What is the difference that makes the difference?

15:01:00 Learning Boffins 0 Comments

We’re all well into the Olympics now, and a question I’ve pondered is how much difference the equipment makes to the performance of our elite athletes?

In diving for example, it’s pretty clear-cut, there is no equipment: Tom Daley and Dan Goodfellow jump through 10m of air into the pool below.  But what difference does Andy Murray’s choice of racket make against his opponent?  Or the quality of Greg Rutherford’s running shoes affect his long jump?  However I’ll let you decide what difference Amber Hill’s spray painted shotgun and pink cartridges make to her performance.

Following a series of crashes on the cycling course, a TV interview showed that whilst competitive cycling allows some latitude in the dimensions and weight of the bikes, they’re all very similar: perhaps the most significant decision a cyclist makes is how hard to pump the tyres (higher pressure means less drag, but also less grip on corners).

In sport, the rules quite rightly seek to create a ‘level playing field’, so athletes compete as much as possible on equal terms.  Any difference is therefore down to the skill, strength and wit of the athlete, not their equipment.

Now here comes the rather predictable connection to L&D…

… because when it comes to formal training, I notice we make a very different assumption – that the outcomes of learning depend very heavily on the quality of the training course.  Generic content is usually frowned upon in favour of something bespoke: specifically designed for our purpose.  We take a lot of time developing the training.  If we’re outsourcing, a great deal of time and thought goes into choosing the right supplier.  And even if we find something suitable on the shelf, we’ll still want to tailor it for our purposes.  “Content is king” we say (and preferably content built to high standards of instructional design).

Content is important, no doubt about that.  But I have noticed that if you look at learning in terms of outcomes, then content does not influence the result anywhere near as much as our practice would suggest.

Here's my list of the 'Big Four' influences on learning outcomes:

In my experience, unless these things are right, it doesn’t much matter whether the content is good bad or indifferent.  And yet, how often do we give them even the briefest consideration, let alone investment. 

My conclusion is that, rather like our top athletes, the outcome is down to the people.