Strategic L&D in Times of Change: How Think Codex Can Accelerate Your Success
Companies across industries are facing unprecedented economic challenges. Layoffs, budget cuts, and shifting priorities can make focusing on long-term resilience difficult. However, neglecting the development of a skilled and adaptable workforce during these times carries significant risks.
This is where Think Codex, a leading provider of game-based L&D solutions, can help. We transform how organizations approach change, leadership, and team dynamics, empowering your people to navigate uncertainty and drive success.
Pain Point 1: The Challenge of Change Management
Credit infographic of the challenges of change management: Faster Capital
Restructuring and downsizing place immense pressure on employees. To thrive, they need adaptability, strong communication, and the ability to collaborate effectively across newly formed teams.
Think Codex’s change management simulations immerse employees in real-world scenarios, developing the problem-solving skills and resilience needed during periods of flux. To learn more about our approach to change management, check out our ThinkAdapt blog post
Pain Point 2: Internal Hiring – Where Think Codex Fits
Sime Darby’s employees are immersed in a Think Codex’s leadership development simulation, collaborating and problem-solving.
Understandably, many companies are prioritizing internal promotions and upskilling. Think Codex accelerates this process with targeted leadership development programs designed specifically for MNCs. We bridge the gap between current skills and new roles, building a pipeline of capable leaders ready to step up with confidence.
Additionally, our team-building simulations foster the cross-functional collaboration essential for a smooth post-restructuring transition.
The Think Codex Advantage
Engagement and Impact: Our game-based approach drives higher engagement and knowledge retention compared to traditional training methods.
Flexibility: Choose physical sessions for high-impact team experiences or explore our virtual solutions for scalable, remote L&D.
MNC Expertise: We understand the unique needs of MNCs and conglomerates, offering tailored programs across diverse industries like banking, FMCG, oil & gas, and more.
Let’s be honest, most corporate training programs could use a serious energy boost. Dry presentations, endless compliance modules… it’s no wonder employees tune out. That’s where gamification comes in – it has the power to transform your training from snooze-fest to something people look forward to.
What is Gamification (and Why Should You Care)?
Gamification isn’t about turning your company into a giant video game. It’s about using game-like elements – think points, badges, challenges, and competition – to make learning more fun, motivating, and effective. Here’s the magic: our brains are wired to respond to these elements, making learning feel more like play and less like work.
Proof it Works: Deloitte’s Success Story
Don’t just take my word for it. Global consulting giant Deloitte revamped their leadership training with their gamified Leadership Academy. This platform uses simulations, challenges, and storylines to immerse employees in real-world leadership scenarios. The payoff? Skyrocketing completion rates and a stronger pipeline of future leaders. Check out the details on Harvard Business Review.
2 Ways to Level Up Your Training with Gamification
1. Content Gamification: Make the Material Fun
Break it Down: Ditch the long lectures. Use quizzes, short challenges, or interactive scenarios to test knowledge after each bite-sized chunk of learning.
Choose Your Adventure: Put learners in the driver’s seat with scenario-based learning. Let their choices and decisions impact the outcome – just like a real-life work situation.
Progress = Satisfaction: Visualize progress with progress bars or level-up systems. This sense of accomplishment keeps learners coming back.
2. Performance Gamification: Reward the Right Behaviors
Points for Progress: Award points for course completion, skill demonstrations, or active participation.
Badge of Honor: Create badges to recognize achievements or milestones.
Friendly Competition: Leaderboards add excitement and a little healthy competition to boost motivation.
How to Get Started (and Prove it’s Worthwhile)
Set Clear Goals: What do you want your training to achieve? Gamification is most powerful when it targets specific outcomes.
Choose the Right Game: Points, badges, or something else? Select mechanisms that fit your goals and resonate with your employees.
Make it Real: Tie rewards and challenges to job skills and company goals.
Track the Wins: Measure completion rates, knowledge gains, and real-world performance improvements to demonstrate the ROI of your gamified training. For in-depth guidance on this, check out this guide.
If you’re wondering if gamification is the right move for your team, let’s chat and explore the possibilities!
Leadership isn’t just about managing; it’s about adapting, innovating, and understanding our dynamic global landscape. To thrive in tomorrow’s leadership, you must uncover the ‘why‘ behind every action, decision, and strategy. That’s why we’ve designed a transformative leadership training program that goes beyond the surface.
WHY OUR LEADERSHIP MICRO TALENT PROGRAM IS FOR YOU?
GET UP TO 10% OFF!
how do you grow into leadership roles?
Unlock your full potential as a leader with our comprehensive leadership program. Our program spans three levels, catering to junior, middle, and senior leaders, and is packed with coaching, assignments, simulations, pre & post analytics, reports, and presentations. With our program, you’ll receive personalised coaching and effective strategies that will help you grow both personally and professionally. Whether you’re just starting out in your career or looking to take your leadership skills to the next level, our program has everything you need to succeed.
Don’t miss out on this limited-time opportunity to save while unlocking your leadership potential. Connect with us now to find out more how does this program help your leadership team!
*ThinkCodex is a 4-time Gold Winner for the Best Team Building Vendor as voted by HR directors of Fortune 500 organizations & MNCs. We’ll be sharing our insights and also use a case study to demonstrate what a best-in-class team-building programme looks like.
Unlocking the Future of Team Building: Beyond Just Fun
Is team building just a fun event without real potential for change? In today’s ever-evolving landscape of employee engagement, it’s time to rethink the possibilities.
