Challenge

My occupation involves multiple methodologys for a wide variety of clients as an independent  human resource consultant, who use human relations as his focus or primal resource. I´ve been  gathering information and studying different aproaches for 5 years, through stable work at a  consultant office, a few proyects on my own, learning from studies and papers about the  bussiness, and gathering inputs from different perspectives like collegues or people that would  eventually be my client type, to finally be able to step up from my own perspective of doing things  and work independently. The question i ask myself is, how do i provide a service that solves the  problem that my client can see, but also prepare the way for the problems to come? My question  comes from the imperative necesity of building human relations for the development in work and  personal life.

Selection

I chose Learning Launch, it´s the tool that lets me try certain technichs that would attempt to  prove the theories i´ve been working on. The goal as to why choosing this tool is to learn wich  methologys and techniques would work best with a wider variety of people that i consider to be  my potential clients in the near future. This choice is considering the ammount of information i  have been gathering along the years accordingly to the sense of purpose that identify my way of  thinking and the resources that are in my scope. So the Learning Launch tool seems to be the best  option in this specific point i´m at, allowing me to test the different aproaches i came to develop at  this point, as Bruce Velasquez says, i need to launch lots of experiments, at low cost, to confirm my  hipothesis or to learn why it doesn´t work so i can pivote to new aproaches more in sinc with what  i´m aiming at.

Aplication

I started the launch by stating which my hypothesis would be, defining that my ultimate theory  would be that people learn better when involved in the process, this comes from the actual model  that uses lots of information and focuses only on transmitting that knowledge, hoping for  understandment. So the question that followed it was how do i involve people, and to get to the  answer i conducted a series of experiments to learn which methods worked better. So i had to  think how do i test those workshops. First, i managed to get a common space for the workshops  with in the building i live in by providing quotas for residents who want to streghten their human  resources, avoiding the cost that renting some place would mea (also got coffee and snacks for  peopple attending, the acomodation of the place was made from me and my girlfriend). Second, i  had to gather people that were in the market i wanted to apply, and a few stakeholders that were  some of my collegues and their acquaintances who knew better the business, i made all of the  coordination reducing expences. Third, i had to choose and develop the workshops with the  different approaches i built with to prove the different methodologies (Actually this was a previus  step, before thinking the place, but only when i got the space and the people i chose wich ones i  was going to do), in accordance with the key assumptions i priorized, which were: 1.- Use people  opinions as facts 2.- Build knowledge from experience 3.- Validate different perspective 4.- Use  dynamic excercises 5.- Argue with the attendants from their perspective. Four, i ran 20 workshops  in total (the starting number were 10, but more people came along and the people on the building  asked for more sessions) by testing these assumptions and some others that born along the road,

and tried 5 more to compare with the traditional method. Five, i asked for anonymous feedback  by writing their opinions at the end of the workshop, aiming for more honest declarations wearing  the mask of anonymity, and finally sending afterwards a simple test via mail to analyze the  learning level from the participants.

Insight

The ressults of the experiments were astonishing. The difference between what the people with  standard method learnt to the people with more human approach did made me realice that the  people in traditional method weren´t even there, note ven remotely interested, not been able to  remember the things spoke during the workshop as to creating asnwers that weren´t even near  the subject, as to the other group that not only gave good answers but also using examples from  what they were able to do when involved. Also in the feedback with this group, the comments  were most grattitude and possitive declarations asking as why didn´t have this kind of workshops  at their own workplace. More objectively speaking, from the metholodies used and the quality of  the answers and feedback i was able to confirm:

-  People need to be listened, as hearing and validating their opinions makes them feel more  conffident about themselves and cooperate more during the workshop, but it´s not  enoygh as to keep with that opinion as a fact, it´s needed to build more knowledge using it  as a start point.

-  The experience helps to build solid knowledge but it´s necessary to link that experience to  a goal, for itself is justa n experience, son to be forgotten.

-  The point is not to validate every perspective, but the reason behind the perspective. The  perspective alone generates more conflict than solution.

-  The dynamic excercises helps people make more real the learning process and are always  welcome when the person in charge is able to be aware of the context and different needs  from the participants.

-  Discussing the themes aproached during the workshop allows to align and state in specific  concepts for a better understanding.

So in summary, the more human aproach is more effective in the learning process than the  traditional one, but is also needed to specify certain settings as to how to approach diferent  people.

Approach

In the end i was able to come to the realization that the service i wanted to provide couldn´t be a  standard method, but could have a standard base. So for me to be able to provide that kind of  service, i had to come to the next agreements with mi clients before starting any process:

-  Meet the person in charge and gather all information posible and ask some more:

o The actual situation  o The real need  o The expectation  o The theories as to why did it happened  o The people involved

-  Ask for the perspective from the people involved, using a tool created from the  information gathered from the first aproach.

-  To have a base of different aproaches to develop the themes asked from clients, and be  able to adapt the models to tha actual need and context.

-  Ask for perfomance indicators that will alow us to evaluate progress in the future.

Making these agreements will allow me to specify the persona type that will receive the services  and also allign my efforts to the expectation put on the services and control the evaluation  method from the indicators, focusing on the improvemente of those indicators.

What this tool taught me, and the methology itself, is even when i can think that the work is done,  it could also be an opportunity to keep improving on time, and to never be too comfortable to not  keep improving.

