ABOUT THE EXPERT
Steve Willis is a Master Trainer and Vice President of Professional Services at VitalSmarts.
READ MORE

A little while back, I showed up for a class and found myself surrounded by introverts. And not just any old introverts, I’m talking about an elite group of genetically enhanced super-introverts hand picked from across the company to attend my class.

I asked a question . . . silence. I waited them out . . . in silence. We watched funny videos . . . (you guessed it) in silence. And just to be clear, I’m talking the kind that’s way beyond the sound of silence that Simon and Garfunkel were singing about.

Anyway , nuff said about my group. I’m interested in your input here. Write in and tell me what you’ve done to work with a group like this one. Yours truly . . . in silence.

ABOUT THE EXPERT
Steve Willis is a master trainer and vice president of professional services at VitalSmarts.
READ MORE

I’m not a superstitious person, but I do have a set number of training rituals I adhere to. You know, things like always using a three water-cup rotation to ensure I stay hydrated, and never, never, never (and I mean never) training with spare change in your pocket—I find I’m just too tempted to break out in a stirring round of “I got change that jingle, jangle, jingles as I go trainin’ merrily along.”

One ritual I never miss is handing out the evaluations at the end of the course—because you need to know how you did, right? In fact, this ritual is so regular and significant that I started thinking of trainings in terms of the overall score from the eval. When people asked how my session had gone, I’d respond with something like, “Well, you know, it was about a 5.7.” I even got pretty good at predicting the overall scores before I finished the training.

Last week I taught back-to-back classes. The first session was okay (it was about a 5.4), but the second session was on track to be at least a 5.8 and maybe even a 5.9. Just as I was whipping the class into a late afternoon learning frenzy, with a 5.9 clearly in sight, a participant from the previous day peeked through the door and beckoned me out of the class.

I knew if I ducked out to talk to this guy, I’d be looking at a 5.4 at best. I looked over and saw he was still there waiting for me, so I took one last look at my 5.9, gave the class an exercise to work on, and slipped out of the back of the room.

He apologized for interrupting my session and then said, “I just wanted to come by and let you know that I had a crucial conversation this morning with my boss that I’d been putting off. It was a conversation I had thought was hopeless, but in the end it turned out great. In fact it worked out so well this morning, I’ve set up another one with my director for this afternoon. I just wanted to let you know that all that stuff you were teaching us really worked. Thanks.” We talked for a minute more before he took off for his second crucial conversation.

It’s experiences like these that help underscore that some rituals aren’t the driving reason for why we do things. In other words, it’s not all about the evals! Yes, they are helpful. Yes, they provide valuable improvement feedback. But, in the end, the reason we step in front of any class shouldn’t be the elusive 5.9, but to help individuals meet and overcome the significant challenges they’re facing. Thank you, Justin. I’m glad you took the time to remind me of this last week.

Steve Willis’ From the Road column will now be published in the Trainer Talk Newsletter, our e-newsletter for VitalSmarts trainers. To read past From the Road articles, visit the newsletter archive.

ABOUT THE EXPERT
Steve Willis is a Master Trainer and Vice President of Professional Services at VitalSmarts.
READ MORE

When participants are creating their own change plan in Influencer Training, how can I help them create an actual results statement instead of getting bogged down describing vague goals or strategies?

I have a question from the Influencer Training, regarding Clear Measurable Results.

I found some very helpful information on the Think Like an Influencer web site. Joseph spoke about how this step breathes life into the Influence Challenge—by helping us avoid confusing means and methods with the end result. The connection that I don’t want people to miss is that this result statement will impact their personal motivation (Source 1). It should be answering why they should care about this challenge.

Yet I find it hard to get people in the class to get beyond vague goals (such as team building) or making their clear measurable result a vital behavior (such as hand washing compliance). I have tried to help participants that are coming up with vague goals by asking them such questions as, “What outcome are you not achieving or not achieving well because of poor collaboration and teamwork?” Hand washing compliance is a substantial goal, but it is a vital behavior for reducing nosocomial infections. What suggestions do you have for facilitating this part of the program?

