Module 10

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

IN PROBLEM SOLVING FOR MANAGERS

Victor S Barocas

 

INTRODUCTION

The proposed program is intended to increase business profitability and organization effectiveness by improving manager’s productivity in relation to business problems and situations. By combining weekly on-line and web based exercises in conjunction with Wikispaces and Skype meetings, the program structure allows participants to continue their work responsibilities while improving their skills. Throughout the program, participants will tailor techniques to participant situations. Upon conclusion of the program each participant will have a portfolio that documents their learnings.

SUBJECT:

Problem Solving for Business Managers

AUDIENCE

 Managers with at least 3 managerial in non-profits, for-profits and government

DURATION

 The program will go for a total of 6 weeks.

ELEARNING FORMAT

Blended format that combines asynchronous activities and Skype meetings.

TECHNOLOGY TOOLS

 Blackboard, Team Blogs, WikiSpaces (for business), Skype and web-based tools for each of the problem solving techniques

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

 At the end of the program, participants will be able to:

• Translate a business problem and/or situation into a problem solving question.

• Apply five different web-based problem solving techniques.

• Pair the correct problem solving techniques with a given situation/problem.

• Work as an online team to apply different web-based problem solving techniques to identify appropriate solution(s) for a given situation/problem.

• Present the rationale, logic, process, and recommendations to other participants.

• Produce a portfolio product that can be implemented where participants’ work.

LEARNING CRITERIA

Wright’s (n.d) technical assistance guide presents a framework to develop and/or evaluate eLearning courses. Within each dimension of the framework—which ranges from background, language and layout through content and activities to transfer techniques, resources and evaluation criteria—the author does not articulate learning criteria, per se, but identifies tactics and goals from which learning criteria can be developed. Albeit logical, the experiences/observations of the author and 11 of his colleagues are the basis guide.

As part of an ongoing effort to identify “what constitutes quality in eLearning (in higher education) and how it might be assessed” (page 7) on a national level, Åström (2008) surveyed of eLearning efforts in Canada, the United States and seven European countries. In addition to identifying the policy ramifications, the author articulated a model for eLearning Quality (ELQ) and quality criteria and measures. Stressing the need to take a systems approach to eLearning programs, the author identified 10 interrelated aspects of quality need to me considered, including material/content; communication/interactivity/cooperation; support (i.e., peer, faculty); flexibility/adaptability.

As a preface to foundation for articulating learning criteria, Pappas (2014) cites “five moments of need” in corporate learning programs. They include: learning new information; building upon knowledge base; applying newly acquired information; ability to troubleshoot (e.g., learn from peers) when things go wrong; and adapting strategy and tactics to new situations.

The criteria below are, in part, Pappas, Wright and Åström’s writings.

Criterion 1:  Make critical thinking a core element to all aspects of the program.

A primary learning outcome is the ability of program participants to think critically about each specific business situations/problems, as well as apply appropriate problem solving techniques to determine alternative solutions suitable to their organization.

Justification 1:

In essence, the application of problem solving techniques is contingent upon critical thinking: a rational understanding based upon the identification, analysis and evaluation of information. Strother (2002) suggests that professional development eLearning programs, while cost-effective, may not be producing some of the desired critical thinking skills. She goes on to suggest that these skills, while desirable, may not be all that important.

In contrast, Baldoni (2010) views these same skills as increasingly important to the future of American business. Baldoni asserts, as part of his analysis of leadership in American businesses, that the inability to think critically is having a detrimental effect upon the business community.  The author goes on to suggest that developing critical thinking skills need to be taught in MBA programs and taught again in the workplace through a variety of ways, including professional development programs.

The challenge, according to Saade, Morin and Thomas (2012), is to rethink how critical thinking skills are taught and fostered as IT plays an ever increasing role in both the classroom and the workplace. The authors suggest that new and innovative approaches to critical thinking need to be explored and refined.

Criterion 2: Tailor best practice delivery systems to business environments.

Significant expenditure of corporate professional development funds have neither proved cost-effective nor realized fully realized the desired outcomes (Strother, 2002).  Strother goes on to suggest that businesses may not have conducted adequate due diligence on best practices prior to buying into eLearning.

