Related Resources
- “Growing the Internal Leadership Pipeline” (Article in Training Industry Magazine)
- “Leadership Development: Buy or Build?” (Article on Training Industry website)
- AXIOM Strategy & Leadership Practice
Episode Transcript
Scott Rutherford
Hello and welcome to the AXIOM Insights Learning and Development Podcast. I’m Scott Rutherford. This podcast explores topics around driving organizational performance through learning. And today we’re focusing on leader development, in particular about the decisions organizations make when investing in leader development programs. For the purposes of this discussion, this involves the leadership build versus by question interpreted in two ways. First, whether organizations are better off developing the leadership behaviors and aptitudes of their existing staff, or whether they should seek to hire the desired leadership traits from outside the company. And secondly, the pros and cons about developing a leader development program using internal resources versus working with an external partner. These themes are explored in more detail into articles published in training industry magazine, and on the training industry website, co-authored by today’s guests, David Hosmer, is Principal Consultant, and Susan Franzen is Vice President for leadership and strategy, both with the Strategy and Leadership Practice at AXIOM Learning Solutions.
And so to begin our conversation, we took a look at how the need for leader development is identified with an organization. I asked David Hosmer, what do people observe in their organization that makes them start looking for a leader development solution or program?
David Hosmer
The short answer to that question is change. And you know, there could be significant change at the macro level and entire organization is going through some major change, for example, electric utility company going through deregulation, or a culture shift from you know, in a hospital setting from say, you know, a one culture to a more participative culture. So change it from that respect, but also change as it relates to anything that might be occurring in the organization like business growth. So you know, increase in revenue, increasing growth, new markets, going global versus domestic succession planning is another trigger. So, you know, we have new leaders being developed in order to remain strong, have a have a strong pipeline of leaders, this is a more proactive approach versus a reactive, so having enough leaders to ensure that we are ready for the future. And that might also be triggered by change. We anticipate change, and we want to make sure we have enough leaders lined up in order to to move the organization into the future. So so another part of that answer is sometimes we’re being reactive and an organization reacting to something that’s already occurred. And in some cases, we’re being proactive being prepared for emerging change.
Scott Rutherford
So let’s bring Susan Franzen in here, Susan, in your experience in leader development, do you see people being more reactive or proactive?
Susan Franzen
So I think people want to be proactive, but I think the the reality is that we’re more reactive. So as as David was saying, change, like I was thinking, sort of the opposite, like, stagnancy status quo, right? Because there has to be some sort of dissatisfaction. That’s either prompting the change or prompting the need to expand or develop these leadership skills that don’t exist today. So I think it’s a reaction to that dissatisfaction, even though a lot of times we hear, no, we’re not experiencing any problems, we just want to be prepared for the future. Well, there’s something that’s happening, that’s telling them that they need to do something different for the future. And so trying to get to the core, that dissatisfaction drives the change that David’s talking about, and drives the need for greater or more enhanced leader development.
David Hosmer
Yeah, so you know, just to piggyback on what Susan is saying, you know, employee surveys, is a great tool that many organizations use to say, you know, to indicate whether or not development leadership development in particular is, is necessary in an organization. We get lots of data from, you know, well designed employee engagement surveys, employee surveys, that can sometimes can sometimes help some of those issues that Susan is alluding to emerge, and give us some data to say, OK, where do we need, what do we need for leadership development? What are the skills? Where are the gaps? So yeah, so employee engagement surveys can be a good a great tool for this as well.
Susan Franzen
I agree.
Scott Rutherford
What about benchmarking? I would imagine if you’re looking at your own business, in the context of competitors, and you’re seeing that you are, for example, underperforming in terms of retention, do you find benchmarking competitive analysis and input as well?
Susan Franzen
I haven’t seen benchmarking be as significant of a driver for any leadership development requests that we’ve come across. You know, I think obviously, being paying close attention to who your competition is, and why you’re losing opportunities is important. But the more formal benchmarking, I’ve not seen a lot of it, have you, David?
David Hosmer
No, although, you know, the mention of retention is an important point, you know, information like turnover, retention can be indicators as well. And then, you know, consider the situation we’re in today with new work environment. employees want to be working environment where they can be, you know, work hybrid, or work from home more often than working in their office, that requires a whole new approach to managing and leading, and we’re not — in the leadership realm, this is not something that we’ve faced with, we’ve been faced with before, as much as we are today.
