DIBs, MIRT, & 7 Easy Steps

By Eva Clare Stein, Ph.D., CCEP, LPEC, 30 October 2020

Deliberate Institutional Behaviors (DIBs)

    Those seeking to find solutions to realize superior outcomes will find a marketplace flush with tools, rubrics, methodologies, and seminars. Scholars are also relentless in their pursuit to find correlations between successful outcomes and relevant influencing factors. Even within this data/resource-rich environment, to look outward for solutions is time-consuming, expensive, and risky. On the surface, finding the correct solution … and … thoroughly implementing it may appear easy enough in the beginning of a continuous improvement effort, but it quickly loses its appeal when little measurable movement is realized and considerable time, effort, and resources are spent.

    An off-of-the-shelf prescriptive cure can easily turn into ‘the fix flavor of the day’ for one simple reason. An external prescribed event (or activity) is only that … merely an event that soon loses momentum and gives way to a yet another “new approach.” Rarely, if ever, does a general prescriptive approach fit the organizational culture or its unique requirements. Rather than seek a solution that one applies to improve outcomes, a holistic approach would be to look inward for the solution, and instead of looking at outcomes as a metric to fix or upon which to focus, let us begin to internalize the notion that improvement metrics are merely outcomes … outcomes of what we do and how we do it … deliberate institutional behaviors (DIBs). Simply put, we should focus on our individual and collective behaviors … DIBs … to truly drive meaningful and lasting change.

    While there are limitless institutional behaviors to consider and a marketplace flush with tools and know how to drive outcomes, businesses are constrained at nearly every turn. Business environments are constrained by their limited access to funding, people, time, and space … essentially every single necessary resource sans the very need for change! Therefore, we must be very deliberate and highly selective in all that we do, for we cannot (nor should we really want to) do everything.

DIBs and Education

    Imagine a three-legged stool and atop of it sits various student outcomes, of which, retention is just one (alongside graduation and placement rates). Schools meticulously track these metrics to support various requirements such as reporting, funding, marketing, ROI and the like. Truly though, what sits atop this stool is most precious for they are not merely metrics meant to be managed and monitored. Rather, what sits atop are learners … the very lives of those we are charged to inspire and develop. Of all of the pathways that a person may take in life (by chance or by choice), it is through education that we can truly influence the course of life.

    Back to the three-legged stool … suppose that the three-legged stool represents DIBs focused on the instructor, student satisfaction, and student success (and not retention, graduation rates, and placement).

Figure 1: The Three-legged Stool

The Three Legs

Leg #1:  The Instructor

    In large part, “it happens in the classroom” (IHITC), and “it” can be defined as student outcomes. Instructors shape, influence, and change lives through the interactions that they have with their students. Therefore, we must go far beyond merely supporting our instructors. A DIB would include how we attract, recruit, and hire instructional talent. This is but one example of how deliberate institutional behaviors must cross functional lines (HR has a direct influence on this first leg!). If IHITC, hiring-right is the first step to ensuring that what’s happening in the classroom is driving student outcomes. Consider the following:

• Do we attract candidates who are likely to align with our institutional culture, vision, mission, and values?
• Have we defined what a “great” instructor looks like in terms of behavior?
• Is there a “role excellence profile” that speaks to institutional behavior and engagement expectations?
• Upon hire, are we prepared to support the transition of subject matter expert practitioners to instructors/coaches/trainers?

    Most educators would quickly agree that their students do not learn at the same rate or in the same manner. The same can be said for new instructors, as they come to us with varying degrees of instructional methodology understanding. They too, learn at different rates and in different ways. Therefore, just as we must thoroughly vet instructor candidates, we should also invest in their development upon hire … because IHITC!

    The care and feeding of instructors is deservedly one of the three legs, as they are the primary drivers of the outcomes retention, graduation rates and placement rates. When institutions focus on developing their instructional cadre as a DIB, the return/outcome will be measured through the very metrics that schools chase. Chase the DIB and not the retention, placement and graduation outcomes.

Leg #2: Student Satisfaction

    As it relates to student satisfaction, once again, I’ll echo, IHITC. Deliberate institutional behaviors certainly include the depth of faculty, student engagement and relationships that are built within the classroom. Yet, student satisfaction is also supported by the connection students have with all service providers within the institution and how welcome and secure they feel within the physical (or virtual) space.

