It’s that time of year again. For those of us in the Northern Hemisphere, the summer holiday period is over and the demands to deliver more training ramps up to beat the competing deadlines of end of year results and using the available budget before the approaching festive season.

And just when you’re in the throes of delivering all that stuff you said you’d do at the start of the year, the budget round starts again.

Apart from throwing up your hands and saying ‘give me a break!’ to anyone who’ll listen, what are you doing about your strategy for the next period?

the capability of the team expected to deliver the strategy is not even considered. 

It is routinely pointed out to us that learning and development teams – and the wider HR function – needs to be more aligned with and supportive of the business strategy our organisation is pursuing.

I agree. But as the first two paragraphs show, deciding on the next year’s priorities when we’ve only just started to tackle this year’s, is a big ask.

Where to start?

Maybe a good place is to look at some of the macro trends. We know that AI is Big and Important – but being Important is not the same as being Strategic. How organisation strategy on Generative AI will pan out is still being worked out in many organisations. How it will impact L&D, is even more opaque. 

What we do know – thanks to those smart people at Fosway Group – is that upskilling and reskilling is number one priority for many – outranking Compliance training for the first time. Alongside career development, business transformation and change as being significant considerations, it looks like we are in uncertain times.

Now look at your own organisation. Do those priorities resonate? Are you facing skill shortages in certain areas? Are you dealing with significant amounts of change? Can you clearly define what these changes will be and what impact this will have on the skills and capability of your people?

You may be able to do that and be very precise. But I’ve reviewed many business strategy documents over the years. Often this level of detail is skimpy at best. In may cases, the capability of the team expected to deliver the strategy is not even considered. 

As a result, L&D teams have two key jobs to do. 

1. We need to define and replay the known capability gaps back to our organisation. Having gained agreement that those are the skills which are needed, then we can start to design a response demonstrating how we will address these gaps.
2. Where the capabilities required are not clear – then we need to investigate and consult with functional teams. This should define skills required, skill gaps and who needs added capability.

If the second point is where you are at, then don’t rush to start designing learning interventions or publishing a course list until you have engaged with the business. 

our first job is to push back on the knee jerk request and undertake the analysis which is too frequently lacking

Getting it wrong damages your credibility. Why do functional managers often think L&D activities are badly aligned with business priorities? Because we respond to the lack of clarity about what we actually need by proposing solutions to problems we haven’t taken time to understand.

This can be hard. We have all seen managers demand a course on X or a programme addressing Y. The level of analysis which has been undertaken and whether X or Y is more important than other alternatives may not be clear. 

As people capability consultants, our first job is to push back on the knee jerk request and undertake the analysis which is too frequently lacking. Will that be universally popular? Unlikely. Will it be the right thing to do? Almost certainly.

‘People capability consultants’

The use of the term people capability consultants is intentional.

By defining ourselves as Learning and Development Teams we have pre-defined the solutions we offer. “We can solve your problems (so long as the solution looks like a course)!” 

When our organisation’s top priority was compliance and regulation, we were probably on safe ground. Unambitious and slightly dull ground, but nonetheless safe. Where compliance is the question, the answer is usually someone, somewhere needs auditable education to ensure all boxes have been ticked.

But where the priority is reskilling and upskilling, or transforming the business, or managing and responding to change – the right response may be very different. 

Hammer and nail

As Abraham Maslow said: “If the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail”. These problems (and opportunities) look different. These problems (and opportunities) are different.

So if you – like many of your colleagues – are planning for financial year 2025, you will need to make time and make choices. You can do more of the same and continue with the fight – for airtime, for access to people, for resources. You can grow a thick skin in response to the criticism of being disconnected, misaligned or – worse – inhabiting an ivory tower of particular shininess.

Or you can demand the seat at the table which should be occupied by those in possession of a unique understanding of our people’s capability and how it can be increased.

And as you construct your own strategy for 2025 – clearly aligned with the strategy of your organisation – remember what Michael Porter – of Harvard Business School and the Godfather of Strategy – said: “The essence of strategy is deciding what you are not going to do!” 

You can’t do everything. Don’t even try.

1. Do a few, relevant things really well. 
2. Show the rest of the organisation how you can help to deliver the organisational strategy. 
3. Earn your seat at the table.

Best of luck.