As many Human Resources, Information Technology, and Learning & Development (L&D) leaders know, “staff augmentation” is a common way to add capacity to your team. Staff augmentation (often shortened to “staff aug”) provides bandwidth to support more projects, especially for shorter term or “one-off” needs, where internal teams might not have the availability or expertise. Most of the time, L&D organizations simply need more instructional designers, developers, or trainers to meet short or mid-term course development and deployment workload.
Proper training significantly increases the likelihood that business initiatives will deliver on the expected performance gains and demonstrate a return on investment. The corollary also holds true. That is, one of the most commonly identified reasons why business initiatives fail is because the teams expected to produce the results are not sufficiently or properly trained on the new processes.
Building a learning and performance strategy is critical to achieving business objectives. It acts as a blueprint for the future state of the training organization while defining how training will align with the organization’s operational goals. It focuses on a road map for staff-wide performance improvement and builds an infrastructure to support changes.
As training vendors and software producers race to figure out whether the software delivered last year is really able to meet the needs of dynamic training organizations, little will be said about a new direction in training simulation. In fact, little literature exists about simulation within the corporate environment, causing many training organizations to wade into the unknown waters of simulation-based learning rather unprepared. To make those waters a little less mysterious, I’d like to discuss the concept of simulation-based learning and provide some guidelines for development.