         Customer dissatisfaction typically does result because of “one big thing” … rather it is typically a response to “lots of little things.” Imagine a school day that starts with no parking spaces available, a teacher who is late for class, a teacher who is not prepared for class and then lets you out late, cutting your 10-minute break to five minutes only to find that the break room vending machine is out of coffee, then a quick stop to the restroom (before your next class) leaves you with wet hands since there were no paper towels. Dissatisfaction is cumulative (lots of little things), and by the end of the school day you are not looking forward to doing it all over again tomorrow. Compound the crummy school day experience with life’s challenges, and we at a minimum have a student satisfaction concern, and possibly a retention one as well. The same can be said of any customer-centric environment (internal and external).

    Deliberate institutional behaviors require that we provide a consistently high quality student (customer) experience, one that minimizes “the little aggravations” through standards, systems and processes that support the customer experience. Rather than being personality-dependent, we should be process-dependent where ever, whenever possible. For example, the expectation of instructors (without exception) should be to arrive to class before it starts, begin on time, be prepared, and end on time (after all, we should be modeling industry practices anyway). The physical facility should be inviting, clean and fully stocked (especially the restrooms). Deliberate institutional behaviors mandate proactive, resource-ready institutional awareness … one that is always looking for ways to reduce the customer’s effort and minimize all the “the little things” that can tank satisfaction.

    Additionally, student satisfaction should not be measured in an “after-the-fact survey” … essentially an autopsy report. Instead, DIBs suggest that we continuously monitor and survey for opportunities to improve during and not at the end of an academic term. Students, especially today’s learners, have ideas and suggestions, and they want to be “connected.” Students want (and in many ways demand via social platforms) to be heard. Students also demand responsiveness. When our DIBs open a transparent and honest dialogue with students, via listening and responding, we can go a long way in mitigating cumulative dissatisfaction. Chase the DIB and not the satisfaction outcome.

Leg #3: Student Success

    Student success should be modeled and reinforced at every opportunity. In career/technical schools, we strive to tie curriculum directly to industry standards and expectations, for we want our graduates to transition to the workforce as seamlessly as possible … that’s good for the institution, our students, and employers … win-win-win. Designing curriculum that ties to a meaningful outcome (from the learner’s perspective) would be considered a DIB; let’s make pedagogy practical and andragogy applicable!

    Additional DIBs supporting student success would include systems and processes that enable us to identify students who are at risk to permit early intervention/mitigation. Sometimes resource availability isn’t as important as resource visibility, for unknown or unseen resources are of little value to the student. One of the most effective DIBs is to build relationships with students at every opportunity. Such relationships can be leveraged not only to support student success, but the other two legs as well: the instructor and student satisfaction.

    Relationships provide a foundation for multiple pathways to issue mitigation. Just as learners consume and digest information differently, there are often multiple ways to support student success. Take the “retention trinity” for example. Multiple relationships extend the reach of intervention efforts. If the student has just one pathway when faced with a barrier to success, the odds of mitigation are reduced. When a student has multiple pathways that are available and visible, the odds for successful mitigation improve significantly. The “retention trinity” suggests that a student should have a meaningful connection to three stakeholders, including a fellow student or peer, an instructor (and it doesn’t necessarily have to be the student’s instructor), and a staff member (admissions, student services, learning resource center, etc.). The trinity can be the foundation of a learning community that supports the pursuit of student success, and when part of the larger learning community (due to DIBs), it can be leveraged to also support the instructor and student satisfaction.

    Student success DIBs include actions that support a meaningful and engaged academic environment … the total package to include not only technical skills but also the much needed softer skills. Never once has an employer asked me about a students’ technical ability, rather questions focus on attendance, communication, problem-solving, team work, and the like. That said, academic content should model industry expectations and standards whenever possible. Learning opportunities should be varied, experiential, and plentiful as we should encourage learners to “make mistakes” in what should be a “safe place” to learn, all-the-while encouraging innovation and problem-solving.

