The Care and Feeding of Subject Matter Experts

Introduction

The relationship between an Instruction Designer (ID) and each of their Subject Matter Experts (SME) is critical to the success of any training program. Unfortunately, many ID fail to take seriously their responsibilities in the relationships. The relationship issues are compounded by the fact that many SME do not see meeting with an ID as a priority, and may actually see the meeting as an interruption than takes time from their priority tasks.

This stresses of somewhat opposing views often result in less sharing of information in both directions between the ID and the SME. The critical fact is that less sharing prevents highly effective training.

Because I have been both SME and an ID, I have a unique perspective of the experiences and frustrations of the humans on both sides.

Perspective

Imagine that a reporter wants to interview you about your accomplishments in a favorite hobby, for which you have received recognition from both hobbyists and professionals. The reporter arrives late, knows absolutely nothing about either the hobby or your accomplishments, and asks questions that utterly waste your time. You are forced to explain “baby details” in ultra-simple language – and the reporter then produces a piece that is so flawed that you feel both frustrated and embarrassed.

That, unfortunately, is the sad experience of many SME when dealing with unprepared ID.

ID Responsibilities

The ID must research, study, and prepare leading questions that make sense. The ID should know the basics, and illustrate that knowledge to the SME for two important reasons: 1) to allow the SME to know that you have put forth effort, and 2) to allow the SME to correct any erroneous conclusions at which the ID may have arrived.

It is the responsibility of the ID to arrive on time and well prepared, but with an understanding that the meeting may be on-time or delayed because of SME conflicts. ID cannot afford to take such delays personally, as that will cloud the relationship before it starts. It is not unusual for SME to get called into or held in another meeting due to events beyond their control.

It is the responsibility of the ID to know the audience(s) of the training(s), and to focus the discussion with the SME on the areas that are critical to the learning to be developed for those audiences. The ID must ensure that questions do not stray from the topics necessary for “fleshing out” ID understanding of the concepts necessary to craft effective learning that meets learning (and business) objectives.

Some SME must be “drawn out”, but others must be “corralled”. Knowing the subject allows the ID to draw out a non-vocal SME. Tactfully “pulling the reins” can restrain the overly verbose SME at least close to the bounds of the topic.

The ID must meet with the SME, but what if the SME cannot find the time? Tread lightly! In one instance, an SME simply refused to respond. My resolution was to discuss with a friend who knew the person’s boss, and to have his boss ask him “in passing” about the progress on the training. No paper trail, no “thou shalt” from the boss, just a gentle nudge that got the meeting that I needed. The SME and I worked very well together from then on, and became good friends. That would not have happened if “I had my boss call his boss”.

My approach when dealing with complex material is to offer the choice of a one hour long meeting covering all aspects, or three or four 15 minute highly focused meetings. Most SME can find 15 minutes much more easily than they can find an hour, and the focused and time constrained meetings tend (IMHO) to be more productive. E-mail is great for specific “Is this correct?” or “It is not clear from the drawing if the ‘X’ cable attaches to the ‘Y’ or to the Z’” types of issues – but it is not a substitute for a face-to-face meeting.

SME Responsibilities

The SME is responsible for providing reasonable time for meeting with the ID, for verification of accuracy and (partially) for completeness.

Ask the SME to Review

OK. You have created a top-notch training, with all of the “bells and whistles”, and it’s ready to roll out. Hold on! 

You might have misinterpreted a critical statement, or “what you thought you heard” is not what the SME thought he/she actually said. This is a lot more common than some wish to admit.

Most SME will want to review script and/or slides – not video or eLearning – BUT, it is the responsibility of the ID to ask their preference, and comply with their wishes. Following their desires allows them to review as they wish. SME may choose to review at the office, while traveling, or while relaxing at home.

Respond Immediately to SME Feedback

Once I had an ID basically ignore my (SME) feedback for over a week. No “thanks” e-mail, no “got it” as we passed in the hallway, nada. The feedback was critical, as the ID concept was quite divergent from the reality of the functioning of the product. Before I left the country for a few weeks, I needed to know that the ID understood – and was fixing the issues. An SME having to call the boss who is over the ID is not a great scenario – either for the SME or for the ID.

As soon as the ID receives any feedback from the SME, it should be acknowledged in writing for the protection of all parties. My preference is for the ID to state something like “I am modifying the sentence “<this was>” to “<this is>” and <whatever else is changing>. This allows an SME to see and review changes – and correct, if necessary.

Summary

Yes, the relationship between the ID and the SME is a two-way street – BUT, the ID is responsible for most of the relationship experience. Some SME may feel initially that she/he is “doing the ID a favor” by making time to meet, chat, guide, and review. The ID should strive to establish something close to a true partnership, so that ideas can flow freely in both directions between the ID and the SME.

The ID owes the SME the courtesy of prior study of the topics in order to carefully and respectfully use the SME time and talent. The SME owes the ID reasonable meeting time(s) and attention to detail, to ensure that the training is factually correct.

Bio

Larry Randall is an Instructional Designer and Technical Writer with on-site international training creation and face-to-face delivery experience in at least 40 countries. In many cases, his training responsibilities were combined with system and/or product engineering and marketing responsibilities.

A former Program Manager of Training for a 1700 person globally dispersed group at Texas Instruments Incorporated, he is a full member of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, and was elected to Active Grade in the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers. Mr. Randall received both commercial and amateur FCC licenses, as well as an invitation to join MENSA, while still in high school. He currently holds an FCC Lifetime General Radiotelephone Operator License (GROL) and an FCC Amateur Extra Class License. 

Mr. Randall’s experience includes multiple international trips to identify and resolve frequency selection and antenna issues for military organizations and commercial users in places like Egypt, Ecuador, India, Nigeria, and Peru. As the Senior Field Engineer and one of two Product Concept Engineers for a top three cryptographic firm, he designed an HF modem that fit into fatigue pockets, and improved performance of analog scramblers on HF by leveling the output to drive the Single Sideband (SSB) radio to full rated power.

Among his varied interests are ham radio, photography, video production, woodworking, and singing.