Action Based Learning

This week we launched our own, internal ITIL simulation.

Over the years I have been a participant and facilitator of a number of simulations and although not so much surprised, I am always amazed by even though each group approaches the simulation differently, and even though the results are quite different; each and every simulation manages to unearth some real basic mistakes people make with service management (in a semi-practical situation).

We all know (or should be aware) that we learn and retain much better by doing and participating than passive absorbing (visual or auditory). See for instance the learning pyramid.

Unfortunately the ITIL Foundations syllabus forces us to focus on the definition and explanation of a large number of facts. And the market forces us to do this in ever decreasing timeframes: personally I struggle to get through everything in three days (in a satisfactory manner), but I have now seen two-day-weekend courses and I hate to think the amount of death-by-fact (PowerPoint or otherwise) this would entail.

The pressure of the exam, the syllabus & the market leaves little time for true hands-on experience. Even in the Intermediate and Expert ITIL modules the content and contact hour requirements of the syllabus, and the specific format of the exam, leaves only a limited amount of time for practical exercises.

The introduction of on-line training as a cheap and convenient alternative only increase this as it becomes much harder to have direct interaction with other students and the facilitator (in role based scenarios, collaborative analysis, practical exercises etc.).

This is why I have always been an advocate of ‘course follow-up’. Within a corporate environment I see this as a manager’s responsibility as they have just invested your\the participant’s time & their money into a training course and therefor they should make sure they get value-for-money.

After Foundations (which is normally reserved for junior staff who have recently joined the organisation) I would suggest to have them review the process & documentation. Specifically of a process they are or will be involved with (most likely incident management). Not so much an audit, but a fresh pair of eyes (with fresh ITIL knowledge) which can perhaps not only find flaws and areas of improvement, but at least validate whether the process is clearly document and easily understood.

Staff that returns from an Intermediate course could perform a ‘maturity assessment’ on the current processes and create a (small) CSI plan, and perhaps implement this. Higher levels of education (i.e. the MALC or Expert level) will increase the scope and complexity of this assessment\improvement.

But back to the post-Foundations period. For a lot of staff an Intermediate course might be some time away and meanwhile they are supposed to apply their new-found service management knowledge or at least a part of it (predominantly service operations). In my experience, even in a mature service management organisation their exposure will be limited, to only a few processes (like incident, request, problem & change management).

Over time their awareness of ‘the rest’ may fade, and even with regards to the processes they participate in, their knowledge might be skewed by the specific implementation of them (or the tools in use). Thus it pays to, from time-to-time, repeat the Foundations course. After all, as an ex-colleague of mine used to say, a tennis-pro still practices their basic strokes every day. But because now there is no pressure of a syllabus or exam, I would not suggest to actually re-do the ITIL Foundation course, but instead choose a more practical approach, which focusses on the true service management principles (instead of the specific ITIL interpretation and definitions).

A simulation is a great way of doing so. In the role-play people adopt their own natural behaviours and a good facilitator can then point out whether these align to the theory or not. If not, it can then be determined whether these ‘altered’ behaviours contributed or detracted from the results. This way the people can experience how the ITIL theory supports the simulation, but also how sometimes ‘home-grown’ adaptations benefit the overall outcome (and often how they do not!).

As said, I love the fact that in a good simulation, no matter what the groups and individuals do, there are always these learning points. The pilot and first run of our simulation was done with managers and senior staff. These are all people that have their ITIL Expert qualification as well as an extensive experience working in a service management environment (often based on the ITIL processes). And still you see them adopt practices that may not necessarily be in line with the theory (and not always the best).

Whilst these experienced staff normally get to a better result, faster than a novice group, there are still many benefits for them doing this kind of exercise. Just think of how beneficial this will be for junior staff, who have a much smaller understanding of the total scope and benefit of service management. If nothing else it reinforces the theory but in a far more practical application, something we can all do with periodically!

the ITIL Zealot
March 2013