    Another DIB would include actions that support a fertile institutional learning environment (one that aligns with the academic learning environment). If retention, graduation, and placement rates are outcomes of DIBs, then they are a result of what everyone does, across all functions. While it is easy to point to IHITC, one must ponder exactly (in terms of DIBs) how admissions, advising, educational funding, student services, and all of the other supporting functions integrate into the overall vision and support of the learner’s experience. Once again, a healthy institutional learning environment also supports student satisfaction and student success, and an unhealthy environment can contaminate all outcomes.

    Finally, a DIB that supports student success would be actions that nurture the career vision, those that are reinforced and celebrated along the entire learning lifecycle. Examples include sharing student successes, documenting milestones (adult learners truly value seeing the roadmap to completion), and securing frequent alumni and industry presence. Imagine a learning community whereby every road and stop along the way reminds all stakeholders of exactly why students are there. Every single day … students, faculty, and support teams would enter a learning community environment that fostered continuous focused engagement through Deliberate Institutional Behaviors. Chase the DIB and not the success outcome.

The Sweet Spot

    Institutional behaviors abound, in that there is no shortage of activity within and between areas of an educational institution. When a particular behavior is able to be leveraged though, all outcomes stand to benefit. When a DIB is leveraged across all three legs: the instructor, student satisfaction, and student success, it falls within the sweet spot (to borrow from baseball) in terms of effect and efficiency. Though the sweet spot is relatively small (continuing with the baseball bat analogy), when the batter “connects” with the sweet spot, he/she gets a better outcome as compared to hitting the ball just outside of the sweet spot. The sweet spot (Figure 1) is small as it includes only DIBs that support all three legs: the instructor, student satisfaction, and student success. In a restricted resource environment, we should always to strive to get the best return on our investment (time, energy, and resources) by targeting the DIB sweet spot. To do otherwise, reduces our effectiveness, efficiency and ultimately student outcomes.

     It is fairly easy for each supporting functional unit to identify events or activities that support their respective objective; instructors, too, are adept at modifying the classroom experience (and sometimes content) to achieve a learning objective. Yet, when each unit is working independently, without an awareness of or alignment to an overall objective, effectiveness and efficiencies are lost, and the ultimately losers are our customers. Conversely, when we are able to align more activities and simultaneously support the instructor, student satisfaction and student success, everyone wins!

    Take cupcakes for example. Students love them (as do faculty and staff); building maintenance teams … not so much (frosting and crumbs everywhere). As yummy as they can be, are cupcakes in the DIB sweet spot? Well, the answer is yes if you are a cupcake lover. That aside, cupcakes likely support student satisfaction a little, but what about the other two legs, namely the instructor and student success? Cupcakes, as an institutional behavior, may be a satisfaction DIB, but it falls outside of the DIB sweet spot. 

    Consider new student orientation (NSO) activities. Certainly, an instructor’s objective is for students to get to know one another, but what if an ice breaker also aligned with student satisfaction and student success? Are there ice breakers that can be leverage across all three legs? Of course, albeit they require more thought and planning. A recent NSO ice breaker share with me involved the development of a criminal justice patch that included values and expectations of success taken directly from the criminal justice field. Students collaborated and designed a patch to wear throughout the program. A simple NSO activity that bonded the team, was tied to the reason they were there (career) in a way that reinforced student pride and perseverance! A simple NSO activity that supported all three legs: the instructor, student satisfaction, and student success. It was a direct sweet spot hit!

    Table 1, below, can help get educators thinking about their own deliberate behaviors as they relate to the instructor, student satisfaction, and student success … and the sweet spot.

Table 1: DIBs & Sweet Spot Evaluation

We should always be evaluating isolated institutional activities for DIB Sweet Spot potential … for it is there that we gain efficiencies and effectiveness and realize the outcomes we’ve been chasing. Furthermore, institutionally, as every functional area begins to focus on DIBs, there is a natural alignment toward outcomes. Deliberate institutional behaviors permit us to focus, leverage and support activities in order to drive retention, graduation, and placement outcomes. It could even be argued that an imbalanced focus on any one of the three legs, or the lack of focus on one, could be risky. For a three-legged stool with uneven legs does not merely wobble, it falls down, and so too will outcomes.