A successful Problem Solving program for business professionals requires a significant investment at the front-end. These resources assets must ensure that implemented program reflect best practice designs, that, when necessary, are adapted to individual industries.

Justification 2:

As findings suggest, eLearning has not achieved fully its potential within business environments (Strother, 2002).  One reason, according to Greenagle (2000), is that no one eLearning model is applicable to all situations and for all audiences. In other words, successful eLearning programs must be adaptable.

Based upon his research with undergraduates, Greenagle reports that there is a significantly greater drop out rate among eLearning students than traditional f2f learning situation.

The author identifies two sources to the problem. First, eLearning program designs and, thus implementations, have not kept up with the latest technology. In other words, there is a disconnect between implemented programs and current technology (e.g., web based, cell phone, twitter).

The second reason eLearning programs are less than fully successful is that they do not reflect different types of intelligence and learning styles. While the author defers to Gardner’s theory (2011) theories, more recent articles assert that types of intelligence and learning styles are readily applicable to the business environment (BunsinessBalls.com, n.d.).

Criterion 3: Create a Community of Inquiry (COI) that becomes stronger during and extends beyond the professional development program.

Dating back to pragmatist philosophers John Dewey, and C.S. Pierce, CoI, as broadly defined, explores the nature, acquisition and understanding of knowledge and its utilization to resolve problems through conceptual and/or scientific analysis (Wikipedia, 2015)

Anecdotal evidence from professional development educators that participants, upon returning from f2f training, almost always place manuals and material on a bookshelf or in a desk drawer. These trainers also report that CoIs are rarely developed, let alone extended beyond the actual professional development sessions

For Garrison and Arbaugh (2007), creating an effective CoI, while a challenge, is critical to the success of eLearning programs. As stated by the authors, CoIs, when achieved, enhance the learning experience through greater social, cognitive and teacher presence. They go on to state that the overall experience can enhance critical thinking skills.

Justification 3.

The nature of eLearning programs, through individual/team activities and it being longer than most f2f training programs, offers participants opportunities to develop a CoI that extends beyond the actual professional development program.

Garrison (2009) points out that asynchronous learning can produce a rich cognitive presence that includes higher order thinking and meta-cognition.  However, this article, by limiting its focus to cognitive presence, raises questions if the “learning experience” can be further enhanced by creating a CoI that maximizes teacher and social presence.

To that point, A University of Washington, Bothwell faculty online newsletter (n.d.) asserts that blended learning is better suited for creating a CoI.  This assertion is supported by Shea and Bidjenao (201) who compared on-line and blended learning with college students.

While not implemented with business professionals, Weyant (2010) integrated social media as a vehicle to create a CoI. Findings from a study, conducted with students in a business management course, suggests that employing FaceBook and/or Google+ might create a CoI that extends beyond the training program.

Criterion 4:  Instill self-directed (i.e., androgagogy) and self-determined (i.e., heutagogy) principles into the professional development program deign.

With a program, whose target audience is business professionals with at least three years managerial experience, traditional pedagological approaches need to be replaced by andragogy and heutagogy models.

Justification 4.

Moore and Kearsley (2012) refer to Knowles’ theory of adult learning (i.e., andragogy) that emphasizes learner control and self-direction. Kenyon and Hase (2010) referring to their earlier work on heutagogy assert that their model takes the theory to a higher level where there is less reliance upon instructor structure and direction with a learner who is increasingly motivated..

Blashke (2012) identifies overarching conceptual considerations when creating eLearning programs for adult learners: collaborative learning and reflective learning. While collaborative learning helps to engage the participant, reflective learning increases critical thinking.  The author offers learning journals, real world activities and assessments (i.e., formative, summative) as effective tools.

Drilling down from the conceptual, Blashke includes several program design considerations, like flexible/negotiated assessments, learner defined contracts and flexible curriculum (e.g., learning maps).

Criterion 5: Ensure timely feedback and resources to program participants.

Retaining interest, participation, involvement, and ultimately learning—especially among adult learners who have are completing professional development courses while working—requires timely feedback and resources.

In the proposed professional development program in problem solving, prior to and during a professional development program, effective facilitation needs, at minimum, to include: critical commentary on work products; support and encouragement; links to websites for articles, analytic tools and applications; sharing of expertise; models and prototypes that helps participants create an ongoing portfolio.

