As students we are frequent observers of different HR procedures and practices across global firms. If any of us, for instance, explored how different contemporary organisations develop their training and learning platforms, they would vary: some with more traditional training occurring in the classroom environment, others with a blend of on-the-job training and limited e-learning or digital learning. Often the latter is restricted to orientation and safety videos and off-the-shelf products. So if we examine a very large contemporary global firm such as Ericsson, how does such a large organisation align its training and learning priorities with its business strategies? First, there is no doubt that HR departments and functions need clear strategic guidance from senior management about the company's direction. As you have learned from previous chapters in this book, this can be a two-way street with HR executives playing a key roie in any transformation. But let's focus on Ericsson. In 2010, the company moved away from its previous reliance on the consumer segment to reframing its strategies around telecom services, software and hardware by leveraging previous network-infrastructure and using this to develop new products for new markets, for example TV and media, cloud services and support software for communications infrastructure. Ericsson called this strategic shift 'Telecom IT solutions'. Importantly, the CEO and top HR managers knew that the only way to achieve this vision was to transform the skill sets and capabilities of its people. So how did they do this?

Similar to this chapter's emphasis on training needs analysis and other techniques, Ericsson found that 23 regional groups, each with a different set of processes and tools for developing and training people, could be consolidated into 10. Each of the new groups had a single people strategy that was closely linked to the new business strategy. In short, this would be similar to deciding what skills and capabilities are required for the whole firm, then performing a skills audit to see how these are linked to the broader strategy. The company also found that they needed an integrated HR platform, one that could be used by managers and workers with data centrally gathered and shared. Actual HR processes, systems, and policies were then matched to the globalised HR process which was simple, user friendly, and business focused. An online virtual portal was created called 'Ericsson Academy' which enabled employees to access global learning programmes from any location in the world. For the global strategy, then, it was critical for HR to create global learning programmes. Notice the emphasis here on e-learning and digital learning similar to a knowledge-based system that can be created to enable knowledge sharing and skill equipping through global training. Ericsson also developed data analytic techniques that heiped them assess their recruitment processes, finding that more female candidates were applying for jobs posted by female managers. Importantly, the company spent a great deal of time communicating and sharing its common purpose around common people platforms and processes. In essence, this is a 'one size fits all' philosophy which can be achieved if a company has a unifying global strategy and is able to communicate this strategy so that its people requirements and capabilities are shared across key global regions (McKinsey Quarterly, 2016). In terms of skills analysis, we can learn a lot from Ericsson's approach. For instance, in order to build a competency framework across the company, it was important first to map out its roles and the stages of each job, while laying out the competence and skills required for each of these. While this may seem a laborious process in any company, it helped Ericsson identify training and people requirement gaps linked to the annual strategic review. Overall, the process led to an aggregated capabilities map for the entire organisation. In any company, once these gaps are identified, this triggers demand signals for learning and recruitment, training and development, and when these skill demands need to be met. Knowing what type of learning programmes are required in advance greatly assists companies to continuously improve their training techniques by overhauling old ones. Earlier in this chapter we talked about the social constructionist approach and narrative as learning. So what we see here again in this example is an emphasis on collaborative tools. For instance, people want to learn in a collaborative way which led HR to create a video learning model where employees could upload their own videos and ideas similar to Facebook and other social learning platforms. Taken together, collaborative learning was included in mobile platforms allowing workers to learn whenever and wherever they liked, to effectively learn 'on-the-go'.

It is possible to contrast Ericsson's story of training, development, and learning with 'learning flows' as described in this chapter. The old Ericsson saw institutionalised learning embedded at the organisational level, for example in groups with different HR practices, processes, and systems, and how these systems were imposed on groups of workers. When such processes are not integrated across the firm, then the quality of feed-back learning to the individual is compromised. In addition, if such learning is not matched to the overall strategic direction, then the feed-forward aspect of learning from the individual to the team and to the organisation may not fit skill requirements. Hence, it would not be surprising that prior training needs analysis under the old system would have been inaccurate, leading to the development of skills not really relevant to busy managers. Since group learning is a key input in learning flows, overall group skills might not have been relevant to the company's direction. This is illustrated in the story of Ericsson and the need to rapidly transform how it learned. If, for example, one key learning capability was to equip groups with the skills to better interpret environmental signals and act on them, then this may have been less likely under the old training regime which was not correctly matched to the company's overall strategy. Ericsson's approach allows us to learn key lessons from global companies about how to develop and implement a global learning system that is tied to a company's strategic intent.

Questions

1 Choose three learning techniques/ideas from this chapter and discuss in groups how Ericsson's approach matches these.
2 Discuss in groups how training and development needs will be different for companies in five years' time and in ten years' time. How will learning needs change?
3 Explain how Ericsson's global learning approach seems to fit ideas related to learning as narrative. What are the key points?
4 Why is it important to link skill assessment and training needs analysis to the company's overall direction? Why can't the HR department develop these in isolation?