    Regardless of industry, all organizations, departments, and offices can identify their own Deliberate Institutional Behaviors. While the above speaks to schools and learning, the same approach can be applied elsewhere. If educational institutions chase retention, placement and graduation rates (again, merely outcomes of DIBs such as those that support instructors, satisfaction, and success), what outcomes does your organization chase (growth, innovation, market share, retention and the like) and begin to ponder -- what DIBs will enable you to realize those outcomes? In the limited resource environment, it makes sense to be deliberate in what we do, when and how we do it in order to achieve the outcomes that drive success. Institute a culture of DIBs and the outcomes will follow.

Make it Real Training (MIRT)

              A MIRT course assumes the personality, concerns, and opportunities of the course participants, where authentic learning scenarios are stakeholder generated.

• It is aligned to the organizational mission, vision, and values as well as functional unit requirements as they were captured during the course summit – Step 1 from 7 Easy Steps.
• A MIRT course puts the learner at the center of the experience and wraps course content around his/her specific needs. Course discussions don’t focus on hypothetical case studies and applied theory, rather, case studies are learner-generated and authentic; solutions are teased out from real resources given real environmental constraints.
• It kicks off with an ice breaker intended to capture the specific (and unique) needs of the learners, and ensures that the learner voice will drive course facilitation. Essentially, within a MIRT course, the WHAT (tools, tips, tactics ... and yes, the theory) of the content is always framed by the HOW, WHERE, and WHEN (specific concerns and opportunities) that the learners bring to the session further refining what was identified by the walk-through (STEP 5 from 7 Easy Steps).

COURSE INTRODUCTION (no more than 5% of time)

              The course introduction includes typical housekeeping boilerplate such as attendance, course ground rules, and course objectives. Course objectives are aligned to organizational mission, vision, and values and likely include departmental goals/objectives (all sourced from the course summit). Ground rules emphasize the need for participants to:

• Speak from personal experience - share examples. Real solutions to your real concerns just might be sitting next to you!
• Challenge yourself to learn and apply. All that we share today, will be real and not a hypothetical case study.
• Practice openness and respect. What happens here, stays here … sanitize names/details where appropriate.
• Be curious and ask questions. Probe, challenge, offer alternative perspectives/solutions … don’t be afraid to ‘poke the bear!’
• Honor confidentiality. A safe learning environment is a powerful thing!

COURSE ICE BREAKER (up to 10% of time)

              An authentic course ice breaker is where participants begin to make the course their own, tailoring it to the learner’s particular needs, issues, concerns, and opportunities. Answers are scribed, displayed and referenced through the remainder of the course, with the objective to capture as many “make it real” examples to use throughout the course. Participants are asked to share their name and role and one example (sanitized as needed) that aligns to the course title. (In most cases, I have found that the “answers” to problems and/or new solutions already exist within the assembled team … we just are pitiful at “teasing them out”) For example:

Participants are permitted to “pass” if they are not comfortable in sharing. This exercise provides the facilitator, with a great understanding as to what’s important to the participants that can be leveraged as he/she moves through the course content – making it a MIRT experience – authentic challenges, real tools, real solutions and a network of fellow learners and an ever-expanding resource pool.

DEFINE and ALIGN COURSE TOPIC (no more than 5% of time)

              After the ice breaker, participants are pretty much engaged (as it just became personal), and solutions are often popping-up in sidebar conversations. Aligning the course topic to the organizational mission, vision and values as well as departmental goals is a natural progression. To make it “more real,” facilitators might point to competencies and rating matrices to define exactly WHAT everyday excellence “looks like” in terms of behaviors expected in the workplace. Sometimes a friendly competition can be introduced whereby teams are encouraged to highlight a poster-sized performance matrix as the group ‘touches’ on various behaviors (the good, bad, and ugly) throughout the session and are asked to reflect on their own behaviors.

APPLY 3-5 TOOLS (at least 60% of time)

              While there are typically dozens of tools, tactics, tips, systems and the like to reference when designing training programs, in order to make it real and meaningful, less is more. Learners should be provided ample opportunity to explore and test tools, using real examples (from the ice breaker or those that surfaced from discussions) during the session, as well as debrief, discuss, and leverage the knowledge and experiences of their peers.