I have found that some people have to think about their result statement between classes. It takes time for some people to absorb and sort out results from vital behaviors. As a facilitator, should I have the participants share their goal with me by the second day (we usually have a week between Day 1 and Day 2) to see if they are on the right track?

This is a great question, and one that many people struggle with.

When we were first designing the course we had a bit of debate about whether to include results in the training. It seemed like most everyone was familiar with SMART goals, and the importance of having measurable outcomes. And so we wondered if there was a lot of value in covering it again. In the end we included it because even though people know that they should have measurable results, they aren’t always very skilled at coming up with results that are measurable, what you really want, and time bound. So with this in mind, here are some ideas that may be helpful.

I’ve found it really useful to have a discussion about common hang-ups and snags when introducing the three criteria of an effective result. We talk about examples of results that are specific and measurable, what you really want, and time bound, and then I ask the following question: “As you think about these three criteria, where do you see people in your organization struggle most?” People say things like, “What you really want.” At which point you’re able to have people give examples (both obvious and more subtle) of how and where people get off track. You can even use some of the common mistakes you’ve gotten from previous classes as examples for the class to analyze, and get them to describe why it doesn’t measure up.

I think your suggestion of checking in with people on their result is also helpful. At the end of day one, participants get a period of time to apply their newly learned skills to their own influence challenge. This is a great time to float between groups and check on how they are coming along with their results statement. You can coach, provide some examples, and in some cases, even give them assignments to do some research before they get too far into their Influencer experience.

Now, there have been times where I’ve run into some tricky situations (not all influence challenges are created equal). You mentioned hand washing as an example of means/ends inversion. We worked with a hospital that desperately wanted to achieve higher levels of hand washing compliance. We asked them the question you suggest (which by the way is a great way to get people to evaluate whether they’ve identified a vital behavior or a result), and it turned out that while they were interested in reducing nosocomial infection rates, they didn’t feel they could economically measure and prove a direct link between hand washing and their desired result. So in this case, they focused on hand washing as a vital behavior and a result. They realized that getting stuck on the result could derail the benefit from increased hand washing compliance so, in essence, they use hand washing as a surrogate measure of their desired results.

Hopefully these ideas will be as useful to you as they have been to me, and if you have additional tips that have worked for you please send them our way.
Steve

ABOUT THE EXPERT
Steve Willis is a master trainer and vice president of professional services at VitalSmarts.
READ MORE

I’m on the road training almost every week—training here, training there, training, training everywhere. So, it’s a rare and nice occasion when I can be in my home state of Utah for three or more consecutive days. And, it’s even nicer when those consecutive days involve the annual REACH Conference.

REACH 2010 was held August 4-5 in Salt Lake City. It was great to see so many familiar faces from sessions I’ve conducted over the years and to meet so many new certified trainers. I loved catching up with people and especially loved the new ideas and insights they shared about how they are using VitalSmarts training materials. One new insight came from David Zinger, a Certified Trainer from Manitoba, Canada.

David has a great way to prepare his participants to engage in exercises. While I’ll highlight how he uses it to set up the Angry Accountant exercise in Crucial Conversations, I want to emphasize that this approach is not limited to this specific exercise or program.

After he introduces the first skill of Master My Stories, David asks participants to turn to page 140 in their manuals and take a couple of minutes to read and discuss the definitions of facts and stories with a statement like this, “Take a couple of minutes to review the definitions on page 140 because we’re going to use them in the next exercise.” He gives them a chance to review and talk about the definitions and then launches them right into an exercise that allows them to put those definitions to use. This exercise puts the responsibility for learning squarely on the participant and puts you in a position to coach and clarify.

I encourage you to try this out in one of your own upcoming sessions (In fact, I used this approach today during an Influencer class) and I think you’ll agree with me that David is definitely on to something here—Thanks again, David!

ABOUT THE EXPERT
Steve Willis is a Master Trainer and Vice President of Professional Services at VitalSmarts.
READ MORE

How would you answer this question I received in training? A participant asked: If you are talking with someone who won’t let go of their story (e.g., they continue to stay in victim role) what do you do?

