Thanks for taking the time to leave a thoughtful comment here. I enjoyed looking at your website and noted that Melbourne is your base - I was there once over the Christmas holidays visiting with close friends - this was in the late 80s. In those days, I was manager for the customer training group of a semiconductor equipment company. From 1994 I have been traveling around to many spots teaching semiconductor service engineers how to train their customers in the operation and maintenance of their factory equipment. It is very difficult for these trainers to provide distance learning because of the need to allow time for (hands-on) practice in the adjustment, calibration, maintenance, and troubleshooting of these large machines.

But to address your comments a bit - although the people I work with do not typically have the opportunity to use distance learning, I do not limit the term trainer to those that deliver face to face training. Not at all. Indeed, a real “trainer” -being a performance improvement consultant- knows when training (whether face to face, online, or any other format) is inappropriate and creates an alternate performance solution to training. Or at least calls in the proper specialists that can do it. In the case of distance learning, where groups are effective, sure Twitter is one optional tool. In my world (equipment training that has specific required performances), groups are typically not effective, and if they had a place, twitter would be my last choice because of the 140 char limitation.

But honestly, none of that is what I meant anyway. I wasn’t referring to trainers who use Twitter as a training tool. What I meant is that those who are sharing “training” or “learning” ideas back and forth through the Twitterverse are typically not real trainers. My post defined real trainers as those who put performance improvement front and center. For clarity I cited certain leaders that these trainers try to emulate. From what I see, the vast majority of those who claim to be learning professionals that are chatting across the Twitterverse are completely caught up in “collaborative” learning and hence the importance of social media tools. In reality, much of this hoopla is led by individuals who are owners or employees of Web 2.0 software companies, many of whom have no real understanding of the performance improvement model (again, see leaders cited in my post).

It is not a case of being closed to social sites and tools, although I agree that some people are. Social sites and tools have their place once the learning objectives (outcomes, whatever) have been clarified and the resources for performance improvement have been identified. I have found that collaboration is not typically the best learning activity in equipment training but I can see how it would apply in teaching skills involved in selling or leadership (for example). And, outside of the learning world, certainly collaboration is an important problem-solving and creative tool for companies to use.

But those who are closed-minded to the use of social learning tools are not alone in their closed-mindedness. What I see across the Twitterverse are so-called learning professionals on the other extreme. These folks have essentially pronounced the death of “formal” learning (whether online or face to face) in favor of “social” learning. Such terminology is, in itself, nonsense (see link in my post). It is a closed mindedness at the other end of the continuum, but one that is easy to sell to the masses that frankly know little about HPT (human performance technology) and are so easily enamored by trends both social and technological. I use the word masses because it has been my experience that there are many influences on business decision-making, not all of them informed. I best stop here before I get into rambling war stories. ; - )

I hope this clarified my thoughts a bit more. Even so, I may have stirred up even more issues!

Also do you restrict the term ‘trainer’ to mean only those who deliver face-to-face training? Isn’t it just as reasonable to include people who support learners in distance learning programs as trainers, they provide direction, support, additional learning activities, and so forth. The only difference is that they’re not face-to-face. If we do include these people then I do know people who Twitter, they use it to form learning groups - as a way of sharing knowledge, relevant links, asking questions and the like. Groups may be formed using other tools such as Ping, it just depends on what the group may prefer. I’d imagine that GoogleWave will be used quite a lot in this context, allowing as it does online collaboration through wiki-like tools and live chat.
Personally I think that ‘trainers’ who are closed to the idea of trying Twitter and other ’social’ sites are simply denying themselves another tool to add to their learning programs. It doesn’t matter if you label a tool ’social’, ‘informal’, or whatever, real trainers are most interested in using tools that help learners to learn.

http://www.gloriagery.com/

I met Gloria once and she has always stuck in my mind. Very interesting and knowledgeable person on EPSS. She experiments with many different learning tools.

Hope all is well with you Richard,

Take care,

Mike

I have been working in the manufacturing environment for three years as an instructional designer. I felt something was missing. Often, we as designers create instruction, deliver it to our customers, wish them well and move on. Those days are gone. I was searching for a marriage and I found it. Although it is not HPT, I believe elements of HPT work in the background is an important part of the mix.

I purchased and read the book Developing and Measuring Training the Six Sigma Way. It made sense. As a way to apply it, I completed Six Sigma training to get my first belt-the Yellow Belt.

Six Sigma gives us tools to target a customer’s business metrics, and the tools to ensure that our training helps achieve the metric that is important to our customer. Six Sigma causes us to remove the variation out of our own design practices. We align business needs with our training expertise and give them the precise training that will positively impact their business numbers. And that is how we measure the ROI on our training instructions and demonstrate we are a profit center and not a cost center.

Thank you for all you do. I recently met a former colleague of yours, Julian Serda. I enjoyed my time with him. He said to tell you hello.

Best regards in all you do,
David Griffin
H-E-B Grocery Company