The COVID-19 pandemic, the social justice pandemic, and now, the uneven, uncertain return to the office have all contributed in shifting our perspective on diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging (DEIB). We all know that what gets measured is what gets done. As a result, people analytics (PA) is increasingly more involved in DEIB efforts than ever. Yet, many leaders struggle to bring together the 2 disciplines of people analytics and DEIB.

This infographic (click on the image below to get the full version) highlights key insights from our report, DEIB Analytics: A Guide to Why & How to Get Started, which includes an iterative, 8-step model that leaders can use to map out their DEIB analytics approach.

As always, we’d love your feedback at [email protected]!

As part of our research on coaching, we invited leaders to participate in a roundtable on the future of coaching. The conversation focused on 4 main topics:

• Increasing access: How can coaching increase access to learning throughout the org (beyond top leadership)?
• Expanding the meaning of “coach”: How are orgs leveraging different types of internal coaches (e.g., manager as coach, peer coaching, reverse coaching)?
• Improving well-being: How can coaching support the whole employee beyond role performance?
• Coaching culture: How can coaching become more systemic?

Shared Initial Research Findings

To start the conversation, we shared our research findings thus far from engaging in ongoing conversations with leaders and conducting an extensive literature review based on 60 articles, blogs, and academic papers.

Figure 1: Future of Coaching Lit Review Word Cloud  |  Source: RedThread Research, 2021.

The word cloud above, produced by our literature review, points to answering the question, “what is coaching for?”

Org leaders see coaching as a tool to help manage, develop, and mentor employees, improve how they perform, and support them in how they learn and build new skills.

Through this process, we also saw coaching changing in 3 fundamental ways:

Figure 2: Ways Coaching is Changing  |  Source: RedThread Research, 2021.

1. More coaching is being extended to more people in the org past top leadership (e.g., new hires, sales groups, DEIB groups).
2. Coaching is starting to shift from a traditional 1:1 between external coach to internal leader to other approaches like coaching on demand, manager as coach, peer coaching, reverse mentoring and coaching, AI coaching, and group coaching.
3. The goals of coaching are expanding; while the traditional goal of coaching has been performance, coaching is moving to become a “benefit to the employee” by addressing wellbeing, as nutrition and wellness coaches enter the space.

Key Takeaways

This research set the stage for our conversation. But while we’ve already conducted extensive research over the past 4 months, this roundtable continued to surprise us with some gems and new insights. We learned about the ways orgs are using coaching to achieve some of their most fundamental goals, as well as the ways they’re struggling with the scope and scale of their efforts. Here are our 5 key takeaways:

1. Coaching is a tool, profession, and way of life, depending on the context
2. Coaching needs a problem to solve
3. Coaching shouldn’t blur lines with therapy
4. Coaching is one tool in a manager’s toolkit
5. Coaching culture is best lived out in practice

Coaching is a tool, profession, and way of life, depending on the context

We asked, “what is coaching?” expecting to hear answers that could be synthesized into one definition, but we discovered that leaders define coaching in different ways for different contexts.

Some leaders saw coaching as a tool for managers: a tool to help their team members learn, grow, and develop key skills. Others referred to coaching as a profession—one that requires some form of accreditation or certification.

And some talked about coaching as something bigger: a framework, perspective, or way of life. These leaders said coaching is what defines good leadership. It’s a lens through which great leaders view all their work, not something they do on occasion. As one leader said:

When coaching is viewed as a leadership style, learning becomes integrated into day-to-day interactions. This makes coaching—and learning—a way of life.

Coaching needs a problem to solve

Leaders talked at length about the difficulty orgs can have in deciding—and communicating to employees—how long coaching efforts should last.

One leader said their org limited coaching engagements to 6 months due to high demand. Participants enjoyed the process so much that they wanted to continue indefinitely. The org needed to determine a cutoff point to allow others to benefit from the coaches’ time.

Others emphasized the importance of clearly setting the coaching agenda and goals at the outset—whether individual or organizational—so it is clear when those goals have been reached. One leader noted:

Coaching is often treated like a silver bullet, but we’re not answering the question, “What’s the problem we’re solving for?” Everything should flow out of the problem to solve.

We were excited to hear about a new example of coaching: integrating it into an org transformation, such as an agile transformation. It’s easier to know when coaching should end in this instance because there is a specific purpose and a problem that it is aiming to solve (e.g., employees learning how to work in an agile framework).

Coaching shouldn’t blur lines with therapy

As we talked about the introduction of well-being into the coaching space, there was some concern that these two worlds are starting to overlap.

Many leaders noted that orgs, as a legal matter, do not provide coaches to discuss personal mental health or medical issues. One leader shared that at their org, employees were referred to therapists for mental health and reimbursed separately, as opposed to integrating that offering into their coaching practice.

However, leaders emphasized employees’ need for human connection—a need that has grown throughout the pandemic. They pointed to team coaching and other group coaching options as ways orgs can help employees connect with one another, find community, and be themselves in a safe space. As one leader said:

Employees need to bring their whole selves to work. The current moment requires it.

These options were seen as more appropriate ways for orgs to support employee well-being while leaving clinical and mental health matters to the licensed professionals.

Coaching is one tool in a manager’s toolkit

When we asked about how coaching is expanding, one of the most common ideas that leaders brought up was “manager as coach.”

Participants stressed the importance of managers having strong coaching skills. Great managers are skilled, for example, in providing good feedback, skillful questioning, setting goals, and guiding employees to think through challenges and come to conclusions.

However, there was also an emphasis on not over-relying on coaching as the only tool for managers: Coaching is not always the right tool for the job. Sometimes managers must direct employees; other times, they may need to act as core team members.

As a result, helping managers understand when and how to effectively use coaching skills is a crucial piece of the “manager as coach” approach. As one leader said:

Before coaching, managers need to know how to assess the situation. What does this person need? What tools do I have at my disposal? What tool should I use based on what’s going on with this person?

Coaching culture is best lived out in practice

Lastly, leaders discussed “coaching culture”—a current buzz phrase—and what it means in practice. Most leaders felt that having a coaching culture means coaching is “in the water” of the org—it’s part of everyday interactions. How to get coaching into the water is, of course, the challenge.

When we asked what orgs are doing to put coaching in the water, they mentioned the following ideas:

• Creating forums that allow people to connect, practice, and experience coaching with one another
• Including coaching in leadership development offerings
• Incorporating coaching into performance conversations
• Following any coaching workshops or training with support and sustainment efforts once employees return to their day jobs
• Expanding access to coaching so that everyone in the org can experience it—to eliminate the disconnect between theory and application, between head and heart. As one leader said:

It’s necessary to experience coaching in order to know what it is and enjoy it.

Expanding access can have a ripple effect, since those who experience and enjoy coaching go on to further support this learning-centric practice and thus influence the culture.

This discussion about how coaching is changing brought up significant insights as well as surprises. Thanks again to those who attended and made it such an enriching conversation. As always, we welcome your suggestions, thoughts, and feedback at [email protected].

PM: A Year in Review

PM in hybrid work is no longer a copy and paste of what it was pre-pandemic.¹ To get a grasp on what organizations are doing (or not doing) for PM, we looked at more than 60 academic and business articles and reports around PM for this literature review. This article summarizes:

• 4 major themes
• Hidden gems we found among the lit reviewed
• 5 critical articles that caught our attention
• 5 additional articles to check out if you have time

Major Themes

The pandemic has changed how people work. However, PM practices haven’t kept pace. The specific themes that emerged from the literature are as follows:

• Hybrid PM requires orgs to rethink culture and bias
• Managers need to tackle PM with empathy
• PM tech can play a crucial role in helping teams perform
• Orgs are approaching PM with an assortment of strategies

The following sections take a closer look at these 4 themes.

Hybrid PM requires orgs to rethink culture & bias

Leaders are worried about a lot of things in hybrid work—and culture is one of them.² We found many articles explaining how matching an org’s in-office culture to a hybrid work environment doesn’t work: This includes PM discussions. Orgs that are aware of this have implemented frequent performance feedback discussions³ since the start of the pandemic. They’ve also matched feedback conversations to the comfort and needs of the employees.⁴

Historically, PM has favored people in the office more than remote workers due to proximity bias.⁵While this bias may have been reduced when most people worked remotely, as employers bring people back to the office, the potential for this bias to resurface increases. If, as some expect,⁶ majority populations return to the office for more days per week than women or underrepresented minorities, it’s likely those majority populations will reap the benefits of proximity bias. Orgs need to proactively design for and address this situation.

In addition, during the pandemic, a concept known as “the intensive margin” has become more popular: It describes caregivers who are holding the same roles—but working fewer hours, declining assignments, or deciding against a promotion or new job due to childcare demands. Several articles highlight the gap in how rewards and opportunities for groups who’ve been experiencing the intensive margin is likely to have longer-lasting effects than the pandemic itself.⁷ This is again something orgs have to address as they look to retain the upward mobility of women and underrepresented populations (who are more likely to experience “the intensive margin”).

Managers need to tackle PM with empathy

As we rub our eyes and try to emerge from the pandemic, one thing is certain: We’re burned out. As Adam Grant described it,

People are languishing.⁸

Managers are shapeshifting into empathetic supporters and burnout alert buttons for their teams, while feeling everything but prepared for that new role.⁹ The resurgence of empathy as a management competency is due to the blurring lines between personal and work lives. The hardships brought on by the pandemic and social injustices have forced more personal conversations: Managers have had to be examples of vulnerability, while also creating psychologically safe environments.¹⁰

PM tech can play a crucial role in helping hybrid teams perform

Withstanding the turbulence since March 2020 has meant teams needed to reform in different locations, persisting through hardships, normalizing ambiguity, and striving to perform. To enable teams in these more digital environments, orgs have:

• Positioned PM tech to support the definition and measurement of employee performance¹¹
• Leveraged PM tech to give power to employees to create their own goals¹²

With a ton of PM tech out there, orgs should be mindful of issues such as whether the tech is removing bias, and providing further clarity and power to workers. Employee tracking doesn’t necessarily equal more productivity.¹³ The asynchronous nature of hybrid work highlights the “how” work gets done as being less important than the “what” gets accomplished.

Orgs are approaching PM with an assortment of strategies

It’s a mixed bag when it comes to what orgs have been doing with PM during the pandemic as reflected in Figure 1 below:¹⁴

Figure 1: Organizations' Approach to Formal Performance Reviews During the Pandemic | Source: Gartner, 2020

Many orgs:

• Redefined high-performance competencies¹⁵
• Focused more on behaviors than outcomes
• Adopted new or enhanced PM platforms during the pandemic¹⁶

Some orgs kept the ratings for the very highest and very lowest performers, but focused less on the ratings for those in the middle of the pack. Those with high ratings have been recognized for motivation and retention purposes. Managers have had development conversations with lower performers whose lagging was seen as less to do with an employee’s abilities ¹⁷ and more with the circumstances surrounding them.

In terms of employee-directed goals, it’s been common to see employees creating their own PM processes,¹⁸ while multi-rater assessments have become the popular new kids on the block¹⁹ — especially for companies with self-managed work teams for which there’s no formal boss.

Hidden Gems

Among the lit we reviewed, we found the following 3 hidden gems to share with you:

1. Recognition and rewards matter in hybrid work.

An employee’s desire to be recognized and rewarded increases in times of disruption, such as the pandemic. We came across evidence that extrinsic motivators are more important in hybrid work,²⁰ and can positively impact morale and retention.