Susan Franzen
I think that’s so true, David, the expectations of the general workforce has changed. And leaders are sort of scrambling to try and catch up with that and make sure that they’re balancing the needs and experiences of the employees with the needs of the work and what needs to be done. So it’s, it’s it’s a totally different landscape.
Scott Rutherford
So as you as you approach a or as you’re approached by someone who is within an organization, they they’ve identified a need, and come to you and say we need your help. What’s the next step in terms of really peeling the layers of the onion, and understanding the drivers of that need for you? And I know, we’ve talked about, you know, the needs assessment, and how do you begin getting your arms around? What’s really going on? From that first conversation moving forward?
David Hosmer
Yeah, you know, the first question I always ask is, why now? And you know, what’s driving the need now, and that can sometimes open up the door to some really fruitful, very fruitful conversation about, you know, what are the drivers here? What are the, you know, what data do you have to indicate that you need to that you need leadership development and some change now? So that’s the first question I always ask is, why now? And how do you know, you know, what, what’s telling you that you have some, some need for leadership development? And I also asked the question, What do you mean by leadership development? And try to understand, you know, because because sometimes, you know, we might, we might have — Susan and I might have an idea about what leadership development is, and our clients might have a different idea of what leadership development is. So we want to make sure we’re talking about the same the same point.
Scott Rutherford
So it’s the question of what does done look like?
David Hosmer
Yeah, yeah.
Susan Franzen
There’s a three part question that I always ask, which is, you know, what do you want people coming out of this program, thinking, feeling and doing? And, and by breaking it down into those three areas, it really helps the client get clear on, gee, what is it that I want to see that’s different? Because they might, a lot of times they start out saying, Well, no, we’re doing it really well, the way we’re doing it now. But they can’t really articulate what’s working and what’s not working. So when you start to drill down with the why, why now? And then what do you want to see as outcomes, and really creating an outcomes driven program, I think that really gets to the root of why the client wants to do this now.
David Hosmer
Sometimes that also helps us understand whether or not leadership development is the right solution. And it may be part of the solution or may not be the solution. But other systems, some systemic issues that also need to be addressed, in addition to providing leadership development, or instead of, so it sometimes helps unveil some other issues that might need to be addressed as well.
Scott Rutherford
I like the use of the term systemic because leader development leaders don’t exist in a vacuum, right? Leaders have to lead someone or something. So it is, at some level, it’s a systemic change, or behavior change that you’re looking for. But — do you find people, you find a lot of people coming in and say, Well, I want to develop and change the behaviors of only this few people or do people think of it more broadly?
Susan Franzen
I think that depends on the client, and the situations that they’re experiencing.
Scott Rutherford
Or should they? I guess, maybe be prescriptive. You know, what, what’s the best advice for for, you know, think of it like that sort of comes down to the question of who are we serving? Who are the leaders we’re developing who, what, who are the first population we’re focusing on them, and how does that relate to the organization?
Susan Franzen
I think you’re definitely better served by taking that more holistic or systemic view. Because, you know, sometimes we get requests for we want leadership development, and it’s, we’re gonna give you an hour at our next retreat, and they want all these results. And, you know, you say, you can’t do that in an hour. I mean, this is developmental, this is a process, it doesn’t happen overnight.
And so really trying to look at it, not just how about the people going through the program, but what is shifting in the organization, that makes it a different organization when they come out the other side, so that they can actually put into practice the things that they’re learning the skills, the behavior changes?
You know, we talk in the article about that transition from, you know, individual contributor to Manager and Manager of small groups to higher level mid level manager to higher level senior managers. And those are completely different playing fields. So how do you prepare both the individual and the field that they’re going to be playing on to make sure that they’re successful in applying what you’ve just invested to teach them?
David Hosmer
Yeah, so you might have several, you might have more than one targeted audience or participant, you know, you could have sort of as soon as Susan’s alluding to, you might have new managers, for example, new managers moving into leadership positions, that might require some level development that is going to be different than leaders who are experienced, and are moving to a different level of development. So, you know, sometimes we have to separate out through the conversation, who requires or needs some leadership development? At what levels? For what reasons? And back to Susan’s point about what are we hoping to accomplish, you know, behave do, you know, think differently, and, and so forth.
Scott Rutherford
And as senior leaders behave differently, think differently and act differently, mid level managers behave differently, act differently, think differently. You’re influencing culture. Because the, you know, the the the net effect of that is, is, does that all trickle down? Or propagate into the organization? I guess that’s the ideal, you want it to.