When I run into this type of situation, there are a couple of approaches that work well for me. I often have people identify their story and give it some sort of title. I write that title on piece of paper, on a flip chart, or someplace where we can both look at it. Then I draw a circle around the title and add four or five spokes (straight lines that start at the edge of the circle and move outward). I explain that each of those lines represents a contributing factor to the story. This then helps us look at all the contributing factors (including actions the individual has taken or not taken) individually, as well as the collective impact.

Another tactic I’ve found useful involves pointing out consequences. Instead of trying to get people to relinquish their stories immediately, I find that exploring natural consequences of holding and acting upon stories works at times. It helps people to see the natural extension/conclusion of their current way of thinking.

Hope this helps,
Steve

ABOUT THE EXPERT
Steve Willis is a master trainer and vice president of professional services at VitalSmarts.
READ MORE

I recently observed a new facilitator ask the group to summarize their understanding of a particular concept she had just taught. She got several responses, the last of which was inaccurate—not mostly accurate with a shade of inaccuracy, we’re talking the “I’ll take wrong answers for a thousand,” the old, “surely you must be joking Mr. Answer-pants,” the . . . well you get the picture. So what do you do when a participant gives an answer that is clearly wrong?

Well, the new facilitator did what most facilitators might do. She took a deep breath and said, “Yes.” And then proceeded to give the correct answer. This tactic is known as the build approach and is a way to build on what the participant said. Sounds like a good solution, right? You don’t make the participant feel bad and you still get the correct answer out there—it’s a popular tactic many facilitators use for those very reasons. And yet, in this case it was less than effective . . . and dare I say, wrong?

By answering “yes” the facilitator sent the message to the individual and the class that, “you’ve just given a mostly correct answer” when in fact the person had given an entirely wrong answer. Bottom line is a facilitator should use the build approach only when a participant offers an incomplete answer, not an inaccurate answer.

When a participant gives the wrong answer, it’s much more effective to say something like, “Actually, it’s different from what you’ve described. A more accurate description would be . . .” Or, “concept X is more closely aligned with Y. Who can tell me why that is?” This way, you can affirm your respect for the individual, and ensure all the participants (especially the ones who give inaccurate responses) learn the ideas, concepts, and skills correctly.

Next time you find yourself in this situation, do your participants a huge favor. Don’t accept the completely wrong, or even the mostly wrong answers. Instead, help them see how their response was inaccurate—in a respectful manner.

ABOUT THE EXPERT
Steve Willis is a master trainer and vice president of professional services at VitalSmarts.
READ MORE

I recently led an out-of-state training session. As usual, I arrived early to make my last-minute preparations and found that this fifteen-person session was to be held in a five-hundred person auditorium! Good thing I arrived early and—despite the room coordinator’s eloquent Manifest Destiny-esque argument that people need their space—was able to change rooms.

So this month I’ve been thinking about propinquity, the property of being close together, and how it affects the learning experience. And if you’re wondering if it’s really that big a deal, the answer is “yes.” How you set up the classroom determines the amount and types of interactions and learning experiences your participants have.

For example, it’s really difficult to facilitate a class discussion that involves everyone when the room is set up classroom style—with participants seated in rows. It’s also really difficult to teach a class of twenty to twenty-five participants and involve everyone when the room is shaped more like the narrow hallway that leads up to the room than a room itself.

So yes, propinquity matters. Changing or adjusting the seating space in the class (for example, seating participants in small groups) can have a dramatic impact on the type and quality of the group’s interactions.

ABOUT THE EXPERT
Steve Willis is a master trainer and vice president of professional services at VitalSmarts.
READ MORE

When I was boy, I frequently watched old western shows on TV. I liked them because of the rough and rowdy, shoot ‘em up action. At the time, I had most of the shows memorized word-for-word. And while I can’t remember much, one line still sticks with me: “Well boys, looks like we’re just gonna have to wait ‘em out!”

Over the years, I’ve remembered and tried to adhere to this advice—especially when it comes to training. For example, after asking a thoughtful question, I’d wait ‘em out (wait in silence for participants to respond) instead of rushing in with both guns blazing and firing off half a dozen responses. And my wait ‘em out technique served me well. That is, until I ran into Dr. Ethna Reid.

