Is a new concept called the Personal Learning Cloud (PLC) going to replace traditional leadership development?
A 2019 Harvard Business Review article introduced and explored this question.
The rise of the Internet and social media has opened a new world of learning opportunities – forming the PLC.
For example, on Coursera, you can sign up today for free courses from Duke University ranging from topics like ‘Medical Neuroscience’ to ‘Dog Cognition and Emotion’. These are real courses taught by esteemed faculty from elite universities – for free!
In a recent article, we looked at the effectiveness of formal programs, on-the-job (OTJ) experiences and supervisors on developing leaders. That research proved OTJ learning to be most effective. In another article, we examined how to get an OTJ learning experience back on track if it goes awry.
So what is the PLC and how does it fit in with traditional leadership development?
The Personal Learning Cloud (PLC) versus traditional leadership development
In the March/ April 2019 issue of Harvard Business Review (HBR), Mihnea Moldoveanu and Das Narayandas wrote an article called ‘The Future of Leadership Development.
In that article, they proposed that the Personal Learning Cloud (PLC) will replace traditional leadership development programs – saving significant cost for organizations.
There are some really cool things coming from the PLC. However, I caution companies about giving up on traditional leadership development to save money with the PLC. It should be examined as a supplement and not a replacement.
Issues with traditional approaches to leadership development
Moldoveanu and Narayandas suggest that traditional approaches no longer meet the needs of companies or employees.
One issue is that companies are not as motivated to develop leaders as the employee is to develop his or her self. Since the learning stays with the person, the company loses its investment when the employee leaves.
They also argue that traditional programs don’t adequately develop soft skills and learners find it challenging to apply their learning in the job setting.
Introducing the Personal Learning Cloud (PLC)
The authors propose that the ‘personal learning cloud’ (PLC) offers a solution to the problems of traditional approaches. The PLC combines available online courses, social and interactive platforms and other learning tools.
These tools range from Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) to open online platforms like Coursera to corporate-membership platforms like Skillsoft to more niche, customized programs.
Using this wealth of resources, organizations can create customized programs to fit the needs of their employees.
4 characteristics of the PLC
The authors describe four key characteristics of the PLC:
- Learning is personalized. This personalization applies to the content, pace and media of the learning.
- Learning is socialized. They indicate that the PLC supports collaboration among cohorts of people who are learning together.
- Learning is contextualized. The PLC enables employees to learn in the workplace setting and apply their knowledge.
- Learning outcomes can be tracked. By allowing certification for skills, the PLC could negate the need for a formal degree.
Limitations of the PLC
Moldonveanu and Narayandas introduce the concept of the PLC and share the benefits they see in it.
I agree on several points. Thanks to online courses and collaboration platforms, there are a lot of learning options available. These options often cost less and are available broadly and on demand.
However, I see some significant issues with this approach as well and don’t believe that the PLC will or should replace traditional options. The right solution is probably a combination of both.
Three challenges with the PLC:
Challenge 1: Content curation required to ensure quality
More is not always better. The authors seem to come from a belief that more is better. More options, more types of learning, more providers.
The information network in this world provides a huge amount of data and learning. But more is not always better.
Too much information or too many options actually becomes overwhelming. This can lead to the learner giving up, because there is too much information to wade through.
In my years managing corporate learning, employees were often overwhelmed just by the online courses offered in the corporate university. That confusion would increase ten-fold if you layer on external programs like MOOCs.
Hard to measure quality. Volume often does not result in quality. A thousand courses are not useful if 990 of them are poor quality or outdated. In an open system, with no oversight, there is no way to ensure that employees are getting quality learning. With limited time available, time spent learning must be valuable.
Requires curation. Because of the overwhelming array of offerings, someone with expertise must curate the content into a coherent program. The authors cite examples of large consultant firms and HR companies providing this service.
It is an important note that the PLC will not provide much value to individual people or companies without some type of curation. This might result in trading one challenge (creating internal content) for a new challenge (curating the vast array of PLC content).
Challenge 2: Niche learning can lead to limited thinking
The authors go as far as saying that college degrees might lose value as employees focus on targeted skill-based learning. They cite examples of blockchain-trackable microdegrees that can prove the acquisition of a skill to a company.
Skill learning is great, but it should happen in the context of broader awareness.
For example, an employee can take an online course and learn how to do awesome pivot tables in Excel. But that does not teach the employee how to analyze data, build a business case or think about the ethics of data manipulation.
Niche learning could result in narrow thinking.
Challenge 3: The PLC learning mode does not work for everyone
Not right for some learners. The PLC relies heavily on online learning – which does not work for every person or every topic.
Online learning provides a great resource for specific skill training – like teach Excel skills or how to implement a process. It is less useful for teaching soft skills – like communication, emotional intelligence or leadership.
Online learning can teach soft skill concepts, but it cannot require real world practice (like role plays) or provide feedback as the learner practices.
Motivation required. Unless curated by the company, the PLC approach also relies on the motivation of individual learners. Some people – like high potential employees – naturally seek out learning opportunities and relish new sources of learning.
But most employees require the occasional nudge to take the extra effort and time away from busy work schedules to focus on development.
Resisters need a nudge. In most of the general leadership development sessions I ran over my corporate career, a handful of the participants would attend only because it was required. I could sense their resistance and desire to be elsewhere.
They often thought they did not need the training or would not learn anything. In almost every case, those resistors became the biggest supporters of the training by the end of the session.
Sometimes employees don’t know what they need or don’t know what they don’t know.
Structured learning programs help expose leaders – even resistant ones – to concepts they need for success.
My conclusion
I appreciate the Harvard Business Review article by Mihnea Moldoveanu and Das Narayandas. They raised some great points and highlighted new ways to learn.
Leadership development needs to evolve along with the rest of the business world, and the PLC approach supports that evolution.
The PLC should become a part of every company’s leadership development strategy. But the PLC must be approached thoughtfully, so it does not become a useless and overwhelming free-for-all.
Ultimately, the PLC should supplement existing leadership development programs and on-the-job (OTJ) learning experiences. Instead of a fighting match up, we should leverage both the PLC and traditional leadership development.
Author credit
Moldoveanu, M. & Narayandas, D. (2019) “The Future of Leadership Development”, Harvard Business Review, Vol 97, 2, 40-49.
Mihnea Moldoveanu, Rotman School of Management
Das Narayandas, Harvard Business School
