Design Thinking Reflection – Learning Launch

Challenge    I work for a professional services organization which develops and implements software  solutions for clients.  Our project managers (PMs), who are not centralized into a Project  Management Office, lead our teams and responsible for the successful delivery of solutions for  our clients.    We have good project management tools but not a consistent onboarding or training process for  new PMs.  Their training is ad hoc and dependent on their hiring manager, the hiring manager's  knowledge, and the time they have available for onboarding.  And, as a result, new PMs may  not be adequately prepared to successfully lead client engagements and may not be aware of  the tools that are available or how to use them.    Selection    We selected the learning launch tool (as described by Sven Ca in the Week 4 video, Learning  Launch Tool) and outlined the following:      •  Hypothesis:  Newly hired PMs in our organization receive inconsistent and incomplete  onboarding.

•  Idea (including specific group, need, and idea to meet the need):  Newly hired PMs (in  addition to our projects and our clients) would benefit from a more structured training  process.

•  Better than current alternatives:  We believed structured onboarding would be than the  current state, due to feedback from recently hired PMs, including:    o PMs felt they were left to themselves to figure out how to lead projects  o PMs were aware that PM tools were available but did not know how/when to use them  o PM onboarding varied greatly depending on hiring manager

Application    We organized a team to interview recent hires (minimum of 5) and conducted "ride-alongs" to  observe their day-to-day and any gaps in knowledge.  Using data gathered during that process,  we designed training for newly hired PMs and conducted it with a subset of new hires.  We  gathered feedback from the participants, asking them if they felt the training covered what they  needed to know to lead teams and projects, where there were gaps, etc.  Based on their  feedback, we iterated on the training -- making updates and filling gaps, where needed -- and  rolled out the training to other recent new hires.    Insight    During the interviews, ride-alongs, and initial learning launch, we gained feedback that  confirmed assumptions about what was not working in our onboarding process.  However, we  also gained unexpected feedback about what was working.      This reinforced the value of testing a hypothesis, soliciting input from a group, to be able to get  around personal bias.

Approach    The learning launch approach worked well for us.  We were able to get feedback quickly, make  changes to the training, and roll it out to additional participants.  In subsequent surveys, the PMs  who participated in the training sessions indicated they felt better able to lead project teams, use  the available tools, and successfully deliver for our clients.    If we were to augment this effort in the future, I would suggest that we consider mind-mapping  as a tool, to increase the input from additional stakeholders such as project team members,  hiring managers, etc., in addition to the input we have received from project managers  themselves.


Design Thinking Reflection – Learning Launch Challenge I work for a professional services organization which develops and implements software solutions for clients . Our project managers ( PMs ) , who are not centralized into a Project Management Office , lead our teams and responsible for the successful delivery of solutions for our clients . We have good project management tools but not a consistent onboarding or training process for new PMs . Their training is ad hoc and dependent on their hiring manager , the hiring manager 's knowledge , and the time they have available for onboarding . And , as a result , new PMs may not be adequately prepared to successfully lead client engagements and may not be aware of the tools that are available or how to use them . Selection We selected the learning launch tool ( as described by Sven Ca in the Week 4 video , Learning Launch Tool ) and outlined the following : • Hypothesis : Newly hired PMs in our organization receive inconsistent and incomplete onboarding . • Idea ( including specific group , need , and idea to meet the need ): Newly hired PMs ( in addition to our projects and our clients ) would benefit from a more structured training process . • Better than current alternatives : We believed structured onboarding would be than the current state , due to feedback from recently hired PMs , including : o PMs felt they were left to themselves to figure out how to lead projects o PMs were aware that PM tools were available but did not know how / when to use them o PM onboarding varied greatly depending on hiring manager Application We organized a team to interview recent hires ( minimum of 5 ) and conducted " ride - alongs " to observe their day - to - day and any gaps in knowledge . Using data gathered during that process , we designed training for newly hired PMs and conducted it with a subset of new hires . We gathered feedback from the participants , asking them if they felt the training covered what they needed to know to lead teams and projects , where there were gaps , etc . Based on their feedback , we iterated on the training -- making updates and filling gaps , where needed -- and rolled out the training to other recent new hires . Insight During the interviews , ride - alongs , and initial learning launch , we gained feedback that confirmed assumptions about what was not working in our onboarding process . However , we also gained unexpected feedback about what was working . This reinforced the value of testing a hypothesis , soliciting input from a group , to be able to get around personal bias . Approach The learning launch approach worked well for us . We were able to get feedback quickly , make changes to the training , and roll it out to additional participants . In subsequent surveys , the PMs who participated in the training sessions indicated they felt better able to lead project teams , use the available tools , and successfully deliver for our clients . If we were to augment this effort in the future , I would suggest that we consider mind - mapping as a tool , to increase the input from additional stakeholders such as project team members , hiring managers , etc . , in addition to the input we have received from project managers themselves .