Imagine a world where your team-building activities not only foster camaraderie but also elevate your employees’ skills and align them with your company’s values. This is the future of team building, and it’s closer than you might think.
The Problem With TEAM-BUILDING Programmes
When discussing team-building strategies, it’s vital to keep in mind the two primary stakeholders: The Business and The Employee.The Business provides funding for these events, while The Employee actively participates in them. Although team-building events are often designed for personal enjoyment, it’s crucial to understand that this is only one aspect of the overall process.
Failing to closely align employees with the core values and mission of the organization could result in a significant disconnect that ultimately affects team dynamics and organizational success. Thus, it’s critical to prioritize BOTH personal enjoyment and the creation of a cohesive team environment that closely aligns with the goals and objectives of the organization. By doing so, businesses can foster a sense of unity and common purpose that genuinely benefits everyone involved.
Balancing Act: Business and Personal Value
At Think Codex, we believe in a balanced approach. We recognize the importance of both Business Value and Personal Value in team building. So, what does a great team-building event look like? It’s one that effectively combines these two aspects.
The Six Building Blocks of Great Team Building
Six building blocks of great team building
A remarkable team-building event integrates at least four components from each side of the spectrum, Business Value and Personal Value. Let’s explore these building blocks:
Business Value:
Growth: Provide employees with opportunities to learn and develop skills applicable to their work.
Alignment: Foster awareness and connection to your company’s purpose and values through Culture & Mindset.
Team Upskilling: Equip employees with the principles of high-performance teams for practical application.
Personal Value:
Experience: Ensure enjoyment and relaxation, offering a break from work-related stress.
De-stressing: Allow employees to release built-up negative energy through mental and emotional wellness practices.
Interaction: Encourage team bonding through enjoyable group activities.
Gamification: The Catalyst for Change
In the dynamic realm of employee engagement, traditional team-building methods often fall short. They can be too basic, offering little long-term value to participants or the organization. Employees today seek more than just fun; they crave opportunities for growth and development. Entergamification, a game-changing solution that addresses these challenges head-on.
Gamification in team building is not merely a trend; it’s a necessity. It’s the bridge between enjoyment and growth. Gamification transforms your team-building events into powerful tools for skill development and values alignment.
What A Great TEAM-BUILDING Programme Looks Like
A great team-building programme must have these 4 components:
Increased Employee Engagement: It must be engaging and immersive, going beyond just having fun and fostering a sense of purpose and achievement.
Skill Development: It’s a learning opportunity. Your team will acquire practical skills that can be applied immediately in the workplace, effectively closing skill gaps.
Values Alignment: It facilitates a deep understanding of your company’s values and purpose. Your team will not only know these values but also embody them.
A Bit of Pressure: It adds a bit of a challenge so that teams can have a deeper-level building as opposed to surface-level bonding. According to Flow Theory, people grow best when tasks are not impossible and not too easy. This applies to teams as well.
Case Study: AIA and ThinkBuild ESG Simulation
AIA, a prominent player in the insurance industry, recognized the need to build high-performing teams and deepen their commitment to Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) principles. That’s when Think Codex entered the picture with a game-changing solution.
Here is an example of a digital version of the ThinkBuild simulation
The implementation of a hybrid simulation modelESG Focus Principles for AIAs
Introducing ThinkBuild Simulation, an interactive team-building experience that incorporates ESG education. This simulation lasts for over an hour and allows participants to delve into the essence of teamwork while tackling sustainability challenges. Teams work together to construct sustainable cities through planning, building, and reviewing. Although it’s not as intense as our main simulation, it effectively promotes team cohesion and is a fun experience. What makes ThinkBuild Simulation unique is its seamless integration of virtual simulations and in-person interaction. With this innovative approach, all 103 participants can fully immerse themselves in the interactive experience and enjoy the benefits of collaborating face-to-face.
During the ThinkBuild Simulation, participants gain valuable insights and key learnings:
Understanding Team Stages: Participants can experience and understand the different stages of team development, leading to a deeper appreciation for team dynamics and alignment with Sustainable Operations’ ESG principles.
Building and Sustaining Culture: Through sustainable city planning, teams learn how to build and sustain a culture and identity within a team, an invaluable skill applicable to their real-life work environments, where they can better understand the role of People and Culture.
Problem Solving and Growth: Through ideation, problem-solving, and growing as a cohesive unit, participants gain problem-solving skills that can be effectively applied in their professional lives. This aligns with Effective Governance as part of their ESG principles.
This holistic approach not only enhances team performance but also instils a sense of purpose and achievement in participants, making it a transformative experience that extends beyond the simulation itself.
ESG-Focused Simulations: Bridging Theory and Practice
Participants face scenarios and challenges that demand the application of ESG practices for success. This hands-on approach not only educates but also encourages critical thinking about applying ESG principles to their roles. They learn how sustainable practices can positively impact their work, their team, and the environment.
In a world where change is the only constant, the ability to adapt and improve is crucial. Gamification, with its built-in feedback mechanisms, ensures teams don’t just participate but progress. It’s a win-win for businesses and employees, making team building more effective and enjoyable than ever before. This collaborative element enhances not only team dynamics but also deepens their understanding of ESG principles through shared insights.
Physical ThinkBuild simulation example
Measuring Success: The Kirkpatrick Evaluation Model
To gauge the impact of the ThinkBuild Simulation, we employ the Kirkpatrick Evaluation Model, focusing on Level 1 & 2 evaluation, which assesses participants’ experience and also learning.
The infographic presents a comprehensive overview of the results attained
The Results Speak Volumes
AIA employees rated the ThinkBuild Simulation highly, with an impressive overall rating of 8 out of 10. This isn’t just a number; it’s a testament to the effectiveness of gamification in team building and ESG education.
