked, they inform, advise, interpret, confront or seek information from the other person. This can often occur in social situations and take place in a manner that interferes with and is disrespectful of the other person’s autonomy. It is not malicious, just unsolicited and generally unhelpful.

Where there is an agreed practitioner – client relationship, this will define the sorts of interventions expected within the relationship. As an example, a bank customer in conversation with a bank manager would probably find interventions related to their finances as being entirely appropriately solicited, however, interventions in relation to their health are likely to appear improper and unsolicited.

Manipulative Interventions

Here the practitioner is motivated by self-interest and has little or no interest in the needs of the client. The practitioner will manipulate the client so that they get what they want from the interaction, whether the client gets anything worthwhile from it or not.

Particularly distasteful and concerning examples are where a practitioner manipulates the other person for the purposes of obtaining money or the satisfaction of power-play.

More common examples – particularly in the coaching arena – occur when the practitioner manoeuvres the client into saying and doing things only in a form that fits the educational or professional belief system that the practitioner holds dear to themselves. They lead the client rather than follow.

Compulsive Interventions

The source of Compulsive Interventions is to be found in unresolved or unacknowledged psychological experiences. These are often frozen needs or occluded distresses of previous years which the practitioner has not worked through and so they are unaware of themselves being driven by them, and so they influencing their interventions. They are less likely to occur where the practitioner has a good level of Emotional Competence or Intelligence, and where they undertake active supervision regarding their activities.

We sometimes see ‘compulsive helpers’ – these are often people who may well be using strategies that they used in their early years in order to survive. In Transactional Analysis (TA) terms they are driven by their Adapted Child and Controlling / Critical Parent ego-states and so do not operate in their objective Adult (although they believe they are in their Adult) ego-state. This will often result in only a limited range of interventions – and as the number is limited they are often misapplied and don’t fit the situation.

Unskilled interventions

This type of intervention is quite simply about a lack of competence. People who use these are limited by their scope and quality of interventions.

In the next blog post I will also look at how a person can eradicate these Degenerate Interventions.

Paul