2. PM tracking needs to meet the ethical needs of hybrid work.

Performance tracking platforms have increased in popularity since the start of hybrid work. We came across a few intriguing pieces that highlight the importance of ethics and the risks of these integrated platforms.

When it comes to performance tracking, orgs must be careful not to erode employee trust, morale, or wellbeing. Strategies for this include enforcement of rules and regulations for which employees can remain in the driver’s seat and authorize use of their data.²¹ Tech that monitors employee performance can easily move into manipulation and “Big Brother” oversight, and should be closely monitored.

3. Where’s HR in all of this?

HR teams are becoming increasingly removed from monitoring performance and team dynamics—something HR had already been struggling with, but was exacerbated by the pandemic. Through the democratization of PM processes like peer feedback and employee-created goals, HR is taking a seat at the strategy table for PM (instead of the administration table) where they are serving as consultants who tie PM value to business needs.²²

In hybrid work, managers are the PM pilots of their teams and HR is air traffic control—ready to support when needed, maintaining accountability to cultural values, and clearing the runway of obstacles.

What Caught Our Attention

Of the literature we reviewed, 5 critical articles stood out to us. We learned from their perspectives and hope you can as well.

What Does It Mean to Be a Manager Today?

Brian Kropp, Alexia Cambon & Sara Clark

This article describes a new era of management in which effective managers of the future will be those who focus and build relationships around how employees feel (via empathy) and manage visibility on what they’re doing.

"When interactions become primarily virtual, managers can no longer rely on what they see to manage performance, and when relationships become more emotional, they can no longer limit the relationship to the sphere of work."

Highlights:

• Reports higher levels of performance and inclusion as an outcome of empathy-based management
• Emphasizes the development of internal manager support groups to provide a safe space in which to practice empathy
• Affirms that reorganization of teams increases a manager's capacity and time to have intentional conversations with employees
• States that capabilities of managers are evolving to require more complex (emotion-based) competencies for which trust and fairness are integral

Rethinking Performance Management for Post-Pandemic Success

Michael Schrage

With hybrid work, this article argues that performance data and analytics are the nonnegotiable nutrients that give strength to the relationship happening between an employee and the org, while providing visible insights into the org’s limitations and strengths.

"High-performance management depends on high-performance measurement. The digital future of one depends on the digital future of the other."

Highlights:

• Describes how COVID-induced remote work really exposes orgs and leaders to what little insights they have on their employees
• Argues that real-time performance and people analytics are indicators which can assist in PM decisions that are accurate, transparent, and fair
• Offers strategies to position PM dashboards as insight providers that are prescriptive and descriptive
• Acknowledges that digital accountability platforms must reflect the coexistence of blurred work and home lives to ensure validity and remove bias in measurements

Talent management challenges during COVID-19 and beyond: Performance management to the rescue

Herman Aguinis & Jing Burgi-Tian

This journal article suggests that the scattered features of PM's potential are best when brought together in a strategic, relevant, and intentional way.

" … Implementing evidence-based performance management practices can not only help address pandemic-related talent management challenges but also allow organizations to thrive after the pandemic is over."

Highlights:

• Defines performance management as future-driven, ongoing, and aligned with org goals
• Describes how evidence-based PM can be a life raft for orgs to use during unprecedented transitions like the COVID-19 pandemic
• Maintains that PM, while evolving, still fulfills a strategic, developmental, and documentary need
• Recommends using evidence-based PM techniques, such as measuring results, in addition to behaviors, measuring adaptive performance, and using multi-rater processes

Are Peer Reviews the Future of Performance Evaluations?

Alessandro Di Fiore & Marcio Souza

This article talks about the diversification of sources within performance feedback, in which peers help provide managers with a fuller view of their employee’s work and interactions.

"The opportunity to create a socially-based feedback system feels even more urgent during the COVID-19 crisis, since many people are working remotely and without the same level of daily interactions with managers."

Highlights:

• Provides an overview of socially focused feedback as part of the PM process
• States that peer feedback is intended to help capture performance and behavior among remote employees who are less visible to their managers
• Explains that aggregated feedback assists managers in focusing their development conversations
• Advises that crowdsourcing techniques for PM must consider who’s giving the feedback, what categories they’re assessing, when it’s given, and how (anonymous? weighted?)

How Do You Evaluate Performance During a Pandemic?

Lori Nishiura Mackenzie, JoAnne Wehner & Sofia Kennedy

This article highlights the need for continuous awareness and accountability—both individually and on a team level—together with empathy and compassion to dismantle bias in hybrid work.

"Figuring out how to evaluate and reward employees fairly is hard even in the best of times. In this crisis, managers are facing a trifecta of conditions that make the task even harder because they’re likely to give rise to increased bias."

Highlights:

• Emphasizes that managers should use empathy when balancing rewarding high performers and coaching / developing lower performers
• Argues that, during times of crisis, managers are likely using their “fast-thinking” brains, which increases the chance of bias
• Explains that implicit preference for those working in-person is increasing PM bias in hybrid workplaces
• Recommends managers become crystal clear on evaluation criteria, combing for any unintended consequences, and “monitoring” other managers to ensure consistency and equity

Additional Articles to Check Out:

1. “Technology Can Ease Hybrid Work’s Performance Management Woes," SHRM, D. Zielinski, 2021.
2. “What Psychological Safety Looks Like in a Hybrid Workplace," Harvard Business Review, A. Edmondson & M. Mortensen, 2021.
3. “How One Company Worked to Root Out Bias from Performance Reviews," Harvard Business Review, J.C. Williams et al., 2021.
4. “How to Do Performance Reviews – Remotely," Harvard Business Review, R. Knight, 2020.
5. “Trust Is Key For Performance Management When Working Remotely," Forbes.com, A. Gaskell, 2020.

Why We Care

Performance management (PM) is critical, even in the most ordinary of times. It’s one of the few talent practices that touches every single employee in the organization. It helps employees set goals, receive feedback, and adjust their daily work practices. Performance assessments impact compensation, promotion, and a host of other job-related opportunities. Whether it’s formal, informal, carefully designed, or ad-hoc, some form of PM is happening in every organization every day.

Given the foundational nature of PM, it’s unsurprising that it significantly impacts key organizational outcomes. For example, in our Fall 2019 study of Modern Performance Management, we identified “3 Cs” that drive performance—culture, capability of managers, and clarity. In that study, orgs that scored high on:

• Culture—were 32% more likely to experience high employee engagement and 97% more likely to experience high organizational performance
• Capability of managers—were 12% more likely to experience high individual performance
• Clarity—were 28% more likely to experience high employee engagement

But we live in a different world now from 2019. Lots of articles have been written about how PM needs to change to better fit a hybrid world. We even recently wrote one—leveraging our 3Cs model from the 2019 study¹ and applying insights from how best to manage hybrid workers (see Figure 1).

Figure 1: Performance Management Practices for a Hybrid World | Source: RedThread Research, 2021.

But you all know—we love our data. So, while we firmly stand behind the model in Figure 1, we want current data to help us understand what’s happening with PM today—and to contrast that with what we knew about PM right before the pandemic hit.

Our Hypotheses

We have a number of hypotheses for this research—some of the primary ones include:

• The 3 Cs model will remain intact. Culture, clarity, and capability of managers will remain critical to how we should be managing performance in a hybrid world of work.
• Capability of managers will be more important. Given that employees—working in hybrid environments—are likely to be less directly exposed to some of the visible aspects of culture (offices, broader team dynamics, etc.), we think capability of managers will be more important than ever in enabling effective performance. In particular, skills such as coaching and managing difficult conversations are likely to become far more critical skills for managers.
• The importance of clarity—and specifically data—will also increase. While it seems relatively obvious that employees and managers will need to talk more about goals, progress, and adjustment, we believe there’s more to it than that. Specifically, we think that providing data-based insights to employees and managers will be key to both groups asynchronously understanding their performance and making adjustments more quickly.
• Trust in PM is at risk. Given the ad-hoc nature of many orgs’ approaches during the pandemic, we may see an increase in people not believing that their org’s PM is objective. Fairness in an org’s PM process is crucial for orgs to gain and retain their employees’ trust—otherwise, lack of employee trust can trigger turnover.
• Underrepresented minorities will have a less favorable view of PM. In our previous study, we found that women had a significantly worse perception of PM. In this current study, we’re collecting more demographic data so we’ll be able to compare different groups’ experiences more effectively.

What We’ll Research

Through this research, we’re looking to answer the following questions:

• How has PM changed prior to the start of the pandemic, in terms of philosophies, practices, and systems?
• What should managers be doing differently to supervise workers in a hybrid world? How can orgs support them?
• What broader practices and systems should orgs adjust or implement to enable PM to work more effectively in a hybrid world?
• How should orgs adjust their practices to ensure equity for underrepresented minorities?
• What are some examples of how orgs have adjusted their PM approaches?

How to Participate

We’ll be conducting this research over the next 4 months and invite you to participate in the study in the following 3 ways:

1. 1. Join the conversation. We’re conducting a roundtable on this subject on September 22, 1 pm ET. You can click here to register and join the waitlist.

1. Take the survey. We rely on responses from our community to help us provide insights to you.
2. Let us interview you. If you're working on PM at your company and are willing to talk to us about this topic for 30-45 minutes, reach out to us at [email protected] and we’ll schedule a discussion at your convenience.
3. Share your thoughts. Read our research and tell us what you think! Shoot us a note at [email protected]. Your comments make us smarter and the research better.

More Resources

You might be thinking, “Love that you’re doing this study, but I need help NOW.” No problem, we’ve got you covered with a host of RedThread resources that can help you get started:

• Designing Performance Management to Work for Hybrid Work (Free Reworked article—August 2021)
• Managing Better: Piercing the Fog of Today’s Uncertainty (Member-only article on enabling managers during the pandemic—October 2020)
  • Managing Better Infographic (Free infographic summarizing article on enabling managers during the pandemic—October 2020)
• The Double-Double Shift (Member-only article on improving PM for women during the pandemic—June 2020)
  • The Double-Double Shift Infographic (Free infographic summarizing article on improving PM for women during the pandemic—June 2020)
• Leveling the Field: Making PM Work for Women (Member-only article on improving PM for women—June 2020)
• Frontline Workers: Creating a Performance-Driven Culture (Member-only article on specific practices orgs can use to help frontline workers perform better—November 2019)
  • Frontline Workers: 7 Practices to Keep Them Engaged and Growing (Free infographic summarizing article on PM and frontline workers—November 2019)
• The Makings of Modern Performance Management (Member-only article on the 3 levers of modern PM—October 2019)
  • How Effective are Your Performance Management Practices? (Free infographic summarizing article on the 3 levers of modern PM—October 2019)

Introduction

As vaccinations and declining infection rates in some regions bring a sigh of relief, organizational leaders are starting to design policies around new working models, such as a hybrid workplace, for their employees. As a result, in addition to existing challenges around talent retention and recruitment, leaders are now faced with new questions such as:

• Which employees should be brought back to office and for how many days?
• How often should they continue working from home, if at all?
• How do employees feel about the new policies?

Talent-related challenges will continue to remain a top priority for the C-suite in 2021 and beyond, as shown by recent research.^1,2

So how can leaders prepare themselves and where can they look for support? Enter people analytics (PA).