Susan Franzen
Yes, yes. Yeah, I think, you know, having a leadership philosophy helps to define the culture. But culture is, you know, unless you can get the majority of the staff behind it, that’s just going to be absorbed and neutralized. So we’ve all seen really strong leaders who come in from outside the organization who are unable to get the alignment in order to be able to make changes to the culture.
So if you’re thinking about a leadership program, to you’re really wanting to define your culture through that leadership program, and that those are the shifts that are happening while the individuals are going through the program so that they emerge into something that looks closer to the desired culture.
Scott Rutherford
And you allude to something that was was a major part of the article, which is the build versus hire. Well, I’m sorry, that which is — develop versus hire? Could you maybe talk us through pros and cons of the two options?
David Hosmer
Pros and cons of you know, buying from the outside versus building internally, you know, there’s so many variables to consider. And every organization is different, every organization is going to have different needs, every organization is going to have different resources available or not available. So back to the pros and cons. So if you’re, you know, if you’re a large organization of 50,000 employees, you’re more likely to have more resources available, for example, a well organized, mature learning and development function that can support much of the work internally. And in might also augment with some external experts, subject matter experts or experts on certain items, for example, assessment tools, you know, you might not have an assessment tool internally for 360 degree feedback, then it would make sense to probably hire someone from the outside to bring that in and work with the organization on what that means for leadership development.
But — so, the pros and cons being you know, if you have the resources, then that’s great, but most organizations don’t have the resources to do everything internally and might want to supplement with some external as well. The other about the other point of all bringing in external resources, you get a different perspectives. Many times organizations I know an organization in higher ed, that has a leadership program, a very successful leadership program. But they do not want any external speakers coming in to serve as what they call “faculty,” because they want their institutional specific values and language, if you will, in the leadership program, they don’t want external.
Scott Rutherford
But that’s I mean, that there’s there’s a difficult path to walk, though, isn’t it? Because on one hand, I understand you want to have a well protected and well nurtured corporate culture. On the other hand, you risk sort of being, you know, navel gazing too much. And, you know, you can you can quickly find yourself in a situation where, well, you know, that’s not how we do things here. And then with some of the negative outcomes that comes with that mode of thought, so, I mean, is there a – obviously, I think there’s what you’re saying is, there’s some benefit to having upside perspective. So how do you how do you talk to a company that says, Well, you know, if we bring in folks from the outside, that’s that’s, they don’t see that as a positive?
David Hosmer
You know, I’ll just tell you what I think and then Susan, feel free to jump in. You know, my first reaction to that is, let’s go back to your objectives. What are we trying to accomplish? If you want change in culture? If you want change, then where can you get some additional perspective, new perspectives in order to help you foster that change in that leader leadership program, development is the key word here Development Program is a prime opportunity to bring in new thinking new ideas, and help leaders begin to think and behave differently.
Susan Franzen
I think that internally run programs can become very insular, they can repeat things that were done in the past. What we find, because we do a lot of programs, over and over again, is that even from year to year, our programs have to be refreshed. Because there’s different people in the group, there’s different needs of the organization, even sometimes, from one session to the next. You’re tweaking the content and how you’re approaching that particular group. And so when you’re delivering it internally, they’re sort of this idea of, we’ve invested all of this to develop the program. And we’re going to run it over and over again, and make sure that everybody gets it exactly the same way. But that’s not how we experience the organization. And so I think having, having that external expertise that says, okay, you know, this group is experiencing the content this way. So here’s, here’s the changes, or the tweaks that we recommend, maybe it’s moving some topic up sooner and the content or it’s completely revising a specific activity or how things happen within the program.
Internal facilitators, internal resources are not going to have that experience because they know only working within the internal organization. And that’s not to say anything bad about them, you know, they’re doing great work, but they don’t have that breadth of knowledge, that lateral knowledge, they have more vertical knowledge about how to deliver leadership development.
David Hosmer
You know, in addition to that, Susan, we have the other the other knowledge that is, you know, the external, if you are looking at external experts, then they should be experts, also in the latest leadership principles, because there’s always there are always new options, new models. And experts generally from the outside are are keeping keeping up with various models, new practices, have exposure to many, many organizations and that is deep experience that has some value. So, and that goes across industries, you know, many industries are, are experiencing similar challenges and issues that can that can also benefit from an expert’s knowledge about you know, what, what are we doing over here that might be helpful for you.
