The simple rule of thumb: How to make your training program grab and maintain the attention of your participants

The balance of passive participation (reading, listening, watching) versus active participation (talking, creating, showing) has a huge impact on how (and how much) people learn, and thus ultimately the results of the training program as a whole.

In this article we dive into the contrasts between active and passive participation, examine a common misconception, and finish off with a simple rule of thumb to evaluate your existing and future programs, to make sure they’re engaging enough for your participants.

‍

Emphasis on passive participation leads to unfocused participation, not enough practice and a one-size-fits-all perspective

Programs with mostly passive participation will inevitably encounter a myriad of problems. The participants will:

• Struggle to maintain focus.
• Not get enough opportunities to practice the skills covered.
• Not get the chance to synthesize the knowledge they’re presented with.
• Not get any feedback, because there’s no “output” to provide feedback on.
• In most cases get a one-size-fits-all perspective (listening to the same lecturers, reading the same texts etc.) instead of getting to apply perspectives to their own circumstances and hear other participants share their perspectives.

‍

Active participation keeps people engaged, gives opportunities to practice and get feedback and highlights the training content from more relevant perspectives

In all the areas where passive participation falls short, programs with lots of active participation tend to excel. The participants will:

• Stay engaged.
• Apply their knowledge in practice, making it easier to eventually implement in the workplace.
• Be able to reflect on which aspects of the training can be applied specifically to them.
• Be able to get feedback, because they say, create or show things that it’s possible to provide feedback on.
• See the content from many relevant perspectives, since other participants are more actively contributing to the program.

‍

Passive participation isn’t a bad thing in itself, but must be reinforced in order to produce results

Obviously, lectures, texts and clips all have their place and aren’t by any means bad in and of themselves. On the contrary, they’re essential puzzle pieces that serve to introduce the key components of the training program. However, that’s also all they are – an introduction.

Without active participation, the participants won’t be able to build the bridge between that introduction and actual implementation.

Fördjupa dig

UTBILDNING

1 heldag

400+ certifierade deltagare

Certifieringsutbildning i Transfer of Training

Lär dig konkreta verktyg för att få er kompetensinsats att leda till beteendeförändring och affärsresultat för organisationen.

Utbildare

Michel Westher, VD, Knowly

Läs mer och se kommande datum »

‍

The trap: “If I’m in control I know the experience will be exactly as planned; if I relinquish control, something might go wrong”

The balance between passive and active participation can sometimes tilt in favor of the former by default, because the formats for passive participation are so much easier to plan and control: A lecture, a text, an e-learning session – these are all formats where you as the creator have full control over both the creative process and the experience.

Active participation, on the other hand, will by definition involve a measure of uncertainty – the things that are said in learning groups, written in reflection questions and addressed during exercises are impossible to predict from the outset.

This is where it’s easy to fall into the trap of “If I’m in control I know the experience will be exactly as I’ve planned, and if I relinquish control, the result might be worse.”

On the contrary, the only way for a program to make a huge impact is taking that step and relinquishing control. Allowing participants to address their own specific challenges, reflect on their own specific contexts and identify exactly the content that they specifically need.

‍

The lithmus test for your next program, to ensure that you’re including enough active participation

So, how do you ensure that a program includes enough active participation?

You can make a rough assessment using this simple rule of thumb:

• Time that participants spend talking, creating, showing etc.
• Time that participants spend listening, reading, looking etc.

Is your quotient below 1? In other words, are the participants passive over half the time? If so, consider adjusting the program so that your participants become more active, as this also leads to applying their new insights more throughout their daily routine – and thus eventually performing better in the workplace as well.

‍