In order to understand the role PA can play in helping the C-suite with these and future challenges, as well as what they need to be successful in this endeavor, we reviewed more than 50 academic and business articles, reports, and books. This article summarizes the themes and insights from our literature review:

• PA has played a vital role during the pandemic
• A growing opportunity exists for PA to step up in orgs
• PA should understand and tie to business goals
• A data-driven culture is essential for a C-suite and PA partnership
• CHROs can help bridge the gap between the C-suite and PA

Let’s take a brief look at these 5 themes.

PA has played a vital role during the pandemic

People analytics became a much more visible force during the pandemic. Several articles highlight the value PA provided as orgs shifted their workforce to remote working.

During the pandemic, the C-suite and senior leaders relied heavily on people data to tell them how their employees were feeling, what challenges they were facing, and how to adapt to new business priorities.

Because of this data from PA teams, during the pandemic orgs could successfully:

• Design and implement strategies that met the specific needs of their workforce
• Keep a pulse on employee engagement levels as they moved to remote work

The question that remains to be answered, however, is whether or not PA will continue to perform this role.

Will PA and HR continue to play a vital role, consult with the senior leadership, and remain influential moving forward?

The answer, according to the lit, lies in how effectively PA functions can pivot their focus to the emerging challenges surrounding return-to-work plans—and use this time as an opportunity to keep their “seat at the table,” which leads us to our next theme.

A growing opportunity exists for PA to step up in orgs

Several articles spoke about how PA teams and leaders should use this period to step up, having recently shown the value they’ve provided to the org during the pandemic. Recent research has shown:

• 42% of corporate board directors think talent management will be a top priority for them in 2021³
• 50% of CEOs globally cite recruitment and retention of top talent as their most critical human capital focus in 2021⁴

Some of the ways PA can help leadership with retention and with building a culture that attracts top talent include providing insights around:

• Employee engagement
• Employee experience
• Employee networks
• Workforce planning
• Labor market analysis

PA leaders should grab this opportunity to push back on some of the low-value and low-impact requests that come their way—and instead identify key business issues and create a cadence of sharing insights with the C-suite on those issues.

In addition, PA can continue to demonstrate value to the C-suite through issues surrounding diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging (DEIB) as they have risen to the top of every C-suite agenda. Orgs will continue to need PA to help them with these challenges, too.

PA should understand and tie to business goals

A frequent finding we came across in the lit is that, in order for PA to provide value to the C-suite, PA functions first must understand the business’s challenges and goals.

PA teams and leaders must:

• Understand what metrics matter to the C-suite
• Use their expertise and capabilities to convey that information in a timely manner and in language the C-suite will understand

According to one report, only 24% of HR functions provide analytics that connect their people metrics to business metrics.⁵ There’s a huge gap in the metrics and areas that PA teams focus on, and what information and data C-suite execs need.

PA must speak the C-suite’s language in order to engage them.⁶

A common reason why the C-suite is not often data-driven is a lack of trust in the data. According to research, 40% of senior execs have reservations about relying on the data and analytics HR produces.⁷

Often this can be due to either the correct data not being shared, or not being explicitly linked to the challenges and immediate needs of the org—usually resulting from a lack of knowledge around business priorities and agendas.

A data-driven culture is essential for a C-suite & PA partnership

A number of articles highlight the role of organizational culture in elevating PA to a place of strategic value to the C-suite. However, we note this push for such a culture that recognizes HR and PA as a market advantage must come from the top.

“It's the CEO who determines the culture of an organization, where to invest and what role HR has in the organization—strategical versus tactical, offense versus defense.”⁸

Some of the ways the C-suite can effectively build this type of culture and start leveraging data to their benefit include:

• Placing HR in the executive rank and have it report directly to the CEO
• Making people data a priority and part of a regular cadence of check-ins with the CHRO
• Looking for and putting in place HR leaders who are partial to science-based decision-making

These actions can help build an organizational culture that uses people data as a competitive advantage to understand and address people challenges: They make a statement that people are a priority.

CHROs can help bridge the gap between the C-suite & PA

We came across several articles that spoke about the role CHROs played during the pandemic, and how they’re working with CEOs to oversee their remote workforces and developing return-to-work plans. A few examples include:

• IBM. Some of the questions the CHRO is discussing with the CEO and other senior leaders:⁹
  • Who comes into the buildings?
  • How many people are allowed in an elevator at 1 time?
  • How does the company configure floor plans to keep people far enough apart from each other so they feel safe?
• Accenture. The CHRO is paying special attention to employees’ emotional well-being¹⁰

The key to doing this work is people data: PA functions and the CHRO can play a crucial role in bringing data and insights to the C-suite. In the lit, we discovered a few ways that CHROs can do this by:

• Being a data champion. CHROs can help the CEO move toward the data domain by highlighting the immediate and long-term value of leveraging data to address challenges
• Sharing important metrics. CHROs should regularly share metrics that matter to the CEO, depending on the issues facing the org
• Presenting in business language. CHROs understand how to present and report metrics in terms of their financial impact on the overall business

What Caught Our Attention

Of the literature we reviewed, several pieces stood out to us. Each of the pieces below contain information that we found useful and / or intriguing. We learned from their perspectives and encourage you to do the same.

People Analytics As A Strategic Partner To The Business

Mellish, A., Human Capital Institute, 2020

Emphasizes the need for PA to become a strategic partner to the business. Return to work challenges, remote engagement, and retention of talent, DEIB culture, and workforce planning are some areas in which PA can contribute.

"People analytics means different things to different organizations. However, there is one through line of purpose for every people analytics practice: to inform and influence business decisions in support of organizational strategy."

Highlights:

• The PA function can partner with the business in many ways. But PA must always ask the questions: How does this advance our strategy? And how strategically important is it when compared with everything else we’re working on?
• Orgs can leverage PA to navigate return-to-work challenges, engage and retain employees remotely, build a culture of diversity and belonging, and infuse workforce planning with compassion.
• To effectively use PA, orgs should internally build the capabilities and skills needed to influence business decisions with people data.
• Orgs also need to invest in data analytics tools to enrich reporting, advance visualization, and uncover insights and trends that might have gone unnoticed.

People Analytics Should Be A Part Of Company’s DNA: Alexis Saussinan, Merck Group

Modgil, S., People Matters, 2019

Provides insights into how PA offers endless possibilities and application areas. This report also defines clear strategic cases, getting support from leadership, and setting transparent ethical guardrails as being key to driving business value.

"Companies that are able to make the most out of people data and analytics, in a sustainable manner and with the perfect balance between business performance, human focus and ethics will be best positioned to drive sustainable high performance and innovation."

Highlights:

• Orgs need to ask if they have the right foundations in place to create and deliver PA at scale for the business.
• PA can offer insights around factors that lead to high performance among new hires, and identify key influencers and team composition to drive performance and innovation.
• To deliver maximum potential, PA should become part of the DNA of a company and be naturally embedded at every step of the employee journey.
• Getting strong C-suite exec and HR sponsorship at the highest levels is a prerequisite to drive true business value as well as positive employee outcomes.

How CEOs And CHROs Can Connect People To Business Strategy

Harvard Business Review, 2017

Presents findings from a survey of 168 companies. The article also includes insights from interviews with thought leaders and CEOs from large global companies. The findings suggest that companies are making progress in their use of human capital metrics but it is still glacial.

“If you have an analytics savvy CHRO, he or she won’t let the CEO get away with problem turnover rates or engagement scores. They have deep conversations about how these metrics are connected to the business.”

Highlights:

• Some of the findings from the survey include:
  • Less than 50% of respondents routinely report on human capital metrics to the C-suite.
  • Fewer than half of respondents say HR uses metrics to predict talent needs, measure the results of their talent strategy, and improve the business.
  • Only 24% of respondents provide analytics that connect people metrics to business metrics.
• Human capital metrics will have strategic value when the CEO and CHRO have a trusted relationship: CHROs need to be data-driven and engage the CEO in meaningful talent conversations.

The CEO’s Guide To Competing Through HR

Bafaro, F., Ellsworth, D., & Gandhi, N., McKinsey & Company, 2017

Highlights the need to accelerate the reinvention of HR as a function capable of understanding the drivers of strategy using the power of data analytics.

"Technological tools provide a new opportunity for HR function to reach its potential and drive real business value."

Highlights:

• Orgs that want to advance the reinvention of HR should concentrate on:
  • Rethinking the role of the HR business partner within the org
  • Using PA to identify the talent actions that drive value
  • Fixing HR operations
  • Focusing HR resources in a more agile way
• Replace the business partner role with a new talent value leader (TVL) who would be held fully accountable for the performance of the talent.
• The development and delivery of insights should be systematic—as this will help HR drive strategic talent value instead of a piecemeal manner as at present.
• As part of the reinvention, the HR function should use automation tech to address operational issues and focus more on strategic mission.

CFOs Should Not Leave Workforce Analytics Solely to HR

Freker, J., CFO, 2020

Highlights the need for CFOs to take a more active role in using HR analytics to identify strategic opportunities for capturing ROI from HR and people programs.

"There is a strong link between CFO’s level of involvement in strategic workforce planning and broader business performance."

Highlights:

• CFOs can use workforce data for strategic insight—using talent data to lower cost of hiring, aligning compensation with business performance and engaging a productive workforce.
• People analytics can help identify cost anomalies, especially in multinational companies in which jurisdictions vary across countries.
• Four main analytics for CFOs to tap into include—healthcare analytics (employee health, absenteeism, wellness), financial analytics (benefits plan, equity, compensation), diversity analytics (talent management, L&D, succession planning, DEI metrics), and engagement analytics (employee engagement, communications, outreach).
• Leaders should be looking at a single, intuitive, and responsive reporting system instead of one-off reports from multiple data sources.

Additional Reading Recommendations

• “The C-Suite Lacks Confidence in HR Data Analytics. But Why?” SHRM, Roy Maurer, March 2018, https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/technology/pages/hr-data-analytics-trust-leaders-kpmg.aspx
• “Why HR Deserves A Spot In The C-Suite,” Forbes, Chad Biagini, December 2018, https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbeslacouncil/2018/12/03/why-hr-deserves-a-spot-in-the-c-suite/?sh=2174a74e7730
• “5 HR Metrics That Matter Most to CEOs,” Lattice, Andy Przystanski, https://lattice.com/library/5-hr-metrics-that-matter-most-to-ceos”
• “CEO Benchmarking Report 2021," The Predictive Index, 2021, https://www.predictiveindex.com/ceo-benchmarking-report-2021/
• “The Gap Between What C-Suite Leaders Think And What HR Executives And Employees Know About Their Workplaces," Caprino, K., Forbes, 2020, https://www.forbes.com/sites/kathycaprino/2020/11/03/the-gap-between-what-c-suite-leaders-think-and-what-hr-executives-and-employees-know-about-their-workplaces/?sh=28adffa77adf
• “How People Analytics Can Help You Change Process, Culture, and Strategy," Nielsen, C., & McCullough, N., Harvard Business Review, 2018, https://hbr.org/2018/05/how-people-analytics-can-help-you-change-process-culture-and-strategy
• “How has COVID changed CEOs perception of HR?" Douglas, E., 2021, https://www.hcamag.com/ca/news/general/how-has-covid-changed-ceos-perception-of-hr/252408

INTRODUCTION

We recently launched new research on C-suite and people analytics (PA). This research aims to:

• Explore the types of challenges that PA can help address for C-suite leaders
• Highlight ways PA leaders can build successful partnerships with the C-suite
• Gain credibility to continue providing value in the future

To brainstorm this further, we invited a group of leaders to participate in our roundtable on this topic.

