Competitive Vs Collaborative Vs Individualized Approaches Towards Learning
Shalini Merugu
Learning Solutions Director | Learning Design and Technology | Curriculum Development & Instructional Design
Much has been said about competition and collaboration in the workplace. The fact is we need both. Team projects can get derailed if a “rockstar” decides to win individually in a team sport. On the flip side, individual progress get disrupted when laggards slow down the team’s progress. So, that’s fine—it’s really up to individuals and their managers to work out these differences and come up with a mutually beneficial course of action. Balance is everything.
When it comes to learning, though, what’s the L&D manager to do? Like work, there’s a place for individual learning, there’s a place for team learning. There’s a space for competition, and an equally important space for collaboration. Competition pushes tenacity and ambition; collaboration fosters teamwork and empathy. And then there’s individual learning. Alone is good. You set your pace, and no one’s pulling you in different directions with motivations that don’t align with yours.
How do we as learning designers and L&D managers harness or design learning experiences that make the best of all these approaches? It begins by understanding motivations and orientation towards learning and acknowledging the merits of each.
Competitive Learning Approaches
Many people thrive on competition. Certain audience demographics, like sales professionals, tend to eat it up. This is where gamification can be a game-changer. By creating “friendly” competition (the key word being “friendly”), we can get learners fired up and ready to go. But let’s take a different demographic: research scientists. They might be fiercely competitive, but they’re probably not going to be motivated by badges and trophies and points. Of course, I’m probably stereotyping, but chances are that R&D teams might prefer a non-competitive approach.
Many platforms today allow teams to compete against each other, display winners on a dashboard, and track team progress. This strategy not only builds team spirit but also lets individuals pursue their personal learning goals within a group dynamic. Iron cuts wood, but sometimes, it’s just as effective to let iron sit peacefully beside wood.
Collaborative Learning Approaches
How do we leverage the human instinct to work together to reach a collective goal? And how do we harness the best practices of top performers? (If your top performers are ultra-competitive, sharing best practices might be off the table anyway.) Some platforms are built with this in mind. For instance, there are microlearning platforms that enable social learning. People can share thoughts, leave comments, and respond—just like a Facebook or Instagram thread.
This sharing can be enhanced by incorporating enough number of group share activities, and by encouraging managers to monitor responses and like their teams comments or respond to them, or generally encourage their teams being active participants in the social learning effort.
ILTs and VILTs, which are usually leveraged for skill-building and practice, can foster collaboration with thoughtfully designed group activities.
When it comes to informal learning or on-the-job training, peer-to-peer learning (which goes both ways) is unbeatable. Learning buddies? Perfect for informal, collaborative learning. Iron sharpens iron. And Communities of Practice (CoPs) are the motherlode of social learning. But because there’s no measurable ROI here and no training budget attached, they’re often overlooked or underutilized. Even in companies without formal CoPs, valuable best practices are shared around the water cooler. How do we tap into that rich resource? Lunch-and-learns! These mini CoPs can lead to who-knows-what—a thriving global CoP, maybe? If we are actively working to build a culture of learning and collaboration, that is. For the hyper-competitive, CoPs are also a great stage for showing off their skills.
Individualized Learning Approaches
When it comes to Individualized learning, here’s a thought – workplaces tend to favor extroverts. This is where self-paced, asynchronous learning can finally provide a level learning field for your teams. Sure, extroverts who thrive in a classroom environment may not like it much, but there are ways to motivate them too. Think gamification, problem-solving, and the flipped classroom approach. For most professionals, the least disruptive path—no dependency on anyone else, their own time, their own space—is ideal. Introverts, in particular, will appreciate learning on their own, without anyone peering over their shoulder. Apart from the sheer convenience of these modalities, eLearning, microlearning, and various digital avatars of asynchronous self-paced learning can achieve great results.
I’m no fan of the learning styles theory, because if there’s something important enough to learn, I’ll learn it, even if it’s printed on toilet paper. No fancy bells and whistles and engagement required. And I’m sure many would agree with me. But maybe instead of obsessing over learning styles, we should focus on people’s motivations and approaches to work and life in general and design accordingly.
The Point
Different people have different motivations, approaches, and preferences for learning. As L&D practitioners, we can be intentional about how we enable learning that considers all of this. In a way, this is also an extension of DEI, beyond its traditional context.
Agree? Disagree? Let’s hear it!