Chaos.
A disorganized experience where someone or a company seeks one thing, opens up to another, then realizes they actually wanted something else, or more.
What is taking place, and is quite visible in our industry, is the changing of the guard, creating an even more convoluted landscape for those in L&D, Training, Associations, and other departments- yes, HR too- seeking a learning platform – a learning system (regardless of type) for the sake of learning and training their customers, employees, association members, or a combo of customers and employees.
The other landscape is purchasing an HCM with learning built in, or as an add-on.
One is a core, the other isn’t.
An HCM (Human Capital Management) is heavy on skills development, with learning tied in, and the kicker: very few focus solely on trade services (i.e., trade workers).
Rather, it is the white-collar professional. The compliance. The onboarding – wrapped into a nice tiny bow with skills at the forefront.
Throw in some AI and whalla, and my learning is instantly better for everyone involved, especially those whose main focus isn’t, per se, learning.
The buyer of said HCM is first and foremost HR folks, not someone with L&D experience. And definitely not someone overseeing training with a training background.
Sure, they have what is defined as talent, but what is actually talent?
Someone whose job will be replaced in a couple of years due to AI?
Someone whose skills will be non-applicable and thus needs reskilling (something that is truly poor in the industry in doing, since it is all about skills dev now, skills tied to job role, skills tied to performance, and hey, why reskill – your gig will be around, after reduction due to AI).
If you have to create content, who’s better: someone from HR or someone with an L&D or training background, regardless of skill level?
I would prefer the latter, but maybe I’m in the old-school group.
When you talk about this blitz, you have systems that are on the tiptoe line of going HCM, but they’re still learning systems, focused on learning, often okay, mainly for folks in L&D.
After all, I wouldn’t be buying an HCM for learning if I wanted customer/client/partner training, or even a combo of employees and customers.
Then we have the systems that are all about learning and training.
Onboarding. Skills Development and growth for employees, customers, association members, and even, yep, direct-to-consumer.
If I want my learning to target a frontline worker or a trade service worker, the core, essential piece is the mobile app with on/off sync.
Is AI crucial here?
Probably not, just an added zip or zing, but you can deliver everything you need for the learner without tapping into AI and those nasty token fees you can expect.
Amid the explosion of growth segments, pipes for finding the next buyer, and a lot of vendors, learning system vendors are zeroing in on the CHR (Chief Human Resources) person, or the person overseeing HR.
This baffles me because, if I want that customer, I have to recognize, at least internally, that the system must have specific capabilities that those overseeing HR need and want.
The problem is that it isn’t, or often won’t be, what the person in L&D wants. Even if they are under HR (the old joke being, Training folks don’t want to be under L&D, L&D doesn’t want to be under Training, and nobody wants to be under HR).
If I want learning for my employees, and learning is the core, the must-have, then I only want learning.
If I want an HCM, then I buy it separately without the learning piece.
I know you will say buying the HCM hits two birds with one stone, but that isn’t the case here.
You may be gone tomorrow (the HCM buyer for learning), and the next person comes in and wants learning from a learning system, not HR; what happens?
HCMs have a place in the grand scheme of things for HR, but learning is another avenue.
You want skills development, whereas you are a skilled learning and development individual (that usually has a background in OD); it can be found in a learning system.
If you want customer training, you should never buy an HCM, because that is never its focus.
Again, Human Capital Management. Not a Customer Training Platform.
Cornerstone is pitched in Europe as an HCM.
I must admit, if the head of Sales in Europe is pushing it as an HCM, and they now run all of sales, will it still be seen as an HCM?
I hope not, because its learning is really strong for the L&D client in the Enterprise space, and their AI functionality is well-placed for learning, depending on how you define learning for your employee when it comes to leveraging AI.
Hence the conundrum.
Do I buy an HCM and tap into its learning component, whether it is included or purchased as an add-on, or do I purchase a learning system for the primary purpose of training my employees, customers, or even my members?
Because one is going to be focused here, and the other’s core focus is there.
Leading simply to
Chaos.
E-Learning 24/7
The post Chaos – HCM for Learning or Learning for Learning appeared first on FindAnLMS.
