Who really decides about learning?

Cette page n'est pas disponible en français Choisissez langues
Anglais, Allemand

A question to start with

Many companies and organisations want people to truly take responsibility for their own learning. They want learning to be driven by personal motivation and intrinsic initiative. At the same time, organisations often decide very precisely who learns what, when they learn it, how they learn it, and how success will be measured.

 

This contradiction has been on my mind recently, and I would like to invite you to join me on a short thought journey.

 

Let me begin with a question: Who is responsible for learning in your organisation?

 

If you feel like it, don't read on just yet. Take a moment to answer that question for yourself and your organisation. Have you got your answer? Then I have a second question for you. Assuming your organisation has a structured approach to learning, often in the form of leadership development programmes, talent programmes or similar initiatives:

 

Who decides in your learning programmes:

• what is learned?
• when it is learned?
• how it is learned?
• and how success is measured?

 

Most people I ask this question answer: Human Resources. Or Learning & Development, in consultation with leadership, perhaps after consulting the target group. What I usually observe is that, sometimes following a needs analysis, not only the overall framework is defined in great detail, but also the individual learning topics.

Which leads me—and perhaps you—to another question: If people are expected to take responsibility for their own learning, how much responsibility are we actually willing to hand over to them?

 

The tension between ownership and control

Many organisations want people to actively engage in their own development, to drive it forward and to take responsibility for their own learning. Learning should be relevant to everyday practice. Given the significant investment of time, energy and resources in development programmes, organisations understandably want learning to lead to meaningful changes in day-to-day work.

 

Although I see signs of change, I still frequently observe that this responsibility is expected from learners while, at the same time, the way learning is designed actually undermines that ownership.

 

For a long time, the standard approach has been clear and familiar. A series of predefined modules determines the learning content. First, participants learn what leadership entails: leadership styles, situational leadership and related concepts. This is followed by self-leadership, leading teams, delegation, conflict management and so on. All of this takes place on predetermined days, often in a training venue. Afterwards, participants are asked which elements they have been able to apply in their daily work.

 

The content is predetermined. The learning objectives are predetermined. The learning formats are predetermined. And the success criteria? Those are predetermined as well.

 

How much ownership is really left if the most important decisions have already been made?

 

Why organisations work this way

I understand where this comes from and why organisations design learning in this way. After all, what would happen if everyone simply chose whatever they wanted to learn? Standardisation provides clarity and consistency. Learning programmes need to be planned and coordinated. And, of course, organisations want to ensure that people work on the topics that are essential to their success and, ultimately, to the organisation's future.

 

Yet I wonder whether this approach is based on an underlying assumption: That learning is more predictable and controllable than it actually is. This desire for control creates an inherent tension with the reality of individual learning processes.

 

A different way of thinking about learning

How can these two perspectives coexist? The alternative to control is not randomness. In our approach, there is still room for professional input, models and conceptual frameworks. The difference is that these do not form the starting point. Instead, they support each participant's individual learning process. Giving learners more responsibility does not automatically mean that "everyone simply does whatever they want."

The real strength lies in defining a framework that provides direction while remaining meaningful to the learners themselves. Within that framework, there is ample space for people to make their own choices—and, with those choices, to take genuine responsibility for their own learning.

 

Defining the playing field

In a leadership programme, this might mean identifying the key situations that truly matter. What are the moments in which leadership really makes a difference in our organisation? In which situations do we expect leaders to be able to act effectively? That framework is provided. It defines the playing field within which learning takes place.

 

From that moment onwards, responsibility shifts to the participants. They reflect on these key situations, individually as well as in conversations with peers and with their own manager. They identify their own development needs. Which situations are most relevant to me? What do I want to work on? Where do I want to grow? Just as every person is different, every learning challenge is different. Yet people can still embark on that learning journey together within the same programme.

 

Same programme, different learning challenges

Let's look at two new leaders: Tom and Katrin. Both have been in their first leadership role for a few months.

Tom's current challenge is developing greater presence. How can he build more confidence? How can he communicate his views more clearly? How can he project greater confidence when interacting with his own manager, his team members and his colleagues? How can he fully step into his leadership role in every direction?

Katrin faces a very different challenge. She is asking herself: How can I make better use of both my own resources and those of my team? How can I set clearer boundaries instead of constantly taking care of everyone? How can I leave responsibility for certain issues where it belongs—with my team members?

 

Learning through everyday practice

Once participants are clear about what truly matters for their own development, the next step is to approach those situations differently. Tom prepares for his next meeting with his manager. Will he maintain eye contact? Will he express his disagreement in a way that ensures his perspective is genuinely heard?

A member of Katrin's team approaches her once again with a recurring complaint. Will she immediately take over the problem? Or will she help the employee develop a solution independently? This is what learning is about. Trying out new behaviours in everyday practice. Designing personal experiments. Reflecting on what happens. Observing the results. Seeking feedback. And continuing to experiment.

 

One role, one programme, different development paths

The role is the same. The programme is the same. The development challenges are entirely different. How unfortunate would it be if both participants first had to work through the same standard content before they were able to focus on what truly matters to them at this point in their development?

 

What does this require?

What does it take to make this possible? What kind of learning environment supports this? And what does it require of us as learning designers?

 

I believe it is about creating space for learners to set their own priorities, while providing orientation through key situations that define the playing field. Once I, as a learner, know what I want to work on, impulses and new perspectives, reflection and dialogue, and support in not losing sight of what I actually want to develop amidst the pressures of everyday work become valuable. The challenge is to maintain that focus in day-to-day practice. Taking responsibility for your own learning does not mean leaving people to manage on their own.

 

Creating the conditions for ownership

Perhaps the task of learning programmes is not to steer learning as completely as possible. Perhaps their task is to create the conditions in which people can take responsibility for their own learning.

 

Which decisions about learning are learners in your programmes already making for themselves today?