Justification 5:

Lister (2015) identifies course structure, content presentation, collaboration and interaction, and timely feedback as major considerations when designing and implementing eLearning programs. Each factor relates back to the Criterion 5.

SUMMARY

 

The proposed professional development program in Problem Solving is targeted to experienced managers. With a blended program design, participants can increase and apply their newly acquired skills without leaving their workplace. A variety of asynchronous, online and web based learning tools will be combined to allow for individual, team and full class engagement. In addition to basing the program upon heutagogical principles that ensures that self-directed and self motivated learning, and timely/motivating feedback, participants will create a CoI that can extend beyond the training program.

REFERENCES

 

 

Åström, Eva (2008) E-learning Quality Aspects and Criteria for Evaluation of E-learning in Higher Education: Report 2008:11 R. Swedish National Agency for Higher Education. Stockholm, Sweden. http://www.hsv.se/download/18.8f0e4c9119e2b4a60c800028057/0811R.pdf

Baldoni, John (2010) How leaders should think critically. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2010/01/how-leaders-should-think-criti/

Blashke, Lisa Marie (2012) Heutagogy and lifelong learning: a review of heutagogy and self-determined learning.  The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. 13(2). http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1076/2087

BusinessBalls.com (n.d.) Howard Gardner’s multiple intelligences. http://www.businessballs.com/howardgardnermultipleintelligences.htm

Gardner, Harold (2011) The Theory of Multiple Intelligences: As Psychology, As Education, As Social Science. Address at Jose Cela University, Madrid, Spain (1-11). https://howardgardner01.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/473-madrid-oct-22-2011.pdf

Garrison, D. Randy and J.B. Arbaugh (2007) Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions. Internet and Higher Education, Volume 10. 157–172. http://reinventnet.org/moodle/pluginfile.php/1196/mod_resource/content/2/COIreview.pdf

Garrison, D. Randy (2009) Cognitive Presence for Effective Asynchronous On-line Learning: The role of Reflective Inquiry Self-direction and Metacognition. City College of New York http://cguevara.commons.gc.cuny.edu/files/2009/09/Learning-Effectiveness-paper-Garrison.pdf

 Greenagle, Frank L. (2000) The Illusion of e-Learning: Why We Are Missing Out on the Promise of Technology. League White Papers. League for Innovation in the Community College. 11 pges. www.league.org/publication/whitepapers/index.html

Hase, Stuart  (2009). Heutagogy and e-learning in the workplace: Some challenges and opportunities. mpact: Journal of Applied Research in Workplace E-learning, 1(1), 43-52. http://www.voced.edu.au/content/ngv17312

Kenyon, Chris & Stuart Hase (2001). Moving from andragogy to heutagogy in vocational education. www.avetra.org.au/abstracts_and_papers_2001/Hase-Kenyon_full.pdf

Lister, Meaghan (2015). Trends in the Design of E-Learning and Online Learning.                    MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10 (4) 671-680. http://jolt.merlot.org/vol10no4/Lister_1214.pdf

Moore, M. G., and G. Kearsley. (2012). Distance Education: A Systems View of Online Learning (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Pappas, Christopher (2008). How to Use The 5 “Moments of Need” Model In Corporate eLearning. eLearning Industry n.p. http://elearningindustry.com/use-5-moments-of-need-model-in-corporate-elearning

Saade, Rafat George, Danielle Morin and Jennifer D. E., Thomas (2012) Computers in Human Behavior. Volume 28 (5), 1608-1617. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S074756321200091X#

Shea, Peter and Temi Bidjerano (2010) Learning presence: Towards a theory of self-efficacy, self-regulation, and the development of a communities of inquiry in online and blended learning environments. Computers & Education Volume 55, 1721–173. http://www.sunyresearch.net/hplo/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Shea-and-Bidjerano-2010.pdf

Strother, Judity B. (2002). An Assessment of the Effectiveness of e-learning in Corporate Training Programs. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning 3 (1), 1492-3831. http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/83/161