Our purpose is to better understand how people analytics can support C-suite execs to address talent-related challenges.

Our roundtable discussion focused on 4 key areas:

• Challenges. How can PA be of value to the C-suite and help them address challenges—both common and novel?
• Metrics. What kind of metrics should PA leaders focus on? How can they best drive change within the org using metrics?
• Partnership. How can we build a strong partnership between PA and the C-suite?
• Culture. How can we create / reinforce a data-driven culture to propel change in our org?

Mindmap of C-suite and PA Roundtable

The mindmap below outlines the conversations that transpired as part of this roundtable.

Note: This is a live document. Click on the window and use your cursor to explore it.

KEY TAKEAWAYS

We had a very enriching conversation. The discussion highlighted ways people analytics can actively contribute to help address C-suite challenges, practical steps to gain credibility, and strategies to create a lasting impact. More broadly, participants expressed their ideas on 2 fronts:

• Strategies and practical steps for PA to showcase its value to the C-suite and the broader org
• Factors that PA needs to consider to maintain a strong relationship with the C-suite

Participants expressed ideas for PA to show its value and to gain influence among C-suite members—and sustain that for the long term.

A few key takeaways stand out from the discussion:

1. Metrics can serve as a conversation starter with the C-suite
2. Certain skills are key for PA leaders to influence the C-suite
3. Structural inefficiency can be a barrier to value delivery
4. Incremental steps can build credibility for PA
5. A strong partnership with the C-suite requires a balancing of priorities

The following sections offer an overview of each key takeaway.

Metrics can serve as a conversation starter with the C-suite

A frequently mentioned insight shared by participants was around using metrics as a means to spark conversations with execs about high-impact issues, rather than just providing metrics for the sake of providing them.

PA teams should lend themselves to decision-making instead of focusing on measurement.

Participants shared how the C-suite often becomes amazed by some of the simpler descriptive, tablestakes metrics: These can help PA get a foot in the door and gain the C-suite’s attention. Providing high-level descriptive metrics can lead to conversations with C-suite leaders intrigued by the “catchy” numbers which, in turn, will more likely engage them in dialogue with PA when they’re making important people decisions. As one participant explained:

A portion of the people analytics meetings with the C-suite should be about the high-level metrics and numbers. The more these metrics lead to questions, the more likely it paves the way for meaningful conversations.

Although these descriptive metrics can help PA get a foot in the door, participants agreed that they’re mostly useful in attracting the C-suite’s attention. The next-level metrics—that provide more value to the C-suite—are usually the same tablestakes, descriptive numbers but presented with more granularity.

PA can provide more value to the C-suite by linking tablestakes metrics with operational performance and business goals—by breaking down descriptives via different employee groups, etc., and using an intersectional framework.

When it comes to specific metrics, some of those that participants routinely share with their execs include:

• Tablestakes metrics—
  • Employee engagement
  • Turnover and retention
  • Recruitment metrics (e.g., headcount growth, hiring goals, current openings, etc.)
  • DEIB metrics
• Next-level metrics—
  • Objective data on employees
  • Operational performance metrics
  • Intersectional and group-specific metrics

Certain skills are key for PA leaders to influence the C-suite

During the discussion around ways PA can help address C-suite challenges, the conversation pivoted to highlight some of the skills that PA leaders need to enable them to better influence the C-suite. Some of the skills mentioned during this conversation include:

• Storytelling
• Courage
• Political skills / astuteness
• Relationship-building

C-suite leaders often don’t have enough time to dig into complex data and analyses—and here’s an opportunity for PA leaders. The following ideas from roundtable participants highlight the use of these 4 skills with the C-suite.

• Participants mentioned the need for PA leaders to be able to tell stories to facilitate communicating with the C-suite, apart from just presenting data. Storytelling can:
  • Convey data-driven insights in a more appealing way
  • Help C-suite leaders better understand the relevance of people data in making important decisions

As one participant stated:

“Storytelling is a way to see the forest through the trees—combatting anecdotal truths with data.“

• Participants highlighted the importance of PA leaders being courageous to more strongly call out significant findings when faced with doubt. This skill is especially useful, for instance, when leaders question the integrity of data and pose doubts about the findings.

Sometimes conversations with C-suite execs become circular—and courage is needed to bring attention to the situation and get to the truth.

• Political astuteness. Often, PA leaders need to manage a variety of stakeholders while influencing the C-suite’s decision-making. Understanding the “lay of the land” and using that to the PA function’s advantage is becoming increasingly important for PA leaders—to enable them to push up the chain of command and provide value through data.
• Relationship-building. Along with political astuteness, PA leaders also need to have strong relationship-building skills—empowering them to be better informed of what the C-suite considers as their biggest problems. This puts PA leaders in a better position to more accurately provide the insights needed by C-suite execs.

Structural inefficiency can be a barrier to value delivery

Among the many factors discussed in PA influencing the C-suite, participants indicated org structure as being critical. The appropriate placement of the PA function within an org is crucial for developing prominence, credibility, and sponsorship. Participants also highlighted that direct communication, feedback, and alignment with the C-suite are some of the outcomes of an ideal structural placement.

The proper placement of the PA function within an org can enhance the value that analytics can provide to the org, instead of being hidden away due to poor org structure.

One of the challenges of effectively building partnerships between PA and the C-suite is often the lack of open communication channels. Participants mentioned that navigating different functions (e.g., HR, finance, etc.) to get the information to the C-suite can create barriers and difficulty in providing value: It increases the chances of receiving inadequate information or data being interpreted out of context. Combatting this org structural inefficiency is key to successful PA and C-suite partnerships.

If information has to go through several functions to get to the C-suite, then this delivery system increases the likelihood of creating a bottleneck along the way.

Our discussion highlighted the need for direct communication channels to equip everybody with the people insights they need—without blinders—to make informed decisions.

Incremental steps can build credibility for PA

Throughout the discussion, participants mentioned several ways that PA can build credibility in order to help and influence C-suite challenges. Specifically, the need to take incremental steps was called out. Some of the basic steps that PA functions should focus on include:

• Figuring out the capabilities of PA (as more than just a reporting function)
• Becoming familiar with business needs and org goals
• Building out use cases to demonstrate the value
• Addressing data skepticism, myths, and anecdotes with facts
• Providing consistent results to build trust

When PA considers itself as a reporting function—taking orders and requests, they’re likely to be less influential. People analytics is brought into important company conversations when PA is clearer about their capabilities and proactively takes actions to solve C-suite challenges.

Having a clear vision of what PA provides—both now and for the future—helps PA move beyond being just a reporting function.

Participants also mentioned the need for PA to proactively understand the org's goals and to put that into context (for the C-suite) to help support business needs with important data and insights. PA can start small by building out specific use cases (e.g., providing managers with critical team productivity data) and enabling individuals to be data champions to demonstrate the value of analytics. As one of the participants stated:

PA has a reputation for sounding like witchcraft and wizardry—PA needs to debunk this stigma and enable individuals to be data gladiators.

People analytics can also build credibility by addressing any data skepticism and myths that hinder progress by providing quality data.

One participant shared an example of how they were able to dispel skepticism around their work policies by providing data which addressed leadership concerns that people weren’t productive working from home. Similarly, the PA function was able to offer concrete data that showed the risk of losing 33% of their female workforce if they didn’t offer a flexible work policy.

Consistently providing critical data that helps the C-suite make important and tough decisions can help in establishing and maintaining credibility.

A strong partnership with the C-suite requires a balancing of priorities

The roundtable discussion also touched upon the need for PA to be clear and transparent about their priorities in order to build a strong partnership with the C-suite. One way to do this is by pushing back on some of the low-value and low-impact requests from HR. The key to that, as one participant explained, is using the “push” approach—which involves PA identifying a key business issue and creating a cadence of sharing insights on it with the C-suite.

This approach can help build a lasting relationship instead of a delivery model that relies on a “pull” approach—waiting for the C-suite to pull PA into conversations or decisions—which isn’t realistic. As C-suite grapples with many competing priorities and challenges, they don’t know when, where, or how PA can provide value.

The push approach can be successful in building a strong partnership with the C-suite: PA identifies their internal customers and then asks those people questions they themselves might not be asking, thus increasing PA’s impact.

However, as some participants noted, push approaches can also build mistrust among C-suite execs. Finding the balance between push and pull approaches may be key to maintaining credibility and trust. As one participant offered, regarding C-suite execs:

PA should regularly ask, “How much do we want to push?”

Throughout the discussion, participants also mentioned other strategies that can go a long way in building a partnership with the C-suite, including:

• Using business language
• Keeping insights succinct
• Providing actionable recommendations

A SPECIAL THANKS

We're extremely grateful to the attendees who enriched the conversation by sharing their thoughtful ideas and experiences. And, as always, we welcome your suggestions and feedback at [email protected].

We've been witnessing rapid growth in the amount, types, and sources of learning content. There’s more learning content everywhere—inside and outside orgs; online and offline; on desktops and mobile devices; and in learning systems, shared folders, browsers, email, and chat platforms.  

It’s chaos.

L&D must help employees navigate this chaos, so they can find and consume the content that builds skills and drives outcomes that matter to the business. This infographic highlights key insights from our report, Learning Content: Embracing the Chaos, which introduced a new learning content model that helps learning leaders—and employees—make sense of the chaos. 

Click on the image below to get the full infographic. As always, we’d love your feedback at [email protected]! 

In 2020, due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the social justice movements, people analytics had an unexpected opportunity to shine. Technology played a more important role than before as people analytics team looked for ways to scale and provide deeper insights to leaders on their workforce, the majority of whom were working remotely. Our goal is to help people analytics leaders succeed in that endeavor and prepare for 2021.

Through this research, we wanted to understand:

• How did the people analytics tech vendor market change in 2020?
• What are the newest capabilities leaders need to know about?
• What should leaders be thinking about when making (or expanding) a people analytics tech investment?

This study is a culmination of nearly a year of qualitative and quantitative research, that included an online poll, a vendor survey, a customer poll, and over 40 vendor briefings and demos. This flipbook highlights the changes and trends from this year, the different capabilities offered by the vendors, and the questions potential technology buyers should consider before making or expanding their tech investments. We also suggest readers check our interactive, evergreen people analytics tech tool, for current vendor information.

Key Takeaways

1. Forward-thinking L&D functions make the chaos of learning content work for their orgs. Being overwhelmed by the surging quantities, types, and sources of learning content is yesterday’s news—but still today’s problem. Learning leaders are embracing the chaos and moving from providing content to enabling it, with an eye toward making more content available to all employees.
2. Learning leaders should ask 2 questions about learning content: 1) Is it specific to the org? 2) How long is its shelf life (How durable is it)? Thinking in these 2 dimensions—specificity and durability—can help L&D functions clarify their learning content strategy and priorities.
3. We developed a new model for learning content. From our conversations with forward-thinking learning leaders, we identified a model that breaks learning content into 4 categories (defined by the 2 dimensions of specificity and durability). This model can form the foundation of a learning content strategy that’s clear on priorities, roles & responsibilities, and areas of focus.
4. There are distinct actions L&D functions can and should take to improve their learning content strategies—and those actions change based on the 4-category model of learning content introduced in this report. We provide some suggestions for immediate and longer-term actions to take, as well as examples of real orgs implementing these ideas, to help learning leaders organize the chaos and better manage learning content overall.

Why Talk About Learning Content Now?