              Ideally, tools should be organizational-specific, including policies, procedures, and forms that leverage organizational resources such as systems, processes, intranets, and other departments. In addition, introducing tools and resources from outside of the organization can spark the innovative spirit (though these options should be discussed during the course summit if appropriate).

              Activities, during this (most meaningful to participants) part of the course, flow as outlined below to ensure maximum learner engagement.

1.     Facilitator: Introduces the tool/job aid

2.     Individuals/groups identify a real scenario from earlier conversations

3.     Individual/group “applies” or uses the tool/job aid

4.     Individuals/groups share findings with one another (discuss, question, challenge, and offer alternative solutions/approaches)

5.     Facilitator: Offers “What if … “ scenarios (seeking a contrary evidence) and problem-solves as a large group

6.     Repeat (same tool and new scenario; new tool)

COURSE CONCLUSION (approximately 20% of time)        

              The course conclusion is intended to align the earlier activities with course objectives and organizational mission, vision, and values. A great way to demonstrate such alignment, alongside understanding of the various tools that were introduced, is to ask participants to share ‘success stories’ as they relate to the course topic. A secondary benefit to closing in this manner, is that it once again shines a light on participant experiences and expertise … remember, “The solution to your issue might be sitting right next to you!”

              Course conclusion boilerplate also includes next steps (following up with other stakeholders, practice, and a learner satisfaction survey). As a believer that ‘practice makes permanent.’ I encourage participants to ‘practice the right things’ especially given the high stakes environment within which we all work (both from a customer’s and fellow associate’s perspective). Finally, the course conclusion includes a check-out moment whereby participants (again with the pass option available) can share:

• Something learned
• Something understood better
• Something that will be immediately used

As we transition from the sage-on-the-stage delivery model to a learner-centric focus, listening to the voice of our stakeholders is critical to designing curriculum that speaks to the modern learner, and in the ever-shrinking organizational resource environment, crafting curriculum that is relevant and applicable is an expected standard as is crafting curriculum that is nimble enough to adjust to the needs of those sitting in the seats.

7 Easy Steps to Course Design

“I’ll never get those four hours back!” Sound familiar? Time is finite … we can’t bank it to use later or make more of it when we’ve run out. Therefore, we should spend it wisely and be especially thoughtful when we are spending other people’s time … such as in training and development.

As a former educator, turned organizational trainer (and yes, there is a difference), I routinely spend other peoples’ time. In just one session, I can easily commit thousands of employer dollars!

Additionally, the above doesn’t factor in any replacement coverage costs that may be required. From the employer’s point-of-view, training is a significant investment, and the ROI must be real, meaningful, and immediately applicable.

As a post-secondary educator, I’ve gravitated toward authentic learning opportunities and competency-based training, weaving theory into my courses as necessary. Whether it was business law, accounting, marketing, management, workplace psychology, a capstone project, or a student success course … my curriculum design objective is for students to:

• Learn ‘how to do something’ that provides a competitive advantage
• Always, leave them wanting more

Not surprisingly, I fell hard for learning and organizational development pathways, and after interviewing senior leaders throughout my career, I’ve heard their collective cry when asked what type of training is needed … “Please, just make it real!” Less theory … more application … and more time to practice. I was charged to be thoughtful in the “what” and “how” of learning and organizational development and to invest the organization’s most precious resources (people and time) wisely.

The following highlights “7 Easy Steps” to curriculum design that complements the Make It Real Training (MIRT) delivery model, woven together by collective stakeholder voices and their desired outcomes, including immediately applicable learner experiences.

MIRT – Make It Real Training – Two learning perspectives

As an educator, my design and delivery objectives include, making:

• Pedagogy practical
• Andragogy applicable

In the spirit of learning and organizational development, my role is to facilitate the translation of adult learning theory into desired workplace behaviors.

Often, in learning and organizational development, course development and delivery times are compressed (compared to the months, and often years, of lead-time provided in formal higher educational program construction). Borrowing best practices from each discipline (including ADDIE), below is an iterative model on how one can identify what’s needed, design, and deliver it quickly in seven “easy” steps that begin and end with listening to the stakeholders’ voice.