UMB Learning Technologies (2015) Community of Inquiry Framework for Hybrid Learning.  University of Washington, Bothwell

http://www.uwb.edu/learningtech/elearning/hybrid-and-online-learning/hybrid-learning/faculty-hybrid/hybrid-intro

Wikipedia (2015) .Community of Inquiry. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_of_inquiry

Wright, Clayton R. (n.d.). Criteria for evaluating the quality of online courses.Clayton R. Wright. Instructional Media and Design department at Grant MacEwan College.  http://elearning.typepad.com/thelearnedman/ID/evaluatingcourses.pdf

 

Weyant, Lee (2014). Supporting online management education with Facebook and Google Plus.   Journal of Instructional Pedagogies Volume 14, 1-8. http://www.aabri.com/manuscripts/141876.pdf

Did you fulfill the requirement to make your first post no later than Wednesday in the discussion?

Yes

Did you fulfill the requirement to post at least three times in each discussion topic between Monday and Friday?

Yes

Did you fulfill the requirement to post the answers to the prompts in your blog no later than Sunday?

Yes

Did you fulfill the requirement to reply at least two classmates’ blogs on Saturday/Sunday?

Yes

Quote your best post(s) from the week and explain why you feel these are the best.

The application of Heutagogy to blended learning programs

Quote several of the best posts from other students. Explain why you chose the ones you present.

Kristan’s discussion of the inclusion of social media, cell phones, Web 3.0  and other emerging technologies as part of an integrated eLearning program.

What did you learn in the discussion this week that will be useful to you or that changes the way you view something?

My primary learning is about the premises, framing, construction, and ultimately balance of design, individual, team and group learning activities needed create an integrated program on Problem Solving for Managers in Business.

MODULE 09 BLOG

BLOG REFLECTION

This past week it became apparent there are a number of resources available to eLearning job seekers. Most resources, (e.g., job listings) are geared for professionals following a traditional career trajectory.

The transition is far more difficult for professionals transitioning into a second career. In other words, finding a position that capitalizes upon one’s past successes /experiences and applies one’s eLearning expertise presents clear difficuilties. This situation is especially acute for mid and late term professionals.

My take-a-ways from the discussions include:

• Finding a position will require far more networking than reliance upon responses to eLearning job postings.
• Positions in industry, and especially consulting are more scarce than those in government, non-profits and education.
• Salaries ranges are pretty broad, even when geographical are taken into account.
• Most positions are not local: many of us in the Inland Empire, especially the desert, will likely have to relocate to other areas.

 Summarize this week’s discussions. Use this template to structure your production:

1. Did you fulfill the requirement to make your first post no later than Wednesday in the discussion?

Yes

1. Did you fulfill the requirement to post at least three times in each discussion topic between Monday and Friday?

Yes

1. Did you fulfill the requirement to post the answers to the prompts in your blog no later than Sunday?

Yes.

1. Quote your best post(s) from the week and explain why you feel these are the best.

My best contribution to this week’s discussion is the inclusion of a table that pairs a list of organizations with their website and organization focus.

1. Quote several of the best posts from other students. Explain why you chose the ones you present.

• Gayle Henry’s discussion on copyright differences for educators and non-educators proved especially useful. Personally, the greatest value is found in her identifying outside going forward.
• Laurie Hanna clarified the importance of knowing the distinction between what a learning object is and knowing how it is applied; her position is that the use of learning objects is central to the success of eLearning courses. Given the somewhat vague definitions of learning objects, her distinctions provided guidance as to the importance why to change the focus from what the learning object is to how it is being used.
• Carolyn Obonoyo described a software tool (i.e., SCORM) that provides technical standards for eLearning products. Not only does SCORM provide guidance for those developing/writing code, it assists in the development of content and ensuring that findings are compatible with learning management systems. Her discussion provides a way to think through both content and implementation.

1. What did you learn that will be useful going forward.

Probably my greatest realization is how difficult it will be to obtain an eLearning position that applies my skills and past experiences. Within that context, it became apparent that I need to:

• Begin the networking process more sooner than later.
• Become active in the eLearning community.
• Begin to create a portfolio of eLearning curricula that will demonstrate my skills and to the profession.
• Think about the possibilities of relocation.