Scott Rutherford
And it makes sense to that you know, as you’re as you’re working with a company working with with with individuals on a path toward leader development, you know where you want to go but the the reality of where they are, is going to change. That’s the whole nature of the beast, you want that you want them to experience change and to grow and evolve. So as that happens, I think what I’m hearing is you need to be flexible enough to meet them where they are. And adjust.
Susan Franzen
Yeah, and David is one of the better, better or best people that I know who does that. He goes in pretty content light. And he is able to, to kind of adjust what he wants to share or where the content, the the topic is the topic, but he’s able to adjust and adapt based on where those sitting in that that leader seat are coming from, and able to get them to, to interact with the materials in ways that are very applicable to their day to day environment, as opposed to just saying, well, we can’t go there because we have an agenda to follow, right. And I think that flexibility is really important.
Scott Rutherford
I was hoping to get your thoughts and maybe an example or two on what, what this looks like, as you get through a point of maturity. You know, I don’t want to say the end of leader development because, you know, it’s one of these things, I suppose you’re never really done. But at the at the at the conclusion of a program, the participants in the organization should be able to look at their roles and their behaviors and their organization and their peers and see change happen. What effects do you see? What do you hear from participants after working with them over over time that – what can someone who was at the beginning of that process learn, do you think, from someone who’s been through it?
David Hosmer
Yeah, you know, Susan and I have had this discussion many times about the value of cohort programs. So having a group of leaders go through a program, a leadership program together, because the value is learning from each other. And so a big plus in that approach is that leaders are learning from each other. And many times, it’s their first exposure to each other from across a larger organization. So they’re building networks as well. So they’re building networks, they’re learning from each other, they’re learning about various functions. And they also build a network that they can rely on after, after the sort of so called his formal leadership program event, if you want to call it that. They build relationships so that we as facilitators can help help facilitate conversations amongst them for peer coaching, for example, and also to carry forward some of their learning and utilize each other as resources beyond the the leadership program itself.
We hear lots of feedback on, you know, this is a fantastic program; without this, we probably would not have met, you know, the colleagues that we’ve met, we’ve got new theories, models that we can put into action.
So action, and taking from sort of the theoretical and putting into practice is something that is of high value to participants, it gives them the opportunity to practice in a safe environment, whatever it is, that they’re learning, and we we have them practice and work on real situations, we’re not talking about hypotheticals, we have them bring real situations into the so called classroom, and, and grapple with those, and they use each other as sort of coaches, if you will, in addition to, you know, some of the facilitation on our part to help them come to some conclusions. So I’m not sure if that gets at your, you know, your question, but these are the values this is the value, or these are the values that participants get from it. Beyond that, I think, you know, we can talk about that as well.
Susan Franzen
I think there’s also, you know, a strong self reflection component in the program. Creating awareness of their surroundings. So asking those participants, you know, what are what are other people saying about you and your style? How are your interactions with your most challenging colleagues changing? What you know, so really asking them some very thought provoking questions to be more aware of what they’re experiencing as changes and then what they’re hearing and seeing from others. I think it’s also really critical to bring in the supervisors of the participants and get their feedback on what are they seeing, because they’re viewing it from a very different perspective. They’re not involved in the day to day aspects of the program, but they are involved in the day to day aspects of what other people are are saying or how they’re responding to their, their staff members.
Scott Rutherford
So is there any guidance that you would offer about taking that cohort and reaching out further into the organization? How does cohort number one, help identify cohort number two? Take the hypothetical you have a large organization you bring, you know, an n number of people 10, 20, 50 through as a first group. They’re sort of released back out into the wild. They’re doing the work, walking the walk. But as as Susan, you mentioned, they’re of course, they’re they’re interacting with colleagues and folks who have not been through the program themselves. One effect the I think you’d want to see from that, is that is that what they’ve learned starts to have an effect on the people they work with. Sure. But is there a evolution that you would recommend or that you see between taking that initial group and reaching out to well, okay, or is there another group that comes through a similar program? How does that how does that continue? How does that, how do you breathe life into that in a way that that’s going to carry forward in the organization?
David Hosmer
Yeah, you know, I have a couple of answers to that question. Let me know if I’m not answering it. One is, you know, in one organization that has had leadership program, every other year, it takes about a year for them to actually plan a program, because there’s so much involved. And what they have done is created an alumni group.