We’ve been witnessing rapid growth in the amount of learning content available to employees. This growth started decades ago, but it’s recently turned from a trickle to a flood. There’s more learning content everywhere—inside and outside orgs; online and offline; on desktops and mobile devices; and in learning systems, shared folders, browsers, email, and chat platforms. Is it any wonder that employees are overwhelmed and exhausted by the sheer volume of all that’s available?¹

Employees are overwhelmed and exhausted by the amount of learning content.

Employees feel like they’re drowning—and it’s L&D’s job to help them find and consume the content that builds skills and drives outcomes that matter to the business . To do this, L&D functions need well-crafted learning content strategies that support org learning and business strategies.

A learning content strategy should help L&D functions answer questions like:

• How will we decide what learning content to bring into the org?
• How will we identify—and help employees identify—learning content that’ll support our business and learning strategies?
• How and when will learning content be updated? By whom?
• How will we make the right learning content easily available to employees?
• What can we do immediately and in the longer term to improve employees’ ability to find and consume the learning content they need?

In this study—which included a lit review, roundtable, and interviews—we explored these questions. Through this research, we sought to identify the leading practices that orgs are using to help employees sift through the volume of learning content to find what’s right for them, when they need it.

L&D functions need well-crafted learning content strategies that support org learning and business strategies.

In the next section, we introduce the trends we uncovered as part of this study.

What’s Happening in Learning Content?

In the course of this research, we identified 4 trends in learning content that are helping shape the learning content strategies of forward-thinking orgs:

1. More types and sources of learning content
2. More enabling, less pushing of learning content by L&D functions
3. More (and better) use of skills data to inform learning content priorities
4. More access for all employees

In the following sections, we take a brief look at these 4 trends.

More types & sources of learning content

Not only is there more learning content in more places—but there are more types of content created by a wider variety of authors. Learning content used to be primarily created and controlled by L&D functions. Now, however, employees have access to:

• L&D function-created content
• Learning content created by subject-matter experts (SMEs)
• Company reports, policies, strategy docs, etc.
• Vendor-created learning content (custom or off the shelf)
• YouTube and other social media content
• Podcasts
• Conference notes, presentations, and videos
• Trade- or industry-specific content
• Learning content libraries (LinkedIn Learning, Udemy for Business, etc.)
• Subscriptions to learning content aggregators
• The entire internet

There’s not only more volume of content—there’s more types of content, in more places, created by a wider variety of authors.

And we know that’s not an exhaustive list.

The incredible volume, variety, and breadth of the learning content that’s available—over much of which L&D functions have limited control—complicate things for learning leaders and for employees.

Through our research, though, we found that learning leaders who’ve given this some thought don’t try to control the chaos. Instead, they embrace it—or, at least, they try to work with the reality that learning content is already complicated, and it’s only going to get bigger and more complex over time.

L&D functions can create systems, processes, and policies that help employees navigate the chaos of learning content.

Savvy learning leaders think about how to create systems, processes, and policies that help orgs and employees navigate through the chaos—rather than trying to tame the chaos itself (because that’s not gonna happen).

One learning leader noted:

“Learning functions need to recognize we never owned learning content in the first place, and we certainly don’t now. We need to embrace the chaos.”

Nick Halder, Senior Director of Talent, Snow Software

More enabling, less pushing by L&D functions

Given the increasing amount and variety of learning content out there, the move toward personalized development experiences, and the sheer variety of people in most orgs, it’s almost impossible for L&D functions to push the right content to the right people at the right time in the right format—all the time. There’s also a growing recognition that often the employee knows best—or at least has a good sense of—what they need to learn.

Learning leaders are thinking about how to enable employees to navigate to the right content themselves, rather than pushing content to employees.

Instead of trying to push learning content, L&D functions are thinking about how to enable employees to navigate to the right content themselves—by giving guidance and context about, for example, the org’s strategy and direction, skills that may be needed in the future, and how learning content is organized in the company. This guidance and context can create conditions that enable employees to find and consume learning content when and how they like, in ways that align with their needs and org goals.

More (& better) use of skills data to inform learning content priorities

Learning leaders we talked to noted that, in the past, L&D functions have sometimes pushed out learning content that wasn’t relevant or helpful to employees. These learning leaders see information about the skills employees and orgs need as a potential solution:

“Without insight into what skills are in demand and what skills people have, L&D tends to focus on the learning content we think people need. That’s rarely an effective approach.”

Participant, “New Trends in Learning Content & Content Management” Roundtable

Forward-thinking orgs are using information about the skills their workforce has and the skills it’ll need in the future to decide what learning content to prioritize. Learning leaders are making investments in learning content that can help close critical skills gaps.

Skills info can help orgs better understand what learning content to prioritize and invest in.

More access for all employees

In the last year or so, learning leaders have started taking a much closer look at how accessible learning content really is in their orgs: They’re recognizing the importance of making learning content more widely available to close skills gaps—and to help the business stay agile, responsive, and competitive.²

Three ways learning leaders can improve access include:

• Removing artificial barriers. Sometimes orgs give employees access to learning content on a “need-to-know” basis. But this logic creates unnecessary boundaries that could be removed unless they’re strategically justified—for example, intellectual property, safety / security, cost, or some other significant reason.
• Making learning content more discoverable. Sometimes great learning content is hidden in pockets or silos within the company. Orgs can find ways of making learning content easier to discover by implementing organization standards and really good search capabilities. They can also create a culture of discovery by removing unnecessary passwords and encouraging employees to poke around.
• Making learning content accessible on mobile. Learning content doesn’t just live on desktops anymore. Employees, particularly frontline workers, need access on their phones. This often means rethinking accessibility to LMSs or LXPs, as well as thinking mobile-first when creating new learning content.

Forward-thinking orgs are exploring ways to make learning content transparent, accessible, and appealing to all employees.

In brief

These 4 trends are currently shaping the learning content environment. In this research, we sought to understand how learning leaders are navigating these trends—and how these trends affect their goals, focus areas, challenges, and strategies for learning content.

We developed a learning content model that can help orgs think through their learning content strategies.

This inquiry resulted in a model that can help orgs think through their learning content strategies and make better decisions about where L&D functions should focus their time and resources. The next section introduces and explores this learning content model.

A Model for Thinking About Learning Content

We looked for similarities and differences between learning leaders’ approaches to learning content—and noticed that the learning leaders we spoke with take very different approaches to learning content based on 2 factors (or dimensions) of the learning content they’re working with:

• How unique the learning content is to their org (specificity). Are leaders dealing with learning content that applies specifically to their company or content that applies across orgs?
• The shelf life of the learning content (durability). Are leaders thinking mostly about learning content that needs to be updated rarely, or learning content that’s continually changing and regularly in jeopardy of being out of date? (Note: Long vs. short shelf life may differ from industry to industry and company to company. But, in general, we consider durable learning content to last 1 or more years without needing to be updated.)

If we plot learning content against these 2 dimensions (specificity and durability), then the content generally falls within 1 of the following 4 categories:

1. Specific & Durable. Learning content that’s specific to 1 org and has a long shelf life
2. Specific & Perishable. Learning content that’s specific to 1 org but changes often
3. Generic & Perishable. Learning content that applies to many orgs and changes often
4. Generic & Durable. Learning content that applies to many orgs and has a long shelf life

The learning content model, introduced in Figure 1, outlines these 4 categories and provides examples of some common topics that each category tends to cover.

Learning leaders might consider using this model to clarify the L&D function’s (and other stakeholders’) focus areas and roles regarding learning content. When we gave one learning leader—who happens to sit in a central L&D team within a federated system—a sneak peek at this model, he said:

“I like this model because it can help our L&D teams think about who owns what content. L&D sometimes tries to be all things to all people, but that’s not possible. In my company, we’re starting to be much more intentional about where each of our respective L&D teams are best-suited to play.”

John Z., Head of Digital Learning & Design, Global Medical Devices Company

Figure 1: Learning Content Model | Source: RedThread Research, 2021.

Let’s look at each of these 4 categories in more detail. For each category, we discuss:

• The focus L&D functions should have for each learning content category
• Challenges specific to each learning content category
• How L&D functions can address those challenges in the immediate and longer terms

Specific & Durable

The Specific & Durable learning content category generally applies only to 1 org and has a relatively long shelf life. It tends to include:

• Introductions to the org’s values, mission, philosophy, and how the org expects employees to act
• Info about strategic initiatives that define the org’s direction
• Onboarding training and materials
• “Crown jewels”—intellectual property that’s critical to success / competitive advantage as a company

The purpose of Specific & Durable learning content is often to shape organizational culture—helping employees understand “this is who we are” and “this is how we act.” Accordingly, the learning leaders we spoke with talked about Specific & Durable learning content most often in conjunction with organizational initiatives, such as organizational culture or change efforts; diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging (DEIB); and strategic pivots (e.g., adapting to industry upheaval).

Specific & Durable learning content often helps shape org culture—by helping employees understand “this is who we are” and “this is how we act.”

L&D’s focus should be: Drive organizational initiatives

Forward-thinking orgs conceptualize the L&D function’s role—and related goals—differently, depending on the category of learning content at hand: They have a different focus for each of the 4 categories of learning content. As the nature of the learning content and its associated challenges change, so does the way the org thinks about where L&D functions should spend the most effort.

L&D should think about how Specific & Durable learning content can help move the needle in areas that are priorities for the business.

For Specific & Durable learning content, L&D functions should focus on driving organizational initiatives. Specifically, they should think about how Specific & Durable learning content can help move the needle in areas that are priorities for the business.

As one learning leader said:

“What’s the strategic change that’s happening? Is your learning content relevant to get to those organizational outcomes?”

Participant, “New Trends in Learning Content & Content Management” Roundtable

Importantly, learning leaders aren’t thinking about how L&D functions can drive org initiatives alone—far from it. Almost every learning leader we spoke with about Specific & Durable learning content described how they’re reaching outside of the L&D function—to other parts of HR and to leaders of other functions—to stay in sync with org priorities and use learning content to support the cultural and strategic initiatives important to the business.

Biggest challenges we heard

Because Specific & Durable learning content often links directly to key business initiatives, L&D functions typically face challenges like:

• Staying aligned with business goals. How do we stay agile and aligned with business goals in an ever-flexible environment?
• Driving change. How do we use learning content to move the org toward its goals?
• Measuring impact. How do we know if the learning content is, in fact, driving the change, creating the culture, or moving the needle in ways that align with the org’s priorities?

Intentionally linking learning content to org priorities is a critical component in addressing these challenges, particularly around measuring impact.

Forward-thinking L&D functions measure success against metrics used by the entire org, not just the L&D function.

In our research on measuring learning impact, we found that average L&D functions tend to triage based on the squeakiest wheel or easiest fix. Conversely, more forward-thinking L&D functions develop strategies and relationships to continually align and adjust learning content to support org goals—and to measure success against metrics used by the entire org, not just the L&D function.³

What L&D can do

In Figure 2, we include some ways L&D functions can start addressing these challenges. The ideas here (and in subsequent Figures 3-5) are divided into 2 sections:

• Do Now. Actions L&D functions can start on right away
• Work On. Actions requiring some time and coordination to implement

Each idea is paired with an example of how an org is implementing it.

Figure 2: Ways L&D Can Help Address Challenges—Specific & Durable Learning Content | Source: RedThread Research, 2021.