MODULE 08

COPYRIGHT

This week’s research corroborated my assumption that topics like copyright, trademarks, patents, etc., should be considered within a larger discussion about Intellectual Property (IP).  This summary looks at copyrighting within the larger issue of IP.

In essence, copyrights trademarks, and patents articulate the legal protections and redress afforded to individuals for their work product, be it creative, educational, engineering, scientific, et al.

Although stated several time, my real world experiences taught me that there are strict sunset dates for all IP protections. And, that the owner must submit the requisite forms and updated documentation in advance of the expiration date.

While much of the discussion was, for me a review, it was interesting to learn about the concept of “Fair Use” and how it relates to copyrighting.

While I appreciate the links to various other websites, the absence of what if any needed documentation  for a copyright application was not addressed. That is an area that I need to address going forward.

P.S. IP, including copyrights, patents and trademarks, are highly complex areas of the law. Engaging the correct type of attorney, early in the process, is critical to anyone seeking to protect their IP.

ACCESSABILITY AND UNIVERSAL DESIGN

The original postings on accessibility discussion seemed to focus more upon the more narrow dimension of accessibility for the disabled than the overarching topic of creating content in multiple ways allowing the learner to the what, way an how of learning.

Upon further reflection, the broader definition (i.e., how, what, way) seems core to the adult learning theories and models (i.e., Heutagogy, Andragogy). More specifically, in contrast to Pedagogy, Andragogy talks about engaging adult learners by building upon their past experiences. Heutagogy expands the previous theory; it introduces fostering the desire to learn.

The discussion of universal design proved far more applicable to adult learning. Fernando, reporting the Foraker Labs analysis, offers a definition of universal design that captures the essence of the concept, “…to extend standard design principles to include people of all ages and abilities, but remains at the level of generality”.

The definition seems to lead to a couple of questions:

• Is this definition too broad?
• And, if the definition is narrowed, does it require too much scripting, thereby eliminating the tailoring necessary for adult learners.

LEARNING OBJECTS

I understand what is meant by a learning object concept and can probably create them. However, after reviewing the blackboard discussion and conducting my own research, questions about its definition and their application in a variety of environments remain.

To me the core problem is the lack of an agreed upon operational definition that can be tested either in quantitative or qualitative research. As such, learning objects seem like a high level conceptual construct,

Baek, responding to my posting, offered some clarifications.  For example, she states, “There is no one definition of learning object that is agreeable to all of us.” Her noting that a learning object is a “self-contained reusable set of instructional materials” brings us closer to a workable definition.  However, by suggesting that learning objects can be as small as “video clip” or as large as a “module of instructional” reopens the discussion of how we assess the reliability and validity of a learning objective.

In sum, a learning object is a construct.  Any one learning construct is a “reusable, self-contained”, chunk of instructional material. These chunks vary depending upon the course content and the learning population.

WEEK REVIEW

1. Did you fulfill the requirement to make your first post no later than Wednesday in the discussion?

Yes

1. Did you fulfill the requirement to post at least three times in each discussion topic between Monday and Friday?

Yes

1. Did you fulfill the requirement to post the answers to the prompts in your blog no later than Sunday?

Yes

1. Did you fulfill the requirement to reply at least two classmates’ blogs on Saturday/Sunday?

Yes

1. Quote your best post(s) from the week and explain why you feel these are the best.

This past week my original discussion board entries and my responses to others’ entries, in retrospect, are probably the most analytic and probative of the term. For example, my:

• Response to Michael’s post on the end of textbooks seemed to provide a good real world counterpoint to his position.

• Entry on copyrighting placed the discussion within the larger context of IP

• Posting, although there were no respondents, on learning objects raises some theoretical and research questions about the concept.

1. Quote several of the best posts from other students. Explain why you chose the ones you present.

Kimberly’s Module 08 discussion of universal design was quite complete and her copyrights entry proved concise and usable.

Melissa’s Module 07 provided a good synopsis of the similarities and differences between f2f and on-line learning. Her noting that both approaches have validity, depending upon such variables as content and student, raises research questions that might be addressed via multi-variate regression analyses where some measure of learning is the dependent variable and different learner characteristics are the independent variables.

What did you learn in the discussion this week that will be useful to you or that changes the way you view something?