Here’s what some participants had to say:
“Hands-on experience that tackles real-life challenges.”
“Engaging trainers who make learning enjoyable.”
“Not your typical training; the skills gained apply both at work and in daily life.”
Elevate Your Team Building with Gamification
Want to improve your team-building skills? Look no further than gamification. With its feedback mechanisms, gamification ensures that teams not only participate but also progress. This can lead to increased effectiveness and enjoyment for both businesses and employees.
Think Codex and AIA have collaborated to create an example of how gamification can be used to elevate team-building, foster ESG insights, and drive success in organizations across industries. By unlocking the full potential of your teams, you can empower them with the knowledge and skills needed to succeed in today’s business landscape.
If you’re interested in exploring different ways that team-building gamification simulations can help you achieve your organizational goals, speak to our CONSULTANT for FREE demo session today.
Every Learning and Development (L&D) team’s dream is to have committed and competent employees, the vehicle that drives an organization’s growth and profit in an ever-growing business landscape. It falls to the L&D teams in organizations, small and large, to develop and retain talents with the appropriate skills and attitude, yet this challenge has only increased following the pandemic. With the changes in employee expectations, more so with Generation Z entering the workforce, it is far too easy for managers to take on a reactive mindset and prematurely conclude that employee attitude or work ethic has deteriorated.
As part of the L&D community, we are responsible for aligning employee career goals with company goals, so we must take a proactive mindset in understanding what underlies this phenomenon, and one such approach is through employee feedback.
Co-workers engaging in discussion
This article will first propose 4 ways an organisation’s L&D could benefit from listening to and acting on employee feedback. Next, we explain how employee feedback is inherently tied to the most essential elements of human motivation, which then predicts employee performance and retention.
WHAT ARE THE 4 WAYS?
Employee feedback gives you a clear picture of the skills or support that is currently missing in the team and, consequently, what type of support or training the team needs. With the increasing complexity of the technology and problems to solve, the plethora of platforms or business tools make it challenging for L&D to accurately identify the most relevant and appropriate for their company within budget and time constraints. Prior to adopting any new tool or introducing any new training programme, L&D needs to have a clear and accurate understanding of the challenges or roadblocks currently faced by employees. As such, employee feedback would highlight said issues, allowing the L&D team to accurately identify the relevant skills required by the employees. For example, employees could be stagnant in their careers and might benefit from a more structured way of brainstorming or strategic planning, but if you manage to identify that the employees already have excellent ideas, it is possible that their struggle lies with communicating their ideas in a clear and convincing manner. Since the L&D’s role is to ensure that employees are equipped to achieve the results that are expected of their position, employee feedback could shed light on the optimal way to use the company’s resources to grow the team.
1 to 1 feedback with your manager often helps
2. Furthermore, use employee feedback to ensure that the organizational and departmentalpolicies remain effective and efficient in the current times. As organizations grow in reputation and teams grow in confidence and expertise, the tendency to become more homogeneous and rigid increases. This means that people are more susceptible to groupthink and struggle with divergent thinking, an important aspect of creative problem-solving and critical thinking. Moreover, sometimes our standard procedures or best practices might no longer be effective or efficient. Employee feedback would then be an important data-gathering process in obtaining diverse, and even dissenting, opinions. Clarity on what still works and what requires improvement shields the team from groupthink and prepares the company for future challenges before they occur.
3. Additionally, it will ensure that the policies and processes in the organization are employee-centric, that is, the company’s vision is aligned with employees’ day-to-day work. Employees are more engaged and productive when their work and how they are treated at work are consistent and aligned with the organization’s vision and mission. For example, it would be hard-pressed for employees to think innovate and problem-solve in a culture that rewards rigid adherence to potentially outdated best practices. Rules and systems were created by people with specific purposes. Employees, the very people whom the vision and mission are meant to guide, would give you the most accurate feedback on whether the systems in place are achieving the purpose they are supposed to.
4. A subtle, and less direct, effect of active listening and acting on employee feedback is forming a culture of learning. As L&D, we act as models and examples to employees in terms of how to behave and act at work. By demonstrating that we are open to upward feedback and constructive criticism, we establish a safe environment for sharing ideas and experiences, an environment that emphasizes self-improvement and encourages humility, creating a space to have difficult conversations. A learning culture encourages employees to be transparent about their mistakes or struggles, which are important predictors of eliminating mistakes in the future. A learning culture promotes collaboration and learning from one’s peers and mentors, resulting in growth in productivity and innovation. Conversely, a culture that prioritizes performance undermines psychological safety, encouraging employees to be guarded and always on the lookout for their own performance and career. In conclusion, a culture that practices upward feedback values improving ourselves instead of proving ourselves.
Human Motivation
The aforementioned advantages of feedback in L&D touch on three important elements of human motivation. Based on the Self-Determination Theory, humans are highly motivated and demonstrate quality performance in an environment that encourages autonomy, foster relatedness, and grows their competence. By providing the most relevant support and training, we increase employees’ competency, allowing them to excel in their work career development. By designing employee-centric policies, we encourage employees to practice their autonomy as their feedback and engagement with the L&D could improve their work conditions and have an impact on the organization. Employees would then feel that they are part of the company as opposed to feeling like a replaceable cog in a machine, encouraging them to take ownership of their careers and increase their commitment.