Specific & Perishable

Specific & Perishable learning content is unique to the org and changes / needs updating relatively often. Examples of this type of learning content include:

• Customer training (e.g., on the org’s products)
• Org-specific policies and processes
• Instructions and updates on internally built software / tools

A defining characteristic of Specific & Perishable learning content: The sources of the learning content exist all over the org—in policy and process documents, product release notes, wikis, etc. This truth, combined with the fact that the content changes often, means it’s exceedingly difficult (if not impossible) for L&D functions to create and update all Specific & Perishable learning content needed by the org.

L&D’s focus should be: Enable content creation

In contrast to orgs in which the L&D function tries to control learning content, orgs that deputize all employees and focus on enabling the creation of learning content—no matter who does the creating—tend to have much more success ensuring that updated learning content is available when needed.

The L&D function’s focus for Specific & Perishable learning content should be to enable the creation and curation of learning content within the org—not to create or control that learning content.

The most forward-thinking learning leaders we encountered approach learning content almost as a free-market economy problem: In their minds, L&D functions should facilitate the supply and demand of learning content. Their job is to make those supply / demand exchanges as frictionless as possible, both for the consumers of the learning content as well as the suppliers, no matter where they sit in the org.

Biggest challenges we heard

Challenges with Specific & Perishable learning content tend to stem from the fact that it needs to be updated frequently and only internal people (for the most part) can do the updating. Challenges include:

• Learning content becomes stale and is hard to keep updated
• The best learning content exists in lots of different places in the org
• Quality and consistency of learning content can vary, since a lot of the learning content isn’t created by the L&D function

We talked with several learning leaders who said their L&D teams struggle either to keep tons of content updated themselves or to incentivize SMEs across the business to keep their learning content updated.

L&D functions should provide processes, templates, and guidance to enable anyone in the org to create or curate learning content with relative ease, consistency, and quality.

To address these challenges, the learning leaders we spoke with focus on putting in place processes, templates, and guidance that enable anyone in the org to create or curate learning content with relative ease, consistency, and quality.

For example, these forward-thinking learning leaders:

• Implement basic instructional design templates and norms across the org
• Put in place tech that offers standard templates, design principles, and formatting
• Track learning content usage and communicate regularly with learning content authors about updates
• Make themselves available as consultants—answering questions and providing advice on how to create effective learning content that meets the standards they’ve set

What L&D can do

In Figure 3, we include some ways L&D functions can start addressing these challenges. Each idea also outlines how an org is implementing that idea.

Figure 3: Ways L&D Can Help Address Challenges—Specific & Perishable Learning Content | Source: RedThread Research, 2021.⁴

Generic & Perishable

Generic & Perishable learning content can apply to many orgs but has a short shelf life. Examples of Generic & Perishable learning content include:

• Training / updates on fast-changing tech skills
• How-to tutorials on common processes (e.g., how to create a QR code, how to use a function in Excel)
• Info on current events and industry / market updates

Generic & Perishable learning content is defined by its sheer volume—and the fact that it’s everywhere.

The defining characteristic of this learning content category is sheer volume: There’s so much of it, everywhere! Much Generic & Perishable learning content is available for free online, although Google and YouTube are certainly not the only ways to find it. Other sources of Generic & Perishable learning content are, for example:

• Learning content libraries like PluralSight and LinkedIn Learning
• Professional or trade publications and websites
• Tech vendors offering learning content on how to use their software

Generic & Perishable learning content also changes frequently, meaning the great video someone found last year might be 3 releases out of date this year.

L&D’s focus should be: Help employees filter to the right learning content

The nature of Generic & Perishable learning content means L&D functions’ focus should be to help employees filter. It would be incredibly difficult to provide just the right info to each employee when they need it. Rather, learning leaders’ job is to create conditions that enable employees to cut through the noise and find what they need.

L&D functions should create conditions that enable employees to cut through the noise and volume of learning content to find what they need.

In most orgs, helping employees “filter” means using some kind of tech, most commonly an LXP. We’ve yet to see an org set up a completely manual process that enables filtering at the scale most orgs need: Most orgs leverage both tech and humans to get the job done. For example, teams may share the best or most helpful learning content with one another via Teams or Slack; they may set up queries in content aggregators like Feedly and other apps.

Biggest challenges we heard

We heard 2 main challenges related to Generic & Perishable learning content, both stemming from the volume and turnover common to this learning content category:

• There’s too much noise. For Generic & Perishable learning content, the “signal-to-noise” ratio is extremely low: There’s a lot of learning content in this category, but quality and relevance vary. Although it may be easy to find some learning content on a particular topic or question, it’s hard to know whether it’s the best learning content—or what the org would want an employee to rely on.
• Finding the latest and greatest. There’s regularly more and better learning content somewhere out there. Employees have a hard time finding the most updated, most relevant stuff.

Implementing effective search, curation, and recommendation engines can help give employees direction and a place to start.

Implementing effective search, curation, and recommendation engines can help address these challenges by giving employees direction and a place to start. We explore these ideas next.

What L&D can do

In Figure 4, we include some ways L&D functions can start addressing these challenges. Each idea also outlines how an org is implementing that idea.

Figure 4: Ways L&D Can Help Address Challenges—Generic & Perishable Learning Content | Source: RedThread Research, 2021.^5,6

Generic & Durable

Generic & Durable learning content changes relatively infrequently and applies to many orgs. It includes learning content such as:

• Education and refreshers on safety, security, and ethics
• Leadership development training and programs
• Industry-specific background / context (e.g., how the banking system works)
• Learning content to develop sales skills
• Support for employee wellbeing, mindfulness, and personal growth

Because Generic & Durable learning content can apply to many orgs and likely isn’t changing at a breakneck pace, quite a few learning content vendors play in this space. These vendors offer high-quality learning content on specialty topics that an in-house L&D team may not have the expertise or bandwidth to create.

Many Generic & Durable learning content vendors offer high-quality learning content on specialty topics that an in-house L&D team may not have the expertise or bandwidth to create.

L&D’s focus should be: Facilitate consistency & quality

L&D functions’ focus for Generic & Durable learning content should be facilitating consistency and quality—setting standards for what quality learning content looks like across the org. Because so many vendors offer different learning content at varying levels of quality, L&D functions can create value by helping the org define standards that outline, for example:

• The “go-to” vendors to work with on cross-functional topics like leadership, industry context, or wellbeing
• Criteria for selecting vendors not on the “go-to” list
• What high-quality learning content looks like and where it’s coming from
• Ways to measure / understand what learning content is working and what’s not

L&D functions should define standards that outline, for example, go-to vendors, vendor selection criteria, and what “high-quality” learning content looks like for the org.

With these standards (and / or others) in place, L&D functions can provide a consistent, org-wide point of view on cross-cutting topics, like “the way we lead,” “the way we think about safety,” and so on.

Biggest challenges we heard

Consistency and quality are the primary challenges for Generic & Durable learning content because much of the learning content can apply to many different functions (think leadership development or safety / security) and so many commercial sources of this category of learning content exist.

This breadth and variety give rise to potential differences—within the same org—in:

• The content that’s used for learning on a particular subject
• The quality or efficacy of that learning content
• How that learning content is delivered or supported
• Who gets access to the learning content
• The processes used to evaluate the learning content

As an example, we’ve seen orgs that use a dozen or more different leadership models because different functions / teams brought in different leadership vendors / consultants at different times.

Forward-thinking L&D functions consider how they can foster relationships—with vendors and other functions—to ensure consistency and quality of learning content across the org.

In the lit review we did as part of this research, we read several articles on creating consistent learning content. In an org, consistent course design and visual cues across as much learning content as possible can go a long way toward helping employees understand and navigate learning content easily. However, this kind of consistency is sometimes difficult to achieve with externally created content.

In addition to these instructional design elements, forward-thinking L&D functions are also considering how they can foster relationships—with vendors and with other functions—to bring people together across silos in order to ensure consistency and quality of learning content throughout the org. This sometimes means convening cross-functional groups to align on needs, pool resources, or negotiate org-level (rather than function- or team-level) contracts with vendors.

What L&D can do

In Figure 5, we include some ways L&D functions can start addressing these challenges. Each idea also outlines how an org is implementing that idea.

Figure 5: Ways L&D Can Help Address Challenges—Generic & Durable Learning Content | Source: RedThread Research, 2021.

Wrap-Up

We’ve given you a snapshot of recent trends in learning content, including how the explosion in volume and variety of learning content is affecting orgs and employees alike. We’ve also introduced a model for thinking about learning content in 4 categories, based on 2 key factors:

• The specificity of the learning content to the org
• The durability (or shelf life) of the learning content

Our biggest takeaway from this study is how the 4 different categories of learning content give rise to very different focuses for L&D functions—different conceptions of what L&D functions should do with regard to that learning content—and have very different associated challenges. (Unsurprisingly, there’s no one-size-fits-all learning content strategy.)

We are grateful to those learning leaders who shared their experiences and examples with us, and are excited to share so many concrete examples in this report.

As always, we welcome feedback and discussion! Please feel free to reach out to RedThread Research at [email protected] or www.redthreadresearch.com. We’d love to hear about your experiences.

Appendix 1: Research Methodology

We launched our study in Spring 2021. This report gathers and synthesizes findings from our research efforts, which include:

• A literature review of 51 articles from business, trade, and popular lit sources
• 1 roundtable with a total of 33 participants
• 15 in-depth interviews with learning leaders about their experiences and thoughts on learning content

For those looking for specific information that came out of those efforts, you’re in luck: We’ve a policy of sharing as much information as possible throughout the research process. Please see:

• Premise: “Content in the 2020s: Enabling Learning”
• Lit review: “Learning Content in the 2020s: What the Literature Says”
• Roundtable readout: “Trends in Learning Content & Content Management”
• Q&A call: "Learning Content"

Appendix 2: Contributors

Thank you so much to those of you who participated in our roundtable and interviews. We couldn’t have done this research without you! In addition to the leaders listed below, there are many others we can’t name publicly. We extend our gratitude nonetheless: You know who you are.

Angel Rodriguez
Ann Boldt
Brett Rose
Bria Dimke
Brian Richardson
Catherine Marchand
Chris Casement
Chris Olson
Clark Shah-Nelson
Eddie Garcia
Emily Crockett
Erik Soerhaug
Gordon O’Reilly
Greg Williams
Heather Bahorich
Ian Bolderstone
Jihyun Jeong
Jim Maddock
John Z.
Laurence D. Banner
Leah Holmgren
Marc Ramos
Martin Tanguay
Melissa Lamkin
Mitchel M.
Nick Halder
Nicole Leret
Robert Young
Sarah Foster
Shaun Rozyn
Stephanie Fritz
Stephen T.
Tania Tiippana
Tone Reierselmoen
Zachary Pfau

In addition, we thank Catherine Coughlin for editing the report, Jennifer Hines for graphics, Jenny Barandich for the layout, and Sana Lall-Trail for research and project management.

Key Takeaways

1. Forward-thinking L&D functions make the chaos of learning content work for their orgs. Being overwhelmed by the surging quantities, types, and sources of learning content is yesterday’s news—but still today’s problem. Learning leaders are embracing the chaos and moving from providing content to enabling it, with an eye toward making more content available to all employees.
2. Learning leaders should ask 2 questions about learning content: 1) Is it specific to the org? 2) How long is its shelf life (How durable is it)? Thinking in these 2 dimensions—specificity and durability—can help L&D functions clarify their learning content strategy and priorities.
3. We developed a new model for learning content. From our conversations with forward-thinking learning leaders, we identified a model that breaks learning content into 4 categories (defined by the 2 dimensions of specificity and durability). This model can form the foundation of a learning content strategy that’s clear on priorities, roles & responsibilities, and areas of focus.
4. There are distinct actions L&D functions can and should take to improve their learning content strategies—and those actions change based on the 4-category model of learning content introduced in this report. We provide some suggestions for immediate and longer-term actions to take, as well as examples of real orgs implementing these ideas, to help learning leaders organize the chaos and better manage learning content overall.