Given my interest in the application of Andragogy and Heutagogy principles, the topic of universal design seems most relevant. Specifically, creating professional development programs for managers requires:

• Creating materials that spark the adult learner’s interest

• Engaging and leveraging adult learners’ past experiences and learning

• Prompting and stimulating the adult learner ongoing learning

Module 07

TOPIC

Application of Andragogy and/or Heutagogy principles to the design and implementation of blended and e-learning professional development programs for corporate managers.

RATIONALE

For the coming decades, corporations will be competing for the best talent. These companies will not only need to retain this talent, they will also need to keep their employees’ skills current.

The loss is not limited to any one American business sector. For example, Accenture and The American Manufacturing Institute conducted a survey of over 300 executives. The report indicates that skill shortages in the America manufacturing sector is resulting in greater that 10% earnings/year (HRReview May 16, 2014).

Levinson (2012) reports, based upon a survey of over 500 IT executives,  that corporate profitability and productivity are diminished by a lack of qualified (i.e., skilled) talent. This author state that this problem is experienced in both large and small businesses. Further, she asserts that the lack of professional development is a major factor exacerbating the situation.

The need for appropriate talent is especially challenging for at least three reasons:

• The aging work force. Burtless (2013) indicates that older workers are remaining in the workforce longer. And, although employers pay a premium to older workers, their productivity does not decline and in some is greater than their younger cohorts. While he does not address productivity, Drake (2014) reports that economic realities and projections that middle age and older workers are remaining longer or returning to the workforce.

• Challenges of the emerging labor force. The Millenials are characterized as a group with short spans and expectations of immediate gratification. This group was brought up on technology and are generally far more tech savvy than their managers.

Gilbert (2011), in the Western University Business Journal, articulates problems recruiting, retaining, motivating, and managing Millenials, including willingness to change jobs, greater social conscience, employer expectations (e.g., flexibility); he also offers some potential solutions to employers and line managers.

• The need for problem solvers. Current and future jobs will require employees who can resolve existing crises as well as anticipate future problems. Given the ever changing global business environment problem solvers will need to be able to work in a multi-cultural work workplace.

Scott and Struther (1994) apply a sophisticated path analysis to determine workplace innovation. In 2012, Kaufman reports that companies are falling far short in their ability to plan strategically for their workplace requirements.

• The need for self-motivated workforce. The greatest challenge for most corporations is creating a learning culture that fosters continuous improvement.

Hase and Kenyon (2007) argue that Heutagogy, as a replacement for the classic Knowle’s classic Andragogy model, promotes self-motivation for learning.

Blashke (2012) argues that with technology advances and the evolution of Web 2.0, Heutagogy as a concept can be translated into an operational model that  can result in self-determined and life long learning.  Crosslin (2014) also sees Heutatogy as a way to look at the adult learner. Some authors, however, still regard Heutatogy less of a testable theory and more of a more of a world view.

Despite the current discussion in the literature, Gilbert (2011) argues that progressive companies are looking to cultivate loyal, self-motivated employees who want to contribute actively in their own and the company’s future.  More recently,

Adding to the complexity is an extremely competitive business environment that seeks the most cost-effective employee training programs.

While the overall situation may appear daunting, e-learning programs may provide partial salutations (Strother, 2002, Cercone, 2008, Schultz, 2012). This might include the design and implementation of professional development initiatives to

• Teach managers problem solving strategies
• Motivate managers to continue to use the techniques following the training program
• Encourage managers to refine their problem solving capabilities.

Barocas (2004) does not emphasize the value of learning traditional and creative problem solving techniques. However, the technical assistance manual—geared to business, non-profit, trade association, and government professional—pairs recognized and creative problem solving with decision-making techniques in their workplace.

With the ever increasing technological ubiquity in the workplace what were previously newsprint/paper/whiteboard and marker techniques can now be concurrently completed on-line by groups in geographically diverse locations.

The techniques to be included includes but not limited to:

• Brainstorming: Masters (2012) and Barocas (2004) identify brainstorming as a problem solving technique that generates potential solutions for some specific situation. One key element of the technique is that it is done in groups, not individually.

• SMART Objective: SMART objectives are Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Time bound. When correctly applied, the technique forces the individual or workteam to focus upon the key elements of the presenting problem (WikiPedia, Wayne State University).

