TRANSFORMING LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT PRACTICES INTO A STRATEGIC, VALUE-ADDING BUSINESS SOLUTION: A

CONCEPTUAL AND BUSINESS-MINDED FRAMEWORK

PH.D RESEARCH PROPOSAL

COLLOQUIUM

13 MAY 2015

CHARLES COTTER

STUDENT NUMBER: 21512884

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

• Phillips (2005) and Greer (2001), cite the critics of the HRM function who demanded more measurement, accountability and demonstrable strategic value

• KPMG (2015), HR leaders are facing a crisis of credibility among their senior peers

• CIPD confirmed that the most common change is for Learning and Development (L&D) professionals to become more business-focused

• PWC Global survey (2012), the reality of business today dictates that organisations will have to grow the talent that they need organically when finding it is constrained

• The “war for talent” is shifting – and is becoming the “war to develop talent” (Deloitte, 2013).

NEED FOR THE RESEARCH STUDY• McKinsey global survey (2014), 50% of the respondents indicated that they

see organisational capability building as one of their top strategic priorities, but many stated that their companies could improve substantially

• It has become a strategic imperative for L&D professionals to show the training Return-on-Investment (ROI)

• The traditional approaches to learning evaluation of Kirkpatrick (1998); Phillips et. al. (2007) and Brinkerhoff (2006) have been superseded by a more modern business imperative comprised of six levels

• It is apparent that there is a need to transform the current L& D practices to be more metric and measurement-oriented, as a credible means of demonstrating the strategic business value of these L&D interventions.

LEARNING EVALUATION

PURPOSE AND AIMS OF THE RESEARCH STUDY

• Research problem statement:

“Learning and Development practices exhibit the inability to actively contribute to business performance at a strategic level”

• Research objectives:

To determine the current strategic levels of L& D impact

To construct an internationally-relevant and multi-disciplinary applicable, Strategic Business Management-aligned, Learning and Development measurement tool (scorecard)

To develop business-valued processes to transform and re-position the L& D function to

become a strategic business partner

ABBREVIATED LITERATURE REVIEW

• Learning and Development (L&D) context and environment

• L&D challenges

• Status Quo of L&D

• Identified trends in L&D

• Assessing the impact of L&D activity

• Benefits of optimizing L&D practices

• Recommended, future-focused strategic imperatives of L&D

SOURCES OF LITERATURE REVIEW• L&D Professional Associations:

Association for Talent Development (ATD) – USA-based

Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) – UK-based

• Researchers:

Bersin by Deloitte and O’Leonard

• Global Management Consultancies:

Deloitte

KPMG

McKinsey

PWC

IDENTIFIED TRENDS IN L&D

• #1: Change to a strategic mind-set and alignment with business goals

• #2: Change to evidence-based, business metrics and predictive analytics

• #3: Change in learning architecture and design

• #4: Changed learning structures and roles

• #5: Enhanced skills set of L&D professionals

IDENTIFIED TRENDS IN L&D

• #6: Extended learning and knowledge management

• #7: Change to social and e-learning (70-20-10 model)

• #8: Change to learning organization culture

• #9: Changed process from (functional) ADDIE model to strategic, learning solutions business model

• #10: Change from a “skills buying” to a “skills building” HRM approach

RESEARCH APPROACH

• Exploratory: These trends will have to be interrogated in-depth, further and the resultant research outcome will be:

A measurement scorecard

The development of a conceptual, business-focused model to improve the business impact of L&D interventions

RESEARCH DESIGN, PROCESS AND METHODOLOGY

• Chapter Three (3) overview

• Research process

• Data collection

• Research sample

• Research instrument: Questionnaire

• Statistical method and process

• Reliability and Validity

DATA COLLECTION

• This research project predominantly will use a quantitative (positivistic) approach.

• Surveys will provide the PH.D researcher a picture of what many people think or report doing (the sample group), this picture is then generalised to the larger population.

• The primary research method that will be used is a structured questionnaire comprised of a significant number of closed-ended questions.

RESEARCH SAMPLE• Type: a convenience sample group, of approximately 3 000 Business and

L&D Managers and Professionals/practitioners

• Access: These will be sourced from various business contacts, databases, networks and social media platforms e.g. LinkedIn and business references from multiple industries, both locally and internationally.

• Location: The majority of these respondents will be based in South Africa, but will also represent North American, Australian and European continents.

• Representativity and generalization: The PH.D researcher is of firm belief that this sample will be representative of a cross-section of respondents.

RESPONDENTS• Positions: Respondent industries will be representative of both the public and private sectors

L&D and training managers; Training administrators and skills development facilitators; Line/business managers; and Academics/subject matter experts

• Form of communication: These respondents will be contacted directly by means of electronic mail through the completion of a self-administered questionnaire.

• Reach: The total reach of this research project will be in excess of 3 000 contacts.

• Response rate: The anticipated response rate is 10% and, consequently, a total sample group of 300 respondents are expected to participate in the PH.D research survey.

• Independent research variable: The current L&D practices

• Dependent variable: The resultant strategic, business impact and value on the achievement of business results

THE RESEARCH INSTRUMENT: QUESTIONNAIRE

• Subject to a comprehensive literature study, the 10 foremost characteristics of Strategic L&D will be identified.