Why Talk About Learning Content Now?

We’ve been witnessing rapid growth in the amount of learning content available to employees. This growth started decades ago, but it’s recently turned from a trickle to a flood. There’s more learning content everywhere—inside and outside orgs; online and offline; on desktops and mobile devices; and in learning systems, shared folders, browsers, email, and chat platforms. Is it any wonder that employees are overwhelmed and exhausted by the sheer volume of all that’s available?¹

Employees are overwhelmed and exhausted by the amount of learning content.

Employees feel like they’re drowning—and it’s L&D’s job to help them find and consume the content that builds skills and drives outcomes that matter to the business. To do this, L&D functions need well-crafted learning content strategies that support org learning and business strategies.

A learning content strategy should help L&D functions answer questions like:

• How will we decide what learning content to bring into the org?
• How will we identify—and help employees identify—learning content that’ll support our business and learning strategies?
• How and when will learning content be updated? By whom?
• How will we make the right learning content easily available to employees?
• What can we do immediately and in the longer term to improve employees’ ability to find and consume the learning content they need?

In this study—which included a lit review, roundtable, and interviews—we explored these questions. Through this research, we sought to identify the leading practices that orgs are using to help employees sift through the volume of learning content to find what’s right for them, when they need it.

L&D functions need well-crafted learning content strategies that support org learning and business strategies.

In the next section, we introduce the trends we uncovered as part of this study.

What’s Happening in Learning Content?

In the course of this research, we identified 4 trends in learning content that are helping shape the learning content strategies of forward-thinking orgs:

1. More types and sources of learning content
2. More enabling, less pushing of learning content by L&D functions
3. More (and better) use of skills data to inform learning content priorities
4. More access for all employees

In the following sections, we take a brief look at these 4 trends.

More types & sources of learning content

Not only is there more learning content in more places—but there are more types of content created by a wider variety of authors. Learning content used to be primarily created and controlled by L&D functions. Now, however, employees have access to:

• L&D function-created content
• Learning content created by subject-matter experts (SMEs)
• Company reports, policies, strategy docs, etc.
• Vendor-created learning content (custom or off the shelf)
• YouTube and other social media content
• Podcasts
• Conference notes, presentations, and videos
• Trade- or industry-specific content
• Learning content libraries (LinkedIn Learning, Udemy for Business, etc.)
• Subscriptions to learning content aggregators
• The entire internet

There’s not only more volume of content—there’s more types of content, in more places, created by a wider variety of authors.

And we know that’s not an exhaustive list.

The incredible volume, variety, and breadth of the learning content that’s available—over much of which L&D functions have limited control—complicate things for learning leaders and for employees.

Through our research, though, we found that learning leaders who’ve given this some thought don’t try to control the chaos. Instead, they embrace it—or, at least, they try to work with the reality that learning content is already complicated, and it’s only going to get bigger and more complex over time.

L&D functions can create systems, processes, and policies that help employees navigate the chaos of learning content.

Savvy learning leaders think about how to create systems, processes, and policies that help orgs and employees navigate through the chaos—rather than trying to tame the chaos itself (because that’s not gonna happen).

One learning leader noted:

“Learning functions need to recognize we never owned learning content in the first place, and we certainly don’t now. We need to embrace the chaos.”

Nick Halder, Senior Director of Talent, Snow Software

More enabling, less pushing by L&D functions

Given the increasing amount and variety of learning content out there, the move toward personalized development experiences, and the sheer variety of people in most orgs, it’s almost impossible for L&D functions to push the right content to the right people at the right time in the right format—all the time. There’s also a growing recognition that often the employee knows best—or at least has a good sense of—what they need to learn.

Learning leaders are thinking about how to enable employees to navigate to the right content themselves, rather than pushing content to employees.

Instead of trying to push learning content, L&D functions are thinking about how to enable employees to navigate to the right content themselves—by giving guidance and context about, for example, the org’s strategy and direction, skills that may be needed in the future, and how learning content is organized in the company. This guidance and context can create conditions that enable employees to find and consume learning content when and how they like, in ways that align with their needs and org goals.

More (& better) use of skills data to inform learning content priorities

Learning leaders we talked to noted that, in the past, L&D functions have sometimes pushed out learning content that wasn’t relevant or helpful to employees. These learning leaders see information about the skills employees and orgs need as a potential solution:

“Without insight into what skills are in demand and what skills people have, L&D tends to focus on the learning content we think people need. That’s rarely an effective approach.”

Participant, “New Trends in Learning Content & Content Management” Roundtable

Forward-thinking orgs are using information about the skills their workforce has and the skills it’ll need in the future to decide what learning content to prioritize. Learning leaders are making investments in learning content that can help close critical skills gaps.

Skills info can help orgs better understand what learning content to prioritize and invest in.

More access for all employees

In the last year or so, learning leaders have started taking a much closer look at how accessible learning content really is in their orgs: They’re recognizing the importance of making learning content more widely available to close skills gaps—and to help the business stay agile, responsive, and competitive.²

Three ways learning leaders can improve access include:

• Removing artificial barriers. Sometimes orgs give employees access to learning content on a “need-to-know” basis. But this logic creates unnecessary boundaries that could be removed unless they’re strategically justified—for example, intellectual property, safety / security, cost, or some other significant reason.
• Making learning content more discoverable. Sometimes great learning content is hidden in pockets or silos within the company. Orgs can find ways of making learning content easier to discover by implementing organization standards and really good search capabilities. They can also create a culture of discovery by removing unnecessary passwords and encouraging employees to poke around.
• Making learning content accessible on mobile. Learning content doesn’t just live on desktops anymore. Employees, particularly frontline workers, need access on their phones. This often means rethinking accessibility to LMSs or LXPs, as well as thinking mobile-first when creating new learning content.

Forward-thinking orgs are exploring ways to make learning content transparent, accessible, and appealing to all employees.

In brief

These 4 trends are currently shaping the learning content environment. In this research, we sought to understand how learning leaders are navigating these trends—and how these trends affect their goals, focus areas, challenges, and strategies for learning content.

We developed a learning content model that can help orgs think through their learning content strategies.

This inquiry resulted in a model that can help orgs think through their learning content strategies and make better decisions about where L&D functions should focus their time and resources. The next section introduces and explores this learning content model.

A Model for Thinking About Learning Content

We looked for similarities and differences between learning leaders’ approaches to learning content—and noticed that the learning leaders we spoke with take very different approaches to learning content based on 2 factors (or dimensions) of the learning content they’re working with:

• How unique the learning content is to their org (specificity). Are leaders dealing with learning content that applies specifically to their company or content that applies across orgs?
• The shelf life of the learning content (durability). Are leaders thinking mostly about learning content that needs to be updated rarely, or learning content that’s continually changing and regularly in jeopardy of being out of date? (Note: Long vs. short shelf life may differ from industry to industry and company to company. But, in general, we consider durable learning content to last 1 or more years without needing to be updated.)

If we plot learning content against these 2 dimensions (specificity and durability), then the content generally falls within 1 of the following 4 categories:

1. Specific & Durable. Learning content that’s specific to 1 org and has a long shelf life
2. Specific & Perishable. Learning content that’s specific to 1 org but changes often
3. Generic & Perishable. Learning content that applies to many orgs and changes often
4. Generic & Durable. Learning content that applies to many orgs and has a long shelf life

The learning content model, introduced in Figure 1, outlines these 4 categories and provides examples of some common topics that each category tends to cover.

Learning leaders might consider using this model to clarify the L&D function’s (and other stakeholders’) focus areas and roles regarding learning content. When we gave one learning leader—who happens to sit in a central L&D team within a federated system—a sneak peek at this model, he said:

“I like this model because it can help our L&D teams think about who owns what content. L&D sometimes tries to be all things to all people, but that’s not possible. In my company, we’re starting to be much more intentional about where each of our respective L&D teams are best-suited to play.”

John Z., Head of Digital Learning & Design, Global Medical Devices Company

Figure 1: Learning Content Model | Source: RedThread Research, 2021.

Let’s look at each of these 4 categories in more detail. For each category, we discuss:

• The focus L&D functions should have for each learning content category
• Challenges specific to each learning content category
• How L&D functions can address those challenges in the immediate and longer terms

Specific & Durable

The Specific & Durable learning content category generally applies only to 1 org and has a relatively long shelf life. It tends to include:

• Introductions to the org’s values, mission, philosophy, and how the org expects employees to act
• Info about strategic initiatives that define the org’s direction
• Onboarding training and materials
• “Crown jewels”—intellectual property that’s critical to success / competitive advantage as a company

The purpose of Specific & Durable learning content is often to shape organizational culture—helping employees understand “this is who we are” and “this is how we act.” Accordingly, the learning leaders we spoke with talked about Specific & Durable learning content most often in conjunction with organizational initiatives, such as organizational culture or change efforts; diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging (DEIB); and strategic pivots (e.g., adapting to industry upheaval).

Specific & Durable learning content often helps shape org culture—by helping employees understand “this is who we are” and “this is how we act.”

L&D’s focus should be: Drive organizational initiatives

Forward-thinking orgs conceptualize the L&D function’s role—and related goals—differently, depending on the category of learning content at hand: They have a different focus for each of the 4 categories of learning content. As the nature of the learning content and its associated challenges change, so does the way the org thinks about where L&D functions should spend the most effort.

L&D should think about how Specific & Durable learning content can help move the needle in areas that are priorities for the business.

For Specific & Durable learning content, L&D functions should focus on driving organizational initiatives. Specifically, they should think about how Specific & Durable learning content can help move the needle in areas that are priorities for the business.

As one learning leader said:

“What’s the strategic change that’s happening? Is your learning content relevant to get to those organizational outcomes?”

Participant, “New Trends in Learning Content & Content Management” Roundtable

Importantly, learning leaders aren’t thinking about how L&D functions can drive org initiatives alone—far from it. Almost every learning leader we spoke with about Specific & Durable learning content described how they’re reaching outside of the L&D function—to other parts of HR and to leaders of other functions—to stay in sync with org priorities and use learning content to support the cultural and strategic initiatives important to the business.

Biggest challenges we heard

Because Specific & Durable learning content often links directly to key business initiatives, L&D functions typically face challenges like:

• Staying aligned with business goals. How do we stay agile and aligned with business goals in an ever-flexible environment?
• Driving change. How do we use learning content to move the org toward its goals?
• Measuring impact. How do we know if the learning content is, in fact, driving the change, creating the culture, or moving the needle in ways that align with the org’s priorities?

Intentionally linking learning content to org priorities is a critical component in addressing these challenges, particularly around measuring impact.

Forward-thinking L&D functions measure success against metrics used by the entire org, not just the L&D function.