• MindMapping: A structured problem solving technique—attributed to Tony Buzan—provides a team with opportunities to: brainstorm ideas, create a plan of action and present findings to others. Buzan’s organization, ThinkBuzan, asserts that mindmapping is an effective technique to streamline an organization’s work process (ThinkBuzan.com)

• Gap Analysis: Essentially, gap analysis is a process allows a team of individuals to articulate where the organization is and where it wants to be. As stated by Investopedia (Investopedia.com), a gap analysis helps an organization determine if the organization is on the correct pathway from their “current state” to a desired “future state”.

• SWOT Analysis: As described by the New Mexico State University School of Business, SWOT analyses determine an organization’s viability by assessing internal capacities (i.e., Strengths, Weaknesses) in relation to their external environment (i.e., Opportunities, Threats). When correctly used SWOT analyses allow the organization to maximize their internal strengths and opportunities while repairing their internal weaknesses and neutralizing external threats.

• Affinity Analysis: An affinity analysis allows individuals and teams to find connections between seemingly dissimilar items (WiseGEEK, Wikipedia). It is also a data mining tool to determine relationships, like buying patterns, among a given population.

• Post-it Analysis: The Post-it analysis is a two step process that combines individual with group tasks (Wikibooks). Once a problem, preferably worded as a question, is identified, each team member with their own pad of Post-its, writes one possible solution/answer per Post-it. After team members identify all their possible solutions, all Post-its are hung on a large white board or newsprint. Teams title the groups before identifying next steps.

• Ishikawa Drawing: Ishikawa, also called a fishbone drawing, depicts cause and effect relationships (ASQ, Wikibooks). The drawings prove especially valuable when it is necessary to foster a team’s rethinking about a specific problem or situation.

The Ishikawa drawing begins with a specific outcome or effect. The generic forces are depicted as a series of diagonal lines positioned off a horizontal arrow line leads to the outcome. Off the diagonals are subforces. Identifying those subforces generally unfreezes the team’s thinking and comes up with new solutions.

REFERENCES

ASQ. Fishbone (Ishikawa) Drawings. ASQ. http://asq.org/learn-about-quality/cause-analysis-tools/overview/fishbone.html

Barocas, Victor S. Creative Problem Solving and Decision-Making: A Technical Assistance Guide. Strategic Management Group. Unpublished manuscript, 2004.

Blashke, Lisa Marie. Heutagogy and Lifelong Learning: A Review of Heutagogical Practice and Self-determined Learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning January, 2012, Vol. 13 No. 1 (56-71). file:///E:/CSUSB/E-Learning%20Articles/Heutagogy/1076-9232-2-PB%20(1).pdf

Burtless, Gary. The Impact of Population Aging and Delayed Retirement on Workforce Productivity. Center for Retirement Research at Boston University 2013 (1-46). http://crr.bc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/wp_2013-111.pdf

Drake, Peter. Number of Older Americans in the Workforce on the Rise. Pew Research Organization: FactTank. January 7, 2014 N.P. http://pewrsr.ch/1adnWGq

Cercone, Kathleen. Characteristics of Adult Learners with Implications for On-line Learning Design. AACE Journal  April 2008, 16 (2) 137-159 http://www.editlib.org/p/24286/

Crosslin, Matt. Theoretical Flow of Heutagogy in MOOCS. Open Learning. August 28,  2014. N.P.  http://www.edugeekjournal.com/2014/08/28/theoretical-flow-of-heutagogy-in-moocs/

Gilbert, Jay. The Millenials: a New Generation of Employees, a New Set of Engagement Policies. Ivey Business Journal. September/October 2011. N.P. http://iveybusinessjournal.com/publication/the-millennials-a-new-generation-of-employees-a-new-set-of-engagement-policies/

Hase, Stewart and Chris Kenyon. Heutagogy: A Child of Complexity Thinking. Journal of Complexity and Education. 2007, 4(1) 111-118

HRReview. Skills shortage biting USA with up to 11% of earnings lost annually. HRReview. May 16,2014. N.P. http://www.hrreview.co.uk/hr-news/recruitment/skills-shortage-biting-usa-with-up-to-11-of-earnings-lost-annually/51668