Example of Self Determination Theory
CONCLUSION
It is easy to forget that employees are one of the stakeholders in the organization. What is an organization without the people or the processes (created by said people) in it? As with any other stakeholders, you need to understand their needs and involve them in decision-making processes. As such, employee feedback is vital in developing the ideal team in any organization.
Let us know what are your thoughts on this in the comment below and if you enjoy reading our articles, do join our community to get latest insights on gamification and L&D.
As companies invest more in Learning and Development (L&D) programs to help employees acquire new skills and stay competitive, measuring the success of these programs becomes increasingly important. In this article, we’ll explore different methodology models that L&D professionals can implement and the critical metrics they need to measure to demonstrate the value of their programs. We start off by examining the most widely used learning effectiveness model – Kirkpatrick Model and then comparing other models against it.
Kirkpatrick Model by Donald Kirkpatrick
The Kirkpatrick Model is one of the most commonly used methodology models in L&D. Developed by Donald Kirkpatrick in the 1950s, this model has four levels of evaluation:
The Kirkpatrick Model is a valuable framework for evaluating the effectiveness of L&D programs. However, it’s important to note that the levels are hierarchical, and each level builds on the previous one. For example, learners are less likely to learn from the program if they don’t react positively to the program. They are less likely to change their behavior if they don’t learn from it. And if they don’t change their behavior, the program is less likely to positively impact the organization’s results.
Comparative Methodology Models
In addition to the Kirkpatrick Model, there are other methodology models that L&D professionals can implement to evaluate their programs:
Phillips Model by Jack Phillips
This model takes a step further by not just measuring Levels 1 to 4 which is similar to the Kirkpatrick Model but has a Level 5 measuring the return on investment (ROI) of the training program. The Level 5 ROI measurement uses data from L2 Learning, L3 Behaviour & L4 Results to create a model for finding out what monetary returns the organization is actually getting back from the training dollars spent.
L1 – L4: Following Kirkpatrick Model L5: Return on Investment
In the form of calculation,
ROI (%) =(Net benefits of the training program / Total program cost) x 100
In the end, the Level 5 calculation comes up with a percentage (%) of ROI. While this is something that is indeed good to measure, there remain a number of challenges in implementing Level 5. Among them:
1. High cost of effort to measure L5 – it takes extensive data collection and working with a number of stakeholders to get accurate data.
2. Delayed Results – as a lot of effort is required, the results of L5 can often be delayed beyond the expected timelines of evaluation by stakeholders.
3. Accuracy of measurement – while calculating, there are a number of assumptions made to put both tangible and intangible factors in focus. Some of these are subjective and up to interpretations depending on stakeholders. It’s important to note that this challenge appears in L4 of the Kirkpatrick & Phillips model to a lesser extent.
4. Ideal but not pragmatic – while it’s great to have these measurements, very few training programs warrant L5 measurements. Jack Phillips himself noted that only 5-10% of training programs require measurements at L5.
5. Lack of data or cooperation from the customer – sometimes a customer just does not have the data required to make a L5 measurement as not all companies track the data of their operations. In the absence of such data, it is often a painstaking process of creating new data sets which can require additional work for stakeholders – which leads to resistance from them.
Brinkerhoff Model by Robert Brinkerhoff
This model is also known as Brinkerhoff’s Success Case Model (SCM) which emphasizes the importance of post-training support and reinforcement to ensure that learners apply what they have learned. Brinkerhoff states that traditional evaluation models such as Kirkpatrick & Phillips models were wrong to just focus on assessing the scope of a training’s effect. He says that the true measure of business results is from performance. SCM is not concerned about finding the average performance of training participants (Kirkpatrick & Phillips Models), but focuses on looking for extreme examples on both ends of measurements.
As such this model measures the performance of the most successful participants and the least successful participants as use cases to understand how well did a learning program perform. The model looks at contrasts or extremes from both ends by seeking to understand 2 important areas:
In a best-case scenario, how well did a program perform? This is derived from analyzing participants who show the most increase in performance after a training program.
In a worst-case scenario, how badly did the program perform? This is derived from analyzing participants who may show the least or no increase in performance after a training program.
Brikenhorff Model
How this model differs from Kirkpatrick & Phillips models is that it requires a few things:
The development of an Impact Model – the definition of what success looks like.
Creating a Success Case Study.
Creating & implementing surveys that can identify best-case and worst-case scenarios.
Conducting interviews.
Documenting successful cases.
Drawing insights, summarizing conclusions, and providing recommendations to stakeholders.
Kaufman Model by Roger Kaufman
This model is based on Kirkpatrick’s model and seeks to improve on it by looking at measurements at a detailed level (L1a and L1b) and big picture level (L5). It’s broken into 5 levels – though if counted, there are actually 6 levels.
L1a Input: This level covers training materials.
L1b Process: This level covers the delivery of the learning process.
L2 Acquisition (Micro): Individual & small group payoffs. Did the learner “acquire” the learning?
L3 Application (Micro): How well the participants utilize what they have learned on the job.
L4 Organizational Results (Macro): Organizational level payoffs – business results.
L5 Customer / Societal Results (Mega): Customers & Society payoffs – the 2 major stakeholders that an organization serves.
Here are some key differences in the Kaufman Model:
1. Group ‘clients’ into Micro (Individual & Small Group), Macro (Organization), and Mega (Customers & Society). This is found in L2, L3, L4 & L5.
3. Introduces a new Level 5 (Customer & Societal Results) which looks at a much broader picture.
So what are the pros of the Kaufman model? Firstly the split in Kirkpatrick’s L1 (Reaction) breaks down the experience into 2 Kaufman factors – supporting materials (L1a Input) and delivery (L1b Process). This helps to isolate the issues of experience by looking at the quality of materials or the quality of delivery.