Dr. Reid is a professional educator who has dedicated her career to improving the teaching of children. After many years of study, she’s discovered teachers who increase the rate of participation among students are more effective. She also quickly discovered (and was equally quick to point out) that while I was good at waiting ‘em out, I missed the opportunity to increase participation during the wait.

Now, as I approach a discussion question, I do something a little different to increase the rate of participation. I set expectations before asking the question. For example, I say something like, “I’m going to give you about fifteen seconds to think about where and how you could use the skills we’ve discussed, and then I’ll ask some of you to share your thoughts.” Then I wait (the part I’m especially good at) and then call on people to share. I’ve found this simple approach gives people time to process the question and increases the number of people who actually process a response. It also produces more thoughtful participation from the group.

I’m always amazed at how little adjustments in my approach make such a significant difference in participation among the participants and the rate at which they internalize the principles and skills. Thanks to Ethna, I’m leaving my “Steve . . . the wait ‘em out kid” days behind.

ABOUT THE EXPERT
Steve Willis is a master trainer and vice president of professional services at VitalSmarts.
READ MORE

So you sign up for a course—one that furthers your development plan, one that offers skills to tackle the challenges you face, or maybe just one that fulfills your learning quota. Now you’re enrolled, and your first thoughts are about the training itself. “Will it be any good? Will I like the instructor? Will I have to role play?”

Often, our satisfaction with our investment in time and money is determined by the answers to these initial questions. If the answers happen to be “yes,” “yes,” and “little-to-none,” then we immediately feel we’ve made the right choice. However, while these answers are good indicators of a participant’s experience during the class, I believe what happens after the course is actually more important. So what can you do to make sure the after isn’t neglected? Here are some ideas.

Target specific applications for the skills both during and after training. We worked with hospital managers in Florida who surveyed participants three months after the training to test whether or not they were using what they’d learned. The results indicated that while employees loved the training experience, they rarely, if ever, used the skills on work-related issues. As they probed a bit further, they found that most had only used the skills at home. Apparently, employees were clear on where and how the skills applied at home and not so familiar with application to their jobs.

So, leaders identified four specific, work-related applications. They provided employees with a “when you see, hear, or experience this . . . use your skills.” Subsequently, people started using the skills at work (go figure). Leaders also incorporated these applications during the training so participants could use them as their “acid test” while learning the skills.

Build skill evaluation into formal processes. Another group we worked with added a couple of discussion items to their formal project post mortem process. This meeting was designed to evaluate the success of their project. They simply added questions to evaluate how successfully or poorly they had used their newly-learned skills while working on the project. This evaluation forced employees to consider the degree to which they were practicing their new behaviors.

So there are a couple ideas to consider. If you’d like to explore this idea in further detail, please join me on April 30 for our next Master Trainer Live Chat. I’ll be answering questions on a wide range of topics, including (but not limited to) rollout and follow up.

ABOUT THE EXPERT
Steve Willis is a master trainer and vice president of professional services at VitalSmarts.
READ MORE

I’m often asked how frequently I train our courses. Depending on the course, my answer is somewhere between “a lot” and “a whole heck of a lot.” My response is almost always followed by the same question: “Don’t you ever get tired of teaching the same program over and over again?” (I know that, in the back of these people’s minds, they’re thinking that even the Love Boat wasn’t as “exciting and new” as the theme song claimed during the 4th and 5th seasons).

So I reflected on my experience. Was I getting tired of teaching the same course, and if so, to what degree? To the surprise of many, including myself, I found that, while the content doesn’t change, I genuinely find the training experience fresh and new—even after so many “repeats.”

This realization got me curious. I started to wonder if others have had a similar or different experience, and what people consciously do to keep their experience fresh. One thing that I have found makes a difference is finding different ways to apply the training. For example, ask yourself the following questions: What group will I work with and what opportunities will be similar or different? How does this program relate to safety or how does it play out in project management? What are the applications to healthcare?

Share your experiences and ideas for keeping it fresh.