In our research on measuring learning impact, we found that average L&D functions tend to triage based on the squeakiest wheel or easiest fix. Conversely, more forward-thinking L&D functions develop strategies and relationships to continually align and adjust learning content to support org goals—and to measure success against metrics used by the entire org, not just the L&D function.³

What L&D can do

In Figure 2, we include some ways L&D functions can start addressing these challenges. The ideas here (and in subsequent Figures 3-5) are divided into 2 sections:

• Do Now. Actions L&D functions can start on right away
• Work On. Actions requiring some time and coordination to implement

Each idea is paired with an example of how an org is implementing it.

Figure 2: Ways L&D Can Help Address Challenges—Specific & Durable Learning Content | Source: RedThread Research, 2021.

Specific & Perishable

Specific & Perishable learning content is unique to the org and changes / needs updating relatively often. Examples of this type of learning content include:

• Customer training (e.g., on the org’s products)
• Org-specific policies and processes
• Instructions and updates on internally built software / tools

A defining characteristic of Specific & Perishable learning content: The sources of the learning content exist all over the org—in policy and process documents, product release notes, wikis, etc. This truth, combined with the fact that the content changes often, means it’s exceedingly difficult (if not impossible) for L&D functions to create and update all Specific & Perishable learning content needed by the org.

L&D’s focus should be: Enable content creation

In contrast to orgs in which the L&D function tries to control learning content, orgs that deputize all employees and focus on enabling the creation of learning content—no matter who does the creating—tend to have much more success ensuring that updated learning content is available when needed.

The L&D function’s focus for Specific & Perishable learning content should be to enable the creation and curation of learning content within the org—not to create or control that learning content.

The most forward-thinking learning leaders we encountered approach learning content almost as a free-market economy problem: In their minds, L&D functions should facilitate the supply and demand of learning content. Their job is to make those supply / demand exchanges as frictionless as possible, both for the consumers of the learning content as well as the suppliers, no matter where they sit in the org.

Biggest challenges we heard

Challenges with Specific & Perishable learning content tend to stem from the fact that it needs to be updated frequently and only internal people (for the most part) can do the updating. Challenges include:

• Learning content becomes stale and is hard to keep updated
• The best learning content exists in lots of different places in the org
• Quality and consistency of learning content can vary, since a lot of the learning content isn’t created by the L&D function

We talked with several learning leaders who said their L&D teams struggle either to keep tons of content updated themselves or to incentivize SMEs across the business to keep their learning content updated.

L&D functions should provide processes, templates, and guidance to enable anyone in the org to create or curate learning content with relative ease, consistency, and quality.

To address these challenges, the learning leaders we spoke with focus on putting in place processes, templates, and guidance that enable anyone in the org to create or curate learning content with relative ease, consistency, and quality.

For example, these forward-thinking learning leaders:

• Implement basic instructional design templates and norms across the org
• Put in place tech that offers standard templates, design principles, and formatting
• Track learning content usage and communicate regularly with learning content authors about updates
• Make themselves available as consultants—answering questions and providing advice on how to create effective learning content that meets the standards they’ve set

What L&D can do

In Figure 3, we include some ways L&D functions can start addressing these challenges. Each idea also outlines how an org is implementing that idea.

Figure 3: Ways L&D Can Help Address Challenges—Specific & Perishable Learning Content | Source: RedThread Research, 2021.⁴

Generic & Perishable

Generic & Perishable learning content can apply to many orgs but has a short shelf life. Examples of Generic & Perishable learning content include:

• Training / updates on fast-changing tech skills
• How-to tutorials on common processes (e.g., how to create a QR code, how to use a function in Excel)
• Info on current events and industry / market updates

Generic & Perishable learning content is defined by its sheer volume—and the fact that it’s everywhere.

The defining characteristic of this learning content category is sheer volume: There’s so much of it, everywhere! Much Generic & Perishable learning content is available for free online, although Google and YouTube are certainly not the only ways to find it. Other sources of Generic & Perishable learning content are, for example:

• Learning content libraries like PluralSight and LinkedIn Learning
• Professional or trade publications and websites
• Tech vendors offering learning content on how to use their software

Generic & Perishable learning content also changes frequently, meaning the great video someone found last year might be 3 releases out of date this year.

L&D’s focus should be: Help employees filter to the right learning content

The nature of Generic & Perishable learning content means L&D functions’ focus should be to help employees filter. It would be incredibly difficult to provide just the right info to each employee when they need it. Rather, learning leaders’ job is to create conditions that enable employees to cut through the noise and find what they need.

L&D functions should create conditions that enable employees to cut through the noise and volume of learning content to find what they need.

In most orgs, helping employees “filter” means using some kind of tech, most commonly an LXP. We’ve yet to see an org set up a completely manual process that enables filtering at the scale most orgs need: Most orgs leverage both tech and humans to get the job done. For example, teams may share the best or most helpful learning content with one another via Teams or Slack; they may set up queries in content aggregators like Feedly and other apps.

Biggest challenges we heard

We heard 2 main challenges related to Generic & Perishable learning content, both stemming from the volume and turnover common to this learning content category:

• There’s too much noise. For Generic & Perishable learning content, the “signal-to-noise” ratio is extremely low: There’s a lot of learning content in this category, but quality and relevance vary. Although it may be easy to find some learning content on a particular topic or question, it’s hard to know whether it’s the best learning content—or what the org would want an employee to rely on.
• Finding the latest and greatest. There’s regularly more and better learning content somewhere out there. Employees have a hard time finding the most updated, most relevant stuff.

Implementing effective search, curation, and recommendation engines can help give employees direction and a place to start.

Implementing effective search, curation, and recommendation engines can help address these challenges by giving employees direction and a place to start. We explore these ideas next.

What L&D can do

In Figure 4, we include some ways L&D functions can start addressing these challenges. Each idea also outlines how an org is implementing that idea.

Figure 4: Ways L&D Can Help Address Challenges—Generic & Perishable Learning Content | Source: RedThread Research, 2021.^5,6

Generic & Durable

Generic & Durable learning content changes relatively infrequently and applies to many orgs. It includes learning content such as:

• Education and refreshers on safety, security, and ethics
• Leadership development training and programs
• Industry-specific background / context (e.g., how the banking system works)
• Learning content to develop sales skills
• Support for employee wellbeing, mindfulness, and personal growth

Because Generic & Durable learning content can apply to many orgs and likely isn’t changing at a breakneck pace, quite a few learning content vendors play in this space. These vendors offer high-quality learning content on specialty topics that an in-house L&D team may not have the expertise or bandwidth to create.

Many Generic & Durable learning content vendors offer high-quality learning content on specialty topics that an in-house L&D team may not have the expertise or bandwidth to create.

L&D’s focus should be: Facilitate consistency & quality

L&D functions’ focus for Generic & Durable learning content should be facilitating consistency and quality—setting standards for what quality learning content looks like across the org. Because so many vendors offer different learning content at varying levels of quality, L&D functions can create value by helping the org define standards that outline, for example:

• The “go-to” vendors to work with on cross-functional topics like leadership, industry context, or wellbeing
• Criteria for selecting vendors not on the “go-to” list
• What high-quality learning content looks like and where it’s coming from
• Ways to measure / understand what learning content is working and what’s not

L&D functions should define standards that outline, for example, go-to vendors, vendor selection criteria, and what “high-quality” learning content looks like for the org.

With these standards (and / or others) in place, L&D functions can provide a consistent, org-wide point of view on cross-cutting topics, like “the way we lead,” “the way we think about safety,” and so on.

Biggest challenges we heard

Consistency and quality are the primary challenges for Generic & Durable learning content because much of the learning content can apply to many different functions (think leadership development or safety / security) and so many commercial sources of this category of learning content exist.

This breadth and variety give rise to potential differences—within the same org—in:

• The content that’s used for learning on a particular subject
• The quality or efficacy of that learning content
• How that learning content is delivered or supported
• Who gets access to the learning content
• The processes used to evaluate the learning content

As an example, we’ve seen orgs that use a dozen or more different leadership models because different functions / teams brought in different leadership vendors / consultants at different times.

Forward-thinking L&D functions consider how they can foster relationships—with vendors and other functions—to ensure consistency and quality of learning content across the org.

In the lit review we did as part of this research, we read several articles on creating consistent learning content. In an org, consistent course design and visual cues across as much learning content as possible can go a long way toward helping employees understand and navigate learning content easily. However, this kind of consistency is sometimes difficult to achieve with externally created content.

In addition to these instructional design elements, forward-thinking L&D functions are also considering how they can foster relationships—with vendors and with other functions—to bring people together across silos in order to ensure consistency and quality of learning content throughout the org. This sometimes means convening cross-functional groups to align on needs, pool resources, or negotiate org-level (rather than function- or team-level) contracts with vendors.

What L&D can do

In Figure 5, we include some ways L&D functions can start addressing these challenges. Each idea also outlines how an org is implementing that idea.

Figure 5: Ways L&D Can Help Address Challenges—Generic & Durable Learning Content | Source: RedThread Research, 2021.

Wrap-Up

We’ve given you a snapshot of recent trends in learning content, including how the explosion in volume and variety of learning content is affecting orgs and employees alike. We’ve also introduced a model for thinking about learning content in 4 categories, based on 2 key factors:

• The specificity of the learning content to the org
• The durability (or shelf life) of the learning content

Our biggest takeaway from this study is how the 4 different categories of learning content give rise to very different focuses for L&D functions—different conceptions of what L&D functions should do with regard to that learning content—and have very different associated challenges. (Unsurprisingly, there’s no one-size-fits-all learning content strategy.)

We are grateful to those learning leaders who shared their experiences and examples with us, and are excited to share so many concrete examples in this report.

As always, we welcome feedback and discussion! Please feel free to reach out to RedThread Research at [email protected] or www.redthreadresearch.com. We’d love to hear about your experiences.

Appendix 1: Research Methodology

We launched our study in Spring 2021. This report gathers and synthesizes findings from our research efforts, which include:

• A literature review of 51 articles from business, trade, and popular lit sources
• 1 roundtable with a total of 33 participants
• 15 in-depth interviews with learning leaders about their experiences and thoughts on learning content

For those looking for specific information that came out of those efforts, you’re in luck: We’ve a policy of sharing as much information as possible throughout the research process. Please see:

• Premise: “Content in the 2020s: Enabling Learning”
• Lit review: “Learning Content in the 2020s: What the Literature Says”
• Roundtable readout: “Trends in Learning Content & Content Management”
• Q&A call: "Learning Content"

Appendix 2: Contributors

Thank you so much to those of you who participated in our roundtable and interviews. We couldn’t have done this research without you! In addition to the leaders listed below, there are many others we can’t name publicly. We extend our gratitude nonetheless: You know who you are.

Angel Rodriguez
Ann Boldt
Brett Rose
Bria Dimke
Brian Richardson
Catherine Marchand
Chris Casement
Chris Olson
Clark Shah-Nelson
Eddie Garcia
Emily Crockett
Erik Soerhaug
Gordon O’Reilly
Greg Williams
Heather Bahorich
Ian Bolderstone
Jihyun Jeong
Jim Maddock
John Z.
Laurence D. Banner
Leah Holmgren
Marc Ramos
Martin Tanguay
Melissa Lamkin
Mitchel M.
Nick Halder
Nicole Leret
Robert Young
Sarah Foster
Shaun Rozyn
Stephanie Fritz
Stephen T.
Tania Tiippana
Tone Reierselmoen
Zachary Pfau

In addition, we thank Catherine Coughlin for editing the report, Jennifer Hines for graphics, Jenny Barandich for the layout, and Sana Lall-Trail for research and project management.