What are the cons of the Kaufman model? While aspirational and good from a high-level view, trying to measure customer & societal payoffs (L5) require extensive effort, time, and budget. There’s also a high level of ambiguity as there are too many factors at play when we talk especially about customer & societal impacts. In fact, by measuring at L5, it’s hard to isolate these impact factors. This goes against Kaufman’s original intent in where else the goal in L1a & L1b was to isolate factors.
So on one hand, the goal was to improve on Kirkpatrick’s model by isolation (L1a & L1b), L5 instead went against the same goal of isolation, thus giving conflicting views on the Kaufman Model.
Where does Gamification Fit Into all these Models?
Firstly, what is gamification? Gamification is the use of game phycology & game mechanics in non-game environments while achieving non-game outcomes. Such a use case is Learning & Development.
Coming back to learning evaluation models, at the core – most models measure 4 things:
Experience – What was the experience like?
Learning – What did the person learn?
Behaviour – Is there a change in behavior at work?
Results – What individual, team, or business outcomes can be seen?
Gamification’s methodology itself is not an evaluation model but instead is considered one of the most effective ways to drive impact at the levels of Experience, Learning & Behaviour which ultimately leads to Outcome. Let’s break it down to how gamification does that.
Experience – a great experience comes from the right type of engagement. Gamification and game-based learning use the methodology Creation (Ideation & Experimentation) as opposed to just Consumption (Information Download) found in most learning methodologies.
Learning – the most important learning comes from not just the acquisition of the knowledge but rather the application of the knowledge. The application of knowledge is typically where challenges and problems will appear. As such, it’s critical that application can happen within the learning session itself. Game-based learning methodologies such as Business Simulations (emphasis on Business) allow participants immediate application & feedback. Coupled with debriefs that tie it back to organizational context, learning becomes highly effective.
Behaviour – one of the challenges of getting a learner to change their current behaviors is their current habits. Often what is learned is forgotten or replaced with resistance to old habits. Gamification’s iterative and habit-looping techniques get the learner to learn new & better habits which are then overlaid on top of old habits. When learners are back at work, they then begin to practice what they learn from the new habits.
Results – a changed behavior comes down to 3 factors:
The ability to retain the knowledge learned
The retrieval of new habits
The confidence to try out what was learned.
The confidence factor comes from the retention of knowledge and retrieval of new habits. If a learner can remember what they learned and also act out what they learned, then there is confidence to behave in a new way – which then leads to business results.
How to Choose the Right Model
1. Do you have data in place for measurements? If you know where the data is, then a number of models might work.
2. Do you want to create new data sets for measurements? This can often be a complex and long process.
3. Do you have the cooperation of the different stakeholders? Measurements not only require input from the HR professional but stakeholders from the business. Many often have no
4. Do you understand the different models? Do you know what is measurement required and how success is defined in each of the models and how it will fit into your organization?
5. Does the effort required makes it worth getting the results? In essence, this is a cost-benefit analysis. Is the results worth the trouble of going through the measurements – some of which require extensive effort.
Using Different Models For Different Learning Programmes
Should we use different models to measure different training programs? From an outcome perspective, this is ideal. From a practical perspective, the costs may far outweigh the benefit. Our recommendation is using different models should be determined by:
1. What type of results do you really need?
2. What type of effort are you willing to put in?
3. What type of monetary cost are you willing to invest?
4. What type of support do you have in the organization?
5. What level of expertise do you or your vendor have on the different models?
Why Measure L&D Metrics?
Before delving into the different methods for measuring L&D metrics, it’s important to understand why it’s necessary. Here are some key reasons:
Measuring L&D metrics helps organizations understand the effectiveness of their training programs and identify areas where improvement is needed.
By measuring the ROI of L&D initiatives, organizations can justify the investment in these programs and secure funding for future initiatives.
Improve employee engagement which can lead to increased productivity and reduced turnover.
Increase employee performance because when they have the skills and knowledge they need to do their jobs well, they are more likely to perform better.
Measuring the effectiveness of L&D programs is crucial to ensure that they are achieving their intended goals. By using key metrics and frameworks such as the Kirkpatrick Model, organizations can get a better understanding of the impact of their L&D programs. Subscribe to Think Codex’s content and explore our other resources to learn how to measure their effectiveness and achieve your goals using frameworks like the Kirkpatrick Model.
Games have always been seen as an activity for entertainment and leisure, but not for work. Here we explore the place of games in the business world.
By Andrew Lau
Everyone has played games. It’s something we experience as part of growing up. Games help us to learn, to avoid repeating mistakes, to choose the right friends, to win graciously, and to lose well. These very things that happen during childhood are what we can also apply to our working lives.
Gamifying business goals makes achieving them so much more desirable
Lately, gamification has come into business in a big way. More and more companies are making time to play, whether to increase employee engagement through team-building activities, or to facilitate learning in a business environment.
As someone who helps organizations develop their employees’ potential, I often find myself telling bosses that “people learn by doing”. When you need to coordinate with others to learn new concepts, change mindsets, or produce results, then reading slides and memorizing manuals are not effective.
This is why I’ve spent most of my career building business simulations that help colleagues experience and resolve real-life challenges in a safe environment.
Business simulations are powerful. They can be built to isolate and target specific issues. Most importantly, you can make mistakes and learn without impacting the real business world.
Engagement Vs Efficiency: Why does Gamification work?