STEP 1: Course Summit

Before pen is put to paper when crafting course content, the most important step is to first listen to your stakeholders’ collective voice … else you run the very real risk of designing a learning experience that is a waste of time … recall … “I’ll never get those four hours back!”

Course Development Checklist

From a course development point-of-view, taking time to listen to the stakeholders’ voice is a very good investment and use of time! That said, summits have been known to drag on for days or weeks in higher education, albeit those courses/programs often span months/years. A summit for a 4-hour course shouldn’t take more than an hour with proper preparation and a bit of pre-work on the part of the course designer. The summit should be broken down into two parts:

• Part 1: Stakeholder overall insights discussion

o  What are the <INSERT TOPIC/COURSE TITLE> needs within your community/department/organization?

o  What should participants ‘walk away with’ after attending?

o  What learning outcomes would you like to see from participants?

o  What specific examples might you like to be included?

·       Part 2: Specific course topic ranking and deep-dive discussions

o 15-20 pre-loaded potential course topics (by course design and working with SMEs)

o     Poll for topics that should be included in course to narrow field for deep-dive

o       Deep-dive discussion of top vote getters

o      Poll for top three topics – topics that absolutely must be included in training

The Summit Guide is pre-loaded with potential topics that could support the course objectives. Functional leaders are very busy, and by ‘doing the heavy lifting’ for them in advance of the summit, they can focus on what their particular needs are as it relates to course content. By pre-loading possible topics, the stakeholder conversation is jump-started (another good use of time). Invariably, many pre-loaded topics are eliminated and new ones are brought forward, and at the end of the summit, the course designers know what should and, more importantly, what should not be included.

The Summit Guide should be provided to summit participants at least two weeks in advance so that they have time to review it and come prepared to share their insights and let their voice be heard. Summits are always recorded and use chat and polling functionalities so as to be able to review post-summit data. Below is an example of a summit guide for time management.

Summit Guide

STEPS 2-3: Content Build and Materials

Having invested time to listen to the stakeholders’ voice, upon summit conclusion, the course developers know what direction the course should take as well as what periphery to avoid. Specific and authentic examples have been provided for context and/or inclusion and as the course objectives, outcomes and structure are crafted. The voice of the stakeholders will be ever present. Steps 2 and 3 are what I oft refer to as ‘what happens behind the curtain’ … the course construction, including course overviews, objectives, MIRT activities, assessments and the like. Below is the checklist, and the intention is to bake MIRT into the development process rather than finding ways to make the course ‘real’ after it’s been developed.

              STEP 4: Dry Run

As mentioned earlier, it is essential to capture to the stakeholders’ voice at the very beginning – even before putting pen to paper. It is equally as important to continue to listen. Beyond merely capturing the needed course content, by making it an inclusive design process, ‘buy in’ is also enhanced (something that every trainer loves!) when stakeholders are invited to the course preview/dry run.

              The Dry Run takes 30 minutes and is open to all summit participants as well as other stakeholders who have an interest in successful training outcomes. As part of the Dry Run invitation, all course materials are included. The session is recorded, and participants are engaged again to provide feedback and make recommendations.

STEP 5: Walk Through

Once the course is “on the shelf” and before it is delivered to a specific audience, there is yet another opportunity, the Walk Through, to listen to the customer’s voice with the specific objective of tailoring outcomes, content, and activities to the particular audience requirements. Designing a course, from the outset, that embraces “adjustments” based on audience requirements makes for a much more dynamic learning experience and more meaningful learning outcomes. Adjustments can include shortening/lengthening delivery times; tailoring for frontline, leadership, or mixed audiences; inserting department-specific scenarios/examples; solving for real-time problems/opportunities; etc. The walk through is a one-on-one conversation with the course facilitator and course organizer (typically a functional manager) and results in customized content and materials … and … no surprises.

              STEPS 6-7: Market to Stakeholders and Go Live

    And this is the fun part! Facilitating customized training sessions where, I quite honestly, learn more than I share … and … in the spirit of listening to our learners’ voice, seek course improvement feedback along the delivery journey as well.

    Following the 7 Easy Steps to Course Design when developing Make It Real Training helps to ensure deliberate design behaviors that include the customer’s voice throughout the development process and course delivery, resulting in meaningful and applicable learning experiences.