Investopedia. Gap Analysis. www.Investopedia.com

Kaufman, Bruce E. Strategic Human Resource Management Research in the United States: A Failing Grade After 30 Years? The Academy of Management Perspective, May, 2012, Vol. 26, Num. 2 12-36. http://amp.aom.org/content/26/2/12.full.pdf+html

Levinson, Merideth. IT Skills Shortages Hamper Profitability, Productivity. CIO March 12, 2012. N.P. http://www.cio.com/article/2398266/careers-staffing/it-skills-shortages-inside-companies-hamper-profitability–productivity.html

Masters, Morgan. Using Brainstorming Technique in Business Analysis. ModernAnalysis.com. 2012. http://www.modernanalyst.com/Resources/Articles/tabid/115/ID/2067/Using-the-Brainstorming-Technique-in-Business-Analysis.aspx

New Mexico State University. SWOT Index. New Mexico State University School of Business. http://business.nmsu.edu/~dboje/sbc/pages/page3.html

Schultz, Richard B. A Critical Examination of the Teaching Methodologies. Pertaining to Distance Learning in Geographic Education: Andragogy in an Adult On-line Certificate Program. Review of International Geographic Education Online. Spring 2012 http://www.rigeo.org/vol2no1/2.3.RIGEO-VOL.2.NO.1-3.pdf

Schweizer, Heidi Journal of Management Education28.6 (Dec 2004): 674-692. http://xerxes.calstate.edu/sanbernardino/articles/record?id=FETCH-LOGICAL-c1218-5c8bc27d4726aeb958158fce2c5e0f8ca81d501e7eab6b8601c697c044d39e583

Scott, Susanne G. and Reginald A. Bruce. Determinants of Innovative Behavior: A Path Model of Individual Innovation in the Workplace. The Academy of Management Journal June 1994 Vol. 37, No. 3, 580-607 http://www.jstor.org/stable/256701

Strother, Judith An Assessment of the Effectiveness of e-Learning in Corporate Training Programs. International Journal of Research in Open and Distance Learning. April 2002, Volume 3, Number 1. www.icaap.org/iuicode?149.3.1.x

ThinkBuzan. 7 Ways to Use Mind Maps in Business. www.ThinkBuzan.com

Wayne LEADS. S.M.A.R.T. Objectives. Waynes State University.

http://hr.wayne.edu/leads/phase1/smart-objectives.php

Wikibooks.  Business Analysis Guidebook/Facilitation and Elicitation Techniques.http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Business_Analysis_Guidebook/Facilitation_and_Elicitation_Techniques

Wikipedia. Affinity Analysis. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affinity_analysis

Wikipedia. SMART Criteria. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMARTcriteria

WiseGeek. What is an Affinity Analysis? www.WiseGEEK.com

2. Summarize this week’s discussions. Use this template to structure your production:

1. Did you fulfill the requirement to make your first post no later than Wednesday in the discussion?

Yes

1. Did you fulfill the requirement to post at least three times in each discussion topic between Monday and Friday?

Yes

1. Did you fulfill the requirement to post the answers to the prompts in your blog no later than Sunday?

Yes

1. Did you fulfill the requirement to reply at least three classmates’ blogs on Saturday/Sunday?

Yes

1. Quote your best post(s) from the week and explain why you feel these are the best.

Perhaps the best posts were the queries to

• Melissa about keeping commitment to complete a professional development program given competing work priorities.

• Kimberly on if she was going to look at the different types of rewards instructors receive by teaching on-line vs. f2f.

1. Quote several of the best posts from other students. Explain why you chose the ones you present.

• Again, Melissa’s rationale for the greater instructors play with on-line learning.

• Fernando’s interest in motivation. With working managers, keeping them motivated and engaged is important. I will be interested in seeing if any of his finding might be applicable to adult learners.

1. What did you learn in the discussion this week that will be useful to you or that changes the way you view something?

Again, I continue to find myself challenged as to the applicability, other than in the most general terms, of my colleagues’ projects to the professional development of managers in business, non-profit, trade association, and government environments.

That noted, one colleague forced me to confront one of the topics that has been below the surface of my thinking: the differences in rewards received in f2f vs. on-line professional development programs.