For most people they often see the outward representation of games such as cards, tokens, badges, avatars, and leaderboards. However, the real secret lies behind the design of the gamification system.
Behavorial design – Photo by Startup Stock Photos from Pexels
There are typically 2 types of system design in the world:
i. Function-centered design creates systems with the end goal of efficiency. However, even though this system is efficient, it does not mean people are motivated or engaged to use it. Most systems in a business are designed this way.
ii. Human-centered design on the other hand. focuses on user engagement and motivation instead. It makes people want to use a system and derive personal meaning from their interaction. The question that should be asked during design is “What do we want to make the user feel?” (Engagement) as opposed to “How can we make things faster?” (Efficiency)
You’re Happier When You Play
E-Learning is a classic case of function-centered design. Internal e-learning platforms are an efficient way to distribute content among employees. However, it’s usually not designed to actually motivate or engage your people to WANT to learn.
Here’s how most people approach e-Learning.
First we go for the quiz, and if we pass (hurray!), we are deemed to have learned the subject. If we fail, then we go through the drudgery of re-watching the videos, only most times, we don’t.
How engaging is e-learning really?
We turn on the video, make a cup of coffee and chat with our colleagues or attend to our emails. We wait for the time when we can take the quiz again. If we fail, repeat coffee and emails till we get it correct.
This is what learning through a function-centered designed system could look like.
Learning through a human-centered design system is hugely different. The most obvious difference is that there is usually a big dose of gamification. Imagine if learning in organizations was geared through completing business missions and quests. The only way to complete missions would then be by applying theories and tools.
Users also rapidly ideate and prototype their ideas in a safe environment. They use iteration to keep getting better at a competency. By the end of a learning session, their repeated actions would have formed the building blocks of new behaviours, ultimately bring results to organizations.
Think Codex CEO Andrew Lau prototyping human-centered design concepts
Most importantly, users have a lot of fun while gaining insights.
Gamification truly taps into the core of human-centered design. It’s about designing a system that gets your customers, employees, and even yourself, to be both extrinsically and intrinsically motivated toward desired actions.
End Game
So where does this leave us?
Everybody loves games and are drawn to it because it connects us to who we are as humans.
We are driven by:
A positive sense of meaning, empowerment, social influence, accomplishment and ownership.
A negative sense of unpredictability, scarcity and avoidance.
All these drive human engagement and motivation.
So, to drive results, the choice is simple. All you need to do is press Play.
Andrew Lau is the CEO of Think Codex, a Learning Gamification Organization that believes the best way to get results is through human-centered systems. You can write him at andrew.lau@thinkcodex.com
Strategic thinking has been an important and famous topic with regards to organisations, so much so that it has been mentioned countless times in management, innovation and corporate articles and blogs.
There are numerous workshops and trainings with regards to this area and we would like to shed some light on this topic as well and how simulations actually play a part in honing this skill.
We would start by introducing what is strategic thinking, its crucial components, an example of how it applies to our daily life and how simulations are able to effectively address this skill. We would like you to take note that there are countless amount of research with regards to strategic thinking, with numerous amount of segregation, components and definition.
We take on the theories of strategic thinking from Liedtka, as we believe that it is the most wholesome and well defined one yet.
What is Strategic Thinking?
The best way of learning what is strategic thinking is by knowing what strategic thinking is not. On the surface level, when strategic thinking is mentioned, we have in our minds that it is thinking about the strategy itself. It may appear to us that when we approach a project, planning up a strategy with regards to it denotes strategic thinking, but that is not the case.
Strategic thinking at an actual fact is a way of thinking, more specifically a mindset with regards to approaching a certain task or project, or in more layman terms, a more organised way of thinking.
You may ask, “what is the difference between both of the definition that you had just spouted?”
Well, the difference between making a strategy and approaching a project with a strategic mindset is the flexibility and adaptability that you possess when critical moments appear (i.e. when something does not go as planned).
A strategic mindset makes you think from your core of what is important to you, what are your strengths, what are your tolerance level for risk, who are your stakeholders, how are you approaching your future, and how you would turn your challenges into opportunities; which a mere strategy (with multiple backup plans) could not have addressed. It gives you a wholesome picture of what is happening within and around you for you to make the best possible decision at that moment in time.
And as Liedtka personally has said:
Strategic thinking, on the other hand, is a synthesizing process, utlizing intuition, and creativity, whose outcome is “an integrated perspective of the enterprise”
We hoped that we have managed to clear some of the misconceptions with regards to strategic thinking. Now let us move on to the elements of it to fully understand it better.
Components of Strategic Thinking
In order for strategic thinking to happen, all the following components have to be realised. Some could be more salient at different points of time depending on the circumstances. They are:
1. Systems Perspective: Having a mental model of the complete end-to-end systems of value creation, and understands the interdependencies within it.
2. Intent-Focused: A strategic intent is differentiated and implies a unique point of view about the future, which communicates a sense of direction, discovery and destiny to the team or individual.
3. Intelligent Opportunism: The ability to adapt without having to depend on top management strategies, which leave open to the possibility of new strategies emerging.
4. Thinking In Time: After having seen the future that we want, what must we keep from our past, lose from that past, and create in our present to get there?
5. Hypothesis Driven: Mirroring the “scientific method” by generating hypothesis and engaging in testing as central activities. Hypothesis generation asks the questions “What if…?” while hypothesis testing follows the critical question “If… then…?”