• From these characteristics, respective sub-factors were identified. These sub-factors will serve as the basis of the construction of an itemized questionnaire.

• A four point Likert-type scale will be utilised, ranging from a descriptor of 1 = strongly disagree to 4 = strongly agree.

• The researcher will use the theoretical guidelines of Babbie (2005) as a checklist to ensure the proper and correct formulation of research questions/items.

• Questionnaire construction guidelines will also be consulted as well as the benefits of the questionnaire instrument.

• The questionnaire will also be tested with a pilot group before distribution to the larger research population.

THE STATISTICAL METHOD AND PROCESS

• Quantitative methods

• The statistical procedures that will be performed in the proposed research study can be regarded as descriptive and inferential statistics.

• The different descriptive statistics used in the proposed, PH.D study include:

Means; Standard deviations; Factor analysis and Frequency distributions/percentages

• The inferential statistics used in the proposed PH.D research study include analysis of variance (ANOVA).

• In general, the purpose of ANOVA is to test for significant differences between means. ANOVA is similar to the t-test, but this is used when there are more than two groups to compare.

• ANOVA testing will be utilised to draw inferences regarding the sub-group comparisons of the research

sample.

RESEARCH TIMETABLE/PLAN Research task/function

Responsibility Duration Expected completion date

#1: Completion and submission of research proposal

Researcher (Charles Cotter) 2 weeks 4 May 2015

#2: Review and approval

Research Supervisor (Prof. P.D Gerber) 2 days 6 May 2015

#3: Submission to NWU

Researcher (Charles Cotter) 1 day 6 May 2015

#4: Presentation of colloquium

Researcher (Charles Cotter)Researcher (Charles Cotter)

1 day 13 May 2015

#5: Approval of research proposal

NWU 2 months July 2015

#6: Commencement of research and completion of Chapter 1

Researcher (Charles Cotter) 1 month August 2015

#7: Review of Chapter 1 Research Supervisor (Prof. P.D Gerber) 1 week August 2015

#8: Completion of research (Chapter 2)

Researcher (Charles Cotter) 4 months November 2015

#9: Review of Chapter 2 Research Supervisor (Prof. P.D Gerber) 1 week November 2015

#10: Completion of research (Chapter 3)

Researcher (Charles Cotter) 2 months January 2016

#11: Review of Chapter 3 Research Supervisor (Prof. P.D Gerber) 1 week January 2016

#12: Completion of data collection and analysis and writing of research (Chapter 4)

Researcher (Charles Cotter) 5 months June 2016

#13: Statistical analysis Professional service: Statistician 1 month June 2016

#14: Review of Chapter 4 Research Supervisor (Prof. P.D Gerber) 2 weeks June 2016

RESEARCH TIMETABLE/PLAN #15: Completion of data interpretation

and writing of research (Chapter 5)

Researcher (Charles Cotter) 3 months September 2016

#16: Review of Chapter 5 (part 1) Research Supervisor (Prof. P.D Gerber)

2 weeks September 2016

#17: Completion of recommendations and writing of research (Chapter 5)

Researcher (Charles Cotter) 2 months November 2016

#18: Review of Chapter 5 (part 2) Research Supervisor (Prof. P.D Gerber)

2 weeks November 2016

#19: Consolidation of PH.D research report

Researcher (Charles Cotter) 1 month December 2016

#20: Language Editing Professional service: Language Editor

1 month January 2017

#21: Writing of article for publication in academic journal

Researcher (Charles Cotter) 1 month February 2017

#22: Submission of final Thesis Researcher (Charles Cotter) 1 month March 2017

#23: Assessment of Thesis NWU appointed external assessor/markers

2 months May 2017

RESEARCH BUDGETResearch Cost Item

Budgeted amount

Research-related data and telecommunication costs R3 500

Transport costs (to NWU campus) R1 500

Professional Service: Statistician R10 000

Professional Service: Language Editor R3 500

Printing and binding of Thesis R3 500

TOTAL R22 000

PROPOSED THESIS STRUCTURE

• Conceptual overview and focus:

Overview of current L&D processes and practicesDetermining the characteristics of strategic L&DBusiness management requirements of L&DMeasuring the current strategic business impact of L&D Identifying the strategic gaps of current L&DConstructing a conceptual model for a L&D ScorecardRecommendations of how to re-position the L&D function to

become a strategic business partner and solutions-provider

• Chapter Layout

SIGNIFICANCE/EXPECTED OUTCOMES OF THE RESEARCH STUDY

• In the best interests of L&D managers to build a business case to justify their right to existence and secondly to pull the plug on ineffective L&D interventions and practices.

• From the perspective of business managers, funds allocated to training can be better utilized, if they can envisage a quantifiable return on investment and can better harness L&D as a strategic lever of gaining a competitive advantage.

• The benefits of L&D serve as the backdrop to this PH.D research study, because they shed light on current levels of business performance, they guide and inform decision-making to improve the status quo and also help to make recommendations that can enhance the effect of L&D interventions and practices.

• The research anticipates finding low levels of strategic impact of L&D programs.

• Furthermore, the researcher will construct a strategically-relevant, L&D scorecard and develop business intelligence and recommendations on how to transform and re-position the L& D function to become a strategic business partner.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

• Summary of key points

• Conclusion

• Questions

• The way forward