So they’re building a larger, larger alumni network, every single time, they hope they have a leadership program graduate. So you have that. So you’re now you’re you’re sort of infusing the organization with future leaders, and a strong network of leaders learning from each other, and being able to reach out to each other. And also having similar similar philosophy, values, behavior, models that are used within the organization, and then also being able to provide additional learning opportunities beyond that, so that, you know, the program doesn’t end at the end of the year per se. You know, there’s ongoing learning as well.
A specific example though, beyond the one, what I’ve just described is, you know, the healthcare organization, a large Harvard teaching hospital, that wanted to move their culture from, to a more participative culture, that was the vision. And we developed a program, I use the word program, but it’s a, you know, a development series, if you want to call it, of creative problem solving, and a number of different initiatives that was quite comprehensive, that helped from the top down. The president of the of the medical center, right down to every single supervisor in the organization. And this went on for over two years. So they all learned a the same creative problem solving process, creative problem solving process.
The indicators that told us that it was working, for example, there were more meetings with that were more participative. More people involved with meetings, supervisors, managers, and leaders asking questions, asking employees for their input. Supervisors, managers and leaders also coming up with new ideas, innovative ideas that translate into real solutions for the Medical Center.
An example being this particular medical center needed a way for a new the way to get patients very quickly to the hospital, in the middle of an urban environment, almost impossible to get an ambulance there on time. So they came up with the idea of a helipad. Okay, well, helipad, but where do you put it in the middle of the city. And the solution was to put it, put the helipad on the roof. And that’s exactly what they did. So this helipad does exist today. And it’s used to, you know, to get patients very quickly to the hospital when they need to. That’s just one example. There’s many examples like that.
Susan Franzen
I would add that, you know, I think, in any leader development program, there’s always an opportunity for alumni to be engaged. Whether that becomes as peer mentors or coaches throughout the program, whether they’re invited back to speak or to facilitate a portion of a session, whether they’re there to serve as ambassadors, that as they grow in their roles and move up in the organization that they then send their team members or they influence their direct supervisors to send others.
One of our clients is trying something really unique this year, they’re actually asking alumni to coach those who have not yet been accepted into the program, and how to better prepare their applications to be accepted into the program, and in what things they need to do in order for those applications to be as robust as possible.
So they’re not, they’re not coaching them to write a better application, they’re coaching them to do more around leadership that prepares them to be able to reflect what they’ve done and where they’re headed more clearly.
Scott Rutherford
That sounds like it really takes it’s really taking root in the organization through that sort of behavior.
Susan Franzen
It is, and again, you know, I think in any, in any situation where you’re doing leader development, especially if you’re working with an external partner, they really need to be a partner, that some ideas come from the client, some ideas come from the partner, but you work together as a seamless team, to do what’s best for the people who are going through the program and for the organization.
And if you don’t have that level of relationship, then you need to find a new partner. You’ve got to be flexible, you’ve got to be adaptable, you have to be open to the fact that even though you’re you might be coming in as a as a quote unquote “expert,” the client has a lot of experience and knowledge about leadership within their organization, and you just have to find a way to work together and make it really the best it can be.
Scott Rutherford
Yeah, for the most part of understanding the background, and you know, the lived experience of, of the people in the organization that you’re serving. The consultant, by definition isn’t going to have that background.
Susan Franzen
Right. Right.
Scott Rutherford
So as we wrap up, I wanted to get both of your thoughts. So you know, there’s in this would, I think, apply most to an organization that is, again, going back to back to the beginning, early in the process of thinking about, okay, we need to take some action and leader development we have — typically there’s a champion of this sort of initiative and organizations, my experience, those champions sometimes will face resistance. Okay, well, is this really where we want to spend the money? Is this really where we want to spend the time? I wanted to get your thoughts on, well, what objections have you heard from folks who are trying to be that champion, trying to trying to reach out and, and, and affect change? And so what what are the obstacles that you’ve even heard of? And? And how would you counsel folks to move around them?
David Hosmer
Yeah, you know, the biggest obstacle I’ve heard in, in my career is, is the is the money, issue, the financials, you know, what, you know, what’s this going to cost? What are we getting for our money with, you know, where’s the, you know, where’s the ROI? And, you know, there’s, that’s always the first question is, what’s the ROI? How do we know that we’re, you know, we’re going to get something in return for this. And that’s usually the biggest objection, if any. I don’t usually hear a lot of objection to leadership development, but that is the one that usually comes up.
