What is the problem with doing a decent learning needs assessment?

Why does this happen? Over the years I have done a lot of research into this question, and what I have read suggests that there are a number of factors contributing to inadequate needs assessment processes, both in terms of quantity and quality. The fact that this does not seem to have changed over the years even though it is a common topic of discussion suggests that there are dynamic forces controlling the situation. So I decided to use a system dynamics approach to try and make some sense of what is happening based on the many research papers that I have read on the subject.

This diagram shows a causal flow diagram containing feedback loops which, from my perspective on the situation, show why learning needs assessment continues to be problematic.

Just to explain the conventions used in this diagram, oval shapes are variables and rectangles are external factors. A ‘+’ shows a positive relationship where an increase in one variable causes an increase in the next one (or both decrease) and a ‘—‘ shows an inverse relationship where an increase in one variable causes a decrease in the next one (or vice versa).

In this article I will first review what the significant factors influencing LNA activity are, and will then offer an explanation about how they interact.

My reading round the subject identified a number of significant factors :

First, a thorough LNA may well identify weaknesses in how the organisation is managed or in some aspect of operation. Senior management may therefore think that it is safer to just ask HRD to design and run a training programme rather than for it to identify weaknesses that they would rather keep hidden or unacknowledged.

The second factor is about power dynamics in organisations. Human Resources is a service function, and typically has less power in strategic decision-making than core functions. HR also generally has a higher percentage of women working in it than in other organisational functions,3 and the unfortunate nature of gender dynamics and power imbalances combined with HR as a service function means that core functions exercise a lot of power over what HR can actually do.

The third factor relates to the problems that often exist about actually defining what the goal of any learning programme might be. Organisational problems are almost always ill-defined and complex. Problems overlap and interact, and how one person defines the problem to be solved may well be quite different to how another would. This can make it quite difficult to identify clear goals for any learning activity.

The fourth factor is about the very common belief that new knowledge or skill will be a solution to any performance problem. This is often related to the first factor, that new knowledge and skill can overcome any organisational weaknesses. It also reflects a unitarist management philosophy, that what is good for the organisation is good for the employee, and overlooks the possibility that employees may feel unhappy or uncomfortable about particular things they have to do, in which case new knowledge or skill may not be adopted.

Finally, the actual process of carrying out an LNA is not easy, and the needs analyst needs to have a thorough understanding of how organisations work and why things are not working as required, as well as how organisational learning can contribute to necessary change. It is not easy to acquire the necessary levels of knowledge and expertise in all these knowledge domains, and practitioner textbooks are often overly simplistic in how they explain the process of carrying out an LNA.

So how do I think these interact? To me it seems as if there are three reinforcing loops. Firstly, in what I call the time loop the lack of management desire for an effective LNA means that time allocated to carry out the work is restricted. This means that the LNA will not be as effective and this will strengthen the perception that LNA’s are not an effective use of time, creating a cycle of negative reinforcement. This is also driven by the relative weakness of HRD to lobby for more time.

Second, the basis loop is driven by the problem of defining goals for performance improvement leading to terms of reference for an LNA being poorly defined. This contributes to reduced effectiveness of LNA activities, making it harder for an LNA to identify organisational problems contributing to poor performance and to challenge the assumption that a lack of knowledge or skill is the key problem.

Third, the skill loop means that when LNA’s are not seen to be effective there will be fewer carried out, so that the skill of HRD practitioners in carrying them out will be limited, and this is reinforced by the limitations on LNA models that are available.

The important thing to note about reinforcing loops is that they can reinforce both positively and negatively, depending on the factors influencing them (in systems thinking terminology, the points of leverage). The analysis therefore suggests that the five factors above are all issues that need to be addressed in order to reverse of the negativity of the overall system so that the effectiveness of LNA’s can be improved. This would mean that:

I hope that this analysis of a system for carrying out LNA’s has stimulated some thought in you as a reader. It does represent my particular perspective and thoughts about what is happening, and is intended as an encouragement for more discussion and reflection rather than as a definitive explanation of organisational dynamics.