Understanding and practicing these five components will give you a powerful source of competitive advantage by (as quoted by Liedtka)”
Their whole system perspective should allow them to redesign the processes for greater efficiency and effectiveness. Their intent-focus will make them more determined and less distracted by their rivals. Their ability to think in time will improve the quality of their decision-making and the speed of implementation. A capacity for hypothesis generationand testing will incorporate both creative and critical thinking into their processes. Intelligent opportunism will make them more responsive to local opportunities… This meets the three fundamental strategically valuable capability: (1) they create superior values for customers, (2) they are hard for competitors to imitate, (3) they make the organisation more adaptable to change.
How can strategic thinking be applied in our daily lives?
Let us take a scenario here. You are currently in the marketing department of a FMCG industry and you are considering a career change because you have seen that your peers are switching companies and you feel that you have done enough time within this company. So most likely you would think of, “should I take a leap?” or “where should I go to next?” Ideally, it makes sense to venture into the same industry at the next company but you would like to try something new as well hence, you are in a dilemma. So let us apply the components of strategic thinking into this situation. It is important to take note that there are no right or wrong to this and would depend on individual differences.
The conventional definition of strategic thinking would get you to immediately come out with a long term plan, and mini goals to get there. What are your backup options if one the other does not work as planned. That would be your strategy. As you go down the line, the same cycle dissatisfaction happens again and you revamp or come out with another strategy. There are some things to be questioned here.
Have you looked at the big picture? Such as what are some of your strengths and your important networks that you could cascade into opportunities? What you think you are good at versus what people value about you?
Have you looked into your past and find out what you are good and poor at and how have you changed since then?
Have you looked into the future of job needs? And what kind of skills do you need to equip yourself with in order to meet the future job needs?
Do you have a specific/few direction(s) which you would you want to head towards?
Have you gathered enough information to garner the resources needed to revise your strategy when your needs changes?
Have you evaluate and manage to risk involved, for each of the path you take?
It may sound overwhelming at first, but as more practice is involved with regards to the strategic way of thinking, the easier it would be for you to utilise them. They should come naturally as it is a mindset by itself.
After answering all the questions, you should have a vivid picture /clear sound of what you should do next. This helps you to stay true to yourself and not ending up making a career change based on what you have seen on social media or small talks with your peers. In addition, it gives you a clear picture of the skills/knowledge/stakeholders that are at your arsenal and how they can be transferable to the next workplace that may or may not be relevant to your current industry.
Here is an example of how strategic thinking is applied in the scenario above:
First you look at the big picture and draft out the important stakeholders that have brought you to this day. That would be your uncle who provides you sound advice, your previous boss who introduced you this job, the sales manager who introduced the ropes of the company to you and your trusted team partner who backs you up in time of need. Interview them on why did they chose you? What do they see in you? And how have you improved over time?. Then draft out your strengths, skills and interests.
Take a look on how your skills match other forms of interests that you have. Know what is the best environment for you to work with and research on the transformation of job needs in the near future. Then take a look on where you need to improve or further polish to meet those needs. For example marketing has been going digital and customers’ demands are getting more specific, thus you feel that you need to hone your data analysis skill in order to segment customers’ needs more effectively.
Do not be afraid to look back at your past and check on what do you dislike and where your achievements were. Be sure to put that in mind when you are drafting your plan. For example, you are comfortable with technology and is always updated with the current technologies, at the same time hated being too comfortable in one place.
By now, you would have an intent on where you want to go. If your traits includes risk-taking and future-minded, then you would naturally be more comfortable in going to an industry that is more futuristic and different from your current industry (e.g. tech). If your trait consists of stability then consider taking another role within the same industry or vice versa. Be sure to check the risks involved in each decision as well.
With that, you are all geared up to face the situation when there are changes in job needs within the economy. For example, you would have an adequate amount of knowledge to face the digital marketing world as well as the competencies to carry out corporate marketing plans. The skills that you have obtained by then could further propel you to help bring existing companies into digitalisation, and many more opportunities to come.
In conclusion, we can see in the example that there is no one right way towards strategic thinking and each components of the theory could emerge at different points in time. Two persons with similar traits / strengths may have totally different career pathways due to differences in their pasts and traits. However, having an organised way of thinking helps you to get a firm grasp of the situation and how you could respond to them in an effective way.
Promotional Content Beyond This Point
How does simulation effectively addresses strategic thinking?
Strategic thinking does possess its complexity and therefore, requires a medium complex yet simple enough to transfer this skill towards the learner. We do not think traditional classroom teachings are adequate in addressing the full scope of strategic thinking because the fluency of this mindset has to be practiced in the real world setting to successfully grasp its mechanics. At the same time, the the workplace may be too hectic or comfortable that the learner falls back to his or her comfort mindset. Therefore, we believe that simulations possess the complexity, yet simple enough in a controlled environment to allow learners to practice this skill first, so they would have the confidence to apply them within their workplace.
With the alignment of Liedtka’s theory to our Strategic Thinking Simulation, Allocate, we are able to transfer the theoretical components in stages towards the learners and at the same time, allows them to test out the theories within a safe and realistic environment.
In addition, we have also aligned specific tools within the programme to help the learners translate the theories (in the head) into paper (visualising) so that they could act on them (execute). With this, we are sure that the strategic thinking mindset can be brought back into the workplace. And the benefit continues when they are shared within the working space.
The CEO of Think Codex takes this opportunity to share his views and how Think Codex came about. Here, he addresses the issue of why learning solutions are not sustainable, and which are within our control
Why are Learning Solutions not sustainable?
Organisations spend a huge amount of money on training and development but still we are seeing people complaining about how they do not see the relevance of it to their work or that they fail to bring the knowledge back into their workplace.