Scott Rutherford
So where do you where do you take folks? I mean, obviously, you can you can speak, you know, from experience and share stories of other clients. But, you know, how do you answer well, what’s the ROI of this? What are we what are we gonna get out of it from a dollar and cents sense?
David Hosmer
Yeah, you know, it, sometimes it’s not dollar and cents. It sometimes it is about, you know, going back to the whole idea about what’s the pain point here, what are we trying to achieve? What are we trying to accomplish? And what if we don’t do something? What’s the you know, what is, you know, what was likely to be the case if we don’t change? And you know, this, this always this goes back to the question, I always ask upfront, “why now,” why why is it important for leadership development now, what are we trying to accomplish?
So I always go back to, you know, the initial objectives, all that always also try to get the champion from the very top as far up to the top as possible. Because, you know, he or she who has the gold makes the rules and so, you know, they have, they have the influence, usually as close to the top as we can get it.
But I also, and there are some ways to, to get the ROI. It’s a little bit complicated when you think about using say, for example, Kirkpatrick’s model on, you know, assessing development and training programs, if you will. So, the five, you know, the five, various ways of measuring development, we, you know, we go back to that as well. And we do use that model and try to as much as possible use a way of showing the value add. But mostly, you know, sometimes it’s pain avoidance and other times, what are you going to get in return? But I’ll stop there and let Sue answer as well.
Susan Franzen
No, I thought that was a great answer. Yeah, I, again, I think it goes back to how you plan your program to protect your investment. So it is, you know, there are ways to do it, that you are, you’re shifting the culture, you’re shifting the environment, you’re eliminating processes that stop people from being able to lead effectively or to be able to get their jobs done. You’re taking that systemic approach, and that really is what helps you to protect your investment. Because you don’t you want it to be sticky, you want people to come out of it, not just having said that’s a great experience, but actually being able to carry that experience with them.
You know, it can be really delicate when you come out of a leader development program, and you have all this excitement and enthusiasm and you’ve learned all these new skills. And then three or four months later, you’re you’ve all of a sudden just evolved back to where you were before you started it, because the system around you has not changed.
So we we really work with clients to try and figure out how do we help them protect their investment in leader development by looking at all the things that need to be in place in order to support these leaders once they emerge from the program?
Scott Rutherford
Susan, that’s something you and I have talked about many times. So offline off the podcast, as well, the notion of the need for sustainment and reinforcement.
Susan Franzen
Yes.
David Hosmer
Yeah, the other you know, something else to back to your question, Scott about the, you know, the sort of the barriers, if you will, or resistance, the only other item that comes to mind that we sometimes have to be careful about is who gets selected to be in the program, because some programs are designed in a way that one must apply. So one gets accepted into a program that is sometimes perceived as elite in an organization, so those who don’t get selected, if you will, and even if they do apply and they don’t get selected, “why is that they got selected, but I didn’t?”
So inadvertently might be could be, you know, might be creating some sort of hard feelings, if you will, because I don’t, you know, one doesn’t get selected. So it’s something to be cognizant of, and think in advance about how you’re going to deal with that, if that issue comes up?
Scott Rutherford
Well, sure, no, I mean, that’s, that’s a natural reality, any sort of any sort of development program you put in an organization that, you know, high potential program for younger, earlier phase employees. The folks who don’t get selected, are going to wonder why. Yeah, you know, that’s human nature. So yeah, I think going into that eyes wide open is probably wise.
David Hosmer
Yeah. Yeah. And transparency. You know, I’m a firm believer in transparency, you know, being very clear about what the program is, what it’s for, and why all of those questions, all those important questions should be transparent.
Scott Rutherford
Thank you to David Hosmer, Principal Consultant, and Susan Franzen, Vice President of leadership and strategy, both with the Strategy and Leadership practice of AXIOM Learning Solutions. The two articles co authored by David and Susan are published in the fall 2023 edition of training industry magazine, and on the training industry.com website, and you can find links to both articles on the podcast episode page at axiomlearningsolutions.com/podcast.
This podcast is a production of AXIOM Learning Solutions. AXIOM connects learning professionals with the people and skills needed for virtually any learning project, including on demand staff augmentation from a network of thousands of vetted professionals with expertise in instructional design, learning strategy, training, delivery, learning, technology, administration, and more. And AXIOM also provides complete project outsourcing for any learning project, including learning content creation content updates, again. To learn more about AXIOM or to discuss your learning project, contact us at axiomlearningsolutions.com And thank you for listening to the AXIOM Insights Podcast.