Learning professionals often overlook the role of governance in ensuring program effectiveness, according to Aaron Olson, Global Director of Talent Programs at Hewitt Associates and adjunct faculty in the Master’s Program in Learning & Organizational Change. Olson’s analysis of this topic appears in the June/July edition of Workforce Solutions Review.
“We are very good at designing and delivering programs aligned to business goals, but too often we miss or mismanage the decision making processes, policies, and structures that play a major role in achieving business impact, ” Olson writes.
An example of mismanaging the governance process includes applying a too-rigid, compliance-based approach. This approach can create a wedge between global or corporate learning leaders and local business units: “Official programs are good, duplicative local programs are bad.” Instead, Olson advocates for governance approaches that “increase stakeholder dialogue, foster innovation, and evaluate options through the lens of business results.”
Three potential approaches are outlined in the Workforce Solutions Review article:
- Mutual accountability. In this approach, the focus is on defining and clarifying roles for making program design decisions across stakeholder groups.
- Freedom within a framework, in which a common framework and language sets boundaries within which local organizations can innovate.
- A portfolio approach to program management. This approach mirrors the way in which financial professionals think about balancing risks/results across a portfolio of investments to maximize return and manage risk.
Join our LinkedIn Group