This had me thinking about how to make learning more efficient, and the best person to start with, was myself.
I began to recall the moments where I had failed to bring the key lessons of the trainings I had been to back into my workplace, and dissecting them into distinct elements. I figured that while there are a number of external factors which are outside an L&D Professional’s control, like organisational culture and structure, there are still some factors within our influence:
1. Recall – Can a person remember what they have learnt?
The typical training method of teaching through slides and written material has been in existence since 600B.C – the time of the ancient Greeks.
While the tools may have changed from Papyrus to Powerpoint, the method remains. More importantly however, research has found this method to have the lowest recall rate.
This means we need to seek out newer proven methodologies such as prototyping and simulations. By changing the methodology, we can shift retention rate from 10% to as high as 90% – a staggering multiplier of nine.
This is because when we prototype in a realistic environment, we can customise the knowledge/solution in accordance to our own style and personality. I’ve found that this creates a sense of ownership, helping us recall things better as we feel that we have created that realization with our own effort.
That said, people have thrown questions at me saying “how can we direct what a person learns if he/she were to direct his/her own learning. We cannot ensure that they learn the desired material”.
O ye of little faith. Let me address this in the next section, have some confidence.
2. Confidence – Is the person willing to try out the learning(s) at work?
Why is a person reluctant to try out what they’ve have learnt in trainings?
At the heart of it, it boils down to this dialogue within their heads – “This looks good, but will it work for me? Will I be able to do it?” The only way to ease such fears is for a person to be able to try out the concepts and theories in a safe environment.
Such an environment must provide business-like reality to mirror the complexity and challenges in the working world. Games and activities that promote luck will not be able to allay the fears of a person. In short, the learning environment must bring participants into a mental and emotional state of real business.
So fear not doubters, simulations can be designed to a person towards the key learnings by incorporating the raw concept of it directly into design, with the environment built around it.
Think of a maze, there are many twists and turns, and the participants are free to take their personalised actions towards achieving them. However, a simulation also has rules, a series of check and balances to ensure that the participants do not stray away, tethering them to an area where the learnings are key. This not only helps them with recall, but also amplifies the feeling of empowerment with regards to their actions.
3. Simplicity – Is the learning & tools hindering implementation?
During my years in an oil and gas company, I once attended a highly-regarded decision making workshop. The content from the vendor was solid, but their process of decision-making took about 2 days to complete. In a normal operational environment this would be near impossible to actually execute.
At other times, I was confronted with tools so complex that it was just not possible to understand without an instructor’s help. Needless to say, I didn’t apply any of the tools.
Methodology and tools should be simple and take no more than 15 minutes to learn. This is so that a person can teach colleagues the tool, and still have 45 minutes to apply the tools in a typical 1-hour business meeting. Tools that are simple will reduce the barrier of entry into the workplace.
Our strategic thinking simulation – Allocate.
This is the direction where I aspire to bring Think Codex to – a simulation design company that focuses on making learning sustainable. If we are to innovate the L&D in our organizations, it does not require sophisticated digital products but can begin with 3 simple core principles in the form of Recall, Confidence and Simplicity.
Talent Development professionals are constantly bombarded with emails, calls and chats from learning solution providers. The options provided can be quite diverse and many providers claim expertise in multiple categories. How then do we filter the ones that provide quality-learning solutions from those are merely great at marketing?
To understand the quality of a learning solution, it needs to be tested against 3 types of objectives. They are:
Cognitive Objective: What do you want a person to know? Affective Objective: What do you want a person to think and care about? Behavioural Objective: What do you want a person to be able to do?
It is imperative that all 3 objectives are present in a single learning solution. The failure of this, gives rise to 3 types of employee:
The Opinionated Employee Opinions of trainers or dominant participants form the basis of discussions in learning solutions that are without proper cognitive objectives. While opinions can be based off experience, we also know that each experience is unique and cannot be used as learning theories. Proper cognitive objectives provide participants with solid concepts, models and processes that are applicable in various context of work. Danger arises when employees value opinions as basis of action without doing checks on relevant theory. This makes the learnings unreliable for it could not be replicated consistently across similar situations.
The Compliant Employee Once a participant learns truth from a theory (cognitive objective), ideas will begin to form. However, learning solutions without affective objectives do not provide the opportunity for participants to nurture their own ideas – a crucial step for ownership. A lot of training focuses only on theory and then straight into action steps. If employees do not create and own their ideas, we will have an organization filled with compliant workers. Such an organization will find it impossible to innovate because great ideas are collaborative in nature – as it requires many people to contribute and refine it collectively at all levels.
The Hesitant Employee The final objective of an effective learning solution is to provide an avenue where participants can test out their ideas. The iterative process of trying out ideas and improving them helps to validate their ideas. When the ideas become refined, this will lead to sustainability as participants are confident to apply it in the working environment. Without an ecosystem to test out ideas, employees remain hesitant as they would deem it too risky to try out unproven ideas in the real life working environment. Whatever that has been learned will unfortunately remain in the classroom, which wastes the resource and effort of the company.
The next time we evaluate a learning solution, test it against the 3 objectives and these questions. What do you want a person to know? What do you want a person to think or care about? What do want a person to be able to do? With this, you will be able to source out the best learning solution for your employees.
Call to Action
We design simulations to ensure the key learnings are applied back into the workplace by providing key learning theories, providing the space for participants to gain ownership of their learning as well as giving them the space to practice the skills. We strive to combine all 3 objectives because we want effective learning solutions for our clients. Contact us to learn how!
And if you like our reads feel free to comment below or click subscribe for more!
