Sunlit House and the Eerie Storm Clouds

 by Srinivasan Venkatarajan (@srini_venkat) #500px https://t.co/ol3RDbuAcp

— Srini Venkatarajan (@srini_venkat) May 19, 2015

from Twitter https://twitter.com/srini_venkat

When Correlation is Obvious do we need to Prove it?

As Talent Development and L&D professionals, when you show the Correlation between metrics from your Talent Development initiatives and the Business Performance Measures, many of you might have got this question...."How do you know that the (Talent Development) Initiative or the Training Program was the key contributor to the Business or Individual Performance Improvement".

They would also argue that Correlation is not Causation. So, we try different Isolation Strategies (i.e., to isolate the impact of Learning Intervention from other potential factors that might have also influenced) like "Control Groups", "Pre & Post Intervention Measurements", etc. While Isolation strategies definitely helps in proving the point....but there are many practical challenges in actually doing these isolation studies in many organizations because of the very agile nature of business or mobile (moving) workforce, virtual teams, contingent staff, etc.

So, having said that, should we step back and think whether we need to go to this length to prove that our correlation is right? If there a strong correlation between A & B for whatever time period that we study, should we still spend time, effort and resources to then again validate B is caused by A?

So, with this context, now I would like you all read this post titled "When to Act on a Correlation, and When Not To" in Harvard Business Review HBR Blogs by David Ritter.

I could not agree more with David Ritter. I am also curious to know what you readers think?

Measuring Learning or Measuring the Impact of Learning?

Recently, I saw this question in Quora. 

What is stopping companies from measuring learning today?

And here is what I think.

Most companies do measure Learning. 

But among those almost of them measure the "Efficiency" - ie., how many people learnt, cost, no of hrs of learning, etc.

They also measure the Learner Reaction or Satisfaction which basically Level 1 of the Kirkpatrick's 4 Levels of Evaluating Training Evaluations (Refer: Evaluating Training Programs: Kirkpatrick's 4 Levels)

There are also quite a few organizations, that measure the "Effectiveness" of Learning ie., Knowledge Gain, Retention, Learning Transfer on the Job, etc.

But there are only very organization, that measure "Learning Outcomes & Business Impact". While measuring the Learning Outcomes and reporting on the Business Impact of Learning is difficult...it is still doable. If I have to state it in very simplistic terms... 

a) Agree on expected Outcomes with the Business Stakeholder 
b) Identify the Observable Behaviors that will create this Outcome and ensure Stakeholders are in agreement on that 
c) Determine the Metrics & Measures to track that Behavior - and make the Stakeholder to be observer of that Behavior Change 
d) Report on the Behavior Change and correlate it with the Business Performance/Outcomes 
e) Compare the Actual Outcomes with the Expected Outcomes

Check out this interaction in Quora at this link  http://t.co/9dL7CPrUwD

Behavior Change

How do you bring about #behavior change? 

Social Motivation, Peer Pressure and Peer Influence is one way. Check out this short video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osUwukXSd0k

Note: Though this is about bringing about Behavior Changes in kids, the same works in Adults too. That's why the use of PBLs ( #points,#badges & #leaderboards ) works in #gamification even among adults.

Can you think of any other way to bring about Behavior Change among adults?

Is Marissa Mayer making the right decision?

A lot of interesting discussions & debates are going on in the Twitterverse and Blogosphere about Marissa Mayer's decision to ban telecommuting at Yahoo. My personal opinion is... that it is a right decision (for Yahoo at this juncture). Here is my rationale. 

Yahoo needs a jolt and needs to turnaround. She was appointed as CEO just to bring about that change. She was employee #20 in Google, and that time Google would have been considered a startup. And she knows how startups work. In a silicon valley/bay area technology start up, it's the things like...people crowing around a cubicle to discuss solve a problem, stepping out to play ping pong to relax and discuss the next big idea, etc are the kind of culture that brings in engagement, productivity, creativity, etc - ingredients of a successful tech startup in the making. And that's the culture that Yahoo needs now. That's why I think she is doing this. While she bans working from home, she did not ban flexible working hours. And that's why I think this was a right decision.

What do you think?

Endhiran Review

Finally got to see the much hyped, much awaited,  Rajini starrer "Endhiran" on October 1st, 2010 at a multiplex in East Windsor, NJ. Here is a my quick & very brief review of the movie.

First of all....Endhiran is a total entertainer.

Graphics & Spl Effects - Makes this movie levels apart from any of the Bollywood/Kollywood movies to date. It is on par with the Hollywood special effects. The last 1/2hr was....simply superb.

During the climax which lasts for about 30mins or so, you must watch Rajini's computer screen/display very closely to understand how our Hero Rajini wins over the Army of Robots, as it is a fast paced action packed 30mins. All the Graphics & Special effects reaches its peak in those last 30mins.

The story line is Good; Stunning Visuals; Even all the maamis in the "Happy Home" were good looking & commerical grade (I mean they appear in various commercials); Rahman's music is good but very fast except for one song.... I think, as I heard all songs for the first time though it has been few weeks since the Audio was launched.

The usual Rajini style & Punch dialogues are missing, which is a bit disappointing. But still a visual treat for all Rajini fans as they would get to see not just 1 or 2 Rajinis but an army of Rajinis as Robots.

I would say it is more apt to tag this movie as a Director Shankar's movie than Rajini's movie. He has roped in Rajini to take it to the masses (of interior remote Tamil Nadu), which otherwise would not have drawn only the city/elite crowds.

And last but not the least the all the marketing efforts of Sun Pictures which has put in Rupees 180-200 crore for this film (touted to be highest buget to date in Indian film Industry) is paying off.

On the whole, as I have mentioned at the beginning of this post, "Endhiran" is a total entertainer. I thoroughly enjoyed it. It is worth a watch atleast once. But I would not mind watching it again :-) 

Posted via email from Srini's Posts

Is Stephen Hawking wrong?

In "The Brief History Of Time" Stephen Hawking said: "If we discover a complete theory, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason – for then we should know the mind of God."

But as you might be aware yet till date the "complete theory" or "the Universal Theory" or "Theory of Everything" is elusive....that Stephen Hawking was talking about to in "The Brief History of Time".

And still... "Dark Energy" or "Dark Matter" are called so because the scientific community does not know what it is and how it can be explained.

But according to the excerpts released from his new book,  "The Grand Design", Stephen Hawking says, "....Because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the Universe exists, why we exist.... It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going."

These excerpts have triggered so much heated debate between the scientific & religious community now and among the people who are not sure whether they are one side or the other, that the chatter about this excerpt from his new book has become the trending topic in Twitter.

I have high regards for Stephen Hawking. And I think, everyone is jumping guns to conclude that "there is no GOD" or "Stephen Hawking is wrong". While, I don't want to jump to conclusions, I can guess what Stephen Hawking would have meant. He probably just says that we (humans) know a lot now than before that we can now explain the beginning & the evolution of the Universe with the laws of physics & the theories that we know as of today. I don't think he says "there is no GOD".

Let's see how far this debate goes. Or will this debate continue for generations to come?