15 September Managing Oneself: Work Relationships (...trust...)

[Paul Terlemezian]

As a mathemetician I have been fascinated by numbers and statistics - this is also why I probably became a baseball fan at an early age.

 

Over the years, however there has been an increased focus on baseball players that were consistently part of winning teams even though their "statistics" might not have compared favorably with others that played the same position. It has been asserted that their managers and teammates knew they were "winners" despite what the individual statistics revealed.

 

Perhaps statisticians have been measuring the wrong things?

 

This reflects a problem that training needs to address. So many of the statistics that we collect on training's impact are based on individual performance. We measure if the indivudual was happy (level 1), learned anything (level 2), could apply what they learned (level 3) and if the learning made a diffrence to their job performance (level 4.).These are all very important and there is value in continuing to measure them.

 

I wonder if any of these measurements are influenced by the impact of the peer group (i.e. teammates) of the learner?

 

I suspect that level 3 or level 4 performance is impacted significantly by the teammates - especially the first and second level manager but also significantly by subordinates and peers.

 

What aspects of training can we implement that increase the ability of the teammates to enable the success of the learner?