In an incredibly fast-paced world, it’s often difficult to plan for the present, let alone the future. Whether you’re closing a deal or putting the finishing touches on a big report, there’s always something urgent to do right now. In this environment, even knowing what you’ll be doing next week can feel like an impossible task, so trying to plan two years ahead can be incredibly daunting. 

Yet, as is often the case in life, taking the time to stop, smell the roses, and plan ahead will set you up for sustainable, long-term success. Accordingly, robust succession planning is imperative for high-performing businesses. 

Don’t just take our word for it, research by PWC shows that 79% of companies in top-performing quartiles engage in succession planning. By comparison, just 21% of other companies have formal succession plans — a huge gulf between high-performers and the rest! 

With this in mind, we’ll analyse why succession planning is vital for your business. We’ll start by defining succession planning, before examining the state of succession planning, and offering four best practices for succession planning. 

Ready to start planning for success? Start here. 

Succession planning means proactively planning for the future. No, it doesn’t require a crystal ball. Rather, it’s all about answering one simple question: when someone leaves the business, who will step up to fill their role? Knowing the answer to this question ensures businesses can strike a balance between current and long-term success — especially if the departing employee is in an influential leadership or executive position. 

There’s nothing worse than being blindsided by someone leaving the company and having no one ready to replace them. Everything grinds to a screeching halt as you scramble to fill the void of knowledge and skills they leave behind. By having a clear succession plan, you can avoid this scenario, ensuring there is a knowledge transfer between the exiting employee and their successor as part of the training and handover process.

As such, a central aspect of succession planning is creating a continuous pipeline of talent, thereby ensuring smooth transitions and minimal disruptions when an employee leaves. Robust succession planning means that when someone leaves the business, the next person in line will have the appropriate skills, experience, and knowledge to step up and fill that role.

As the University of Washington explains, “succession planning is the process of identifying the critical positions within your organisation and developing action plans for individuals to assume those positions. A succession plan identifies future staffing needs and the people with the skills and potential to perform in these future roles.”

BamooHR adds that a good succession plan “focuses on identifying potential leaders and high performers, helping them develop so they can advance within their organisation.”

To achieve this, you must identify promising talent and potential leaders early and continuously develop their skills to ensure they are prepared to be promoted to a new role when the time comes. 

While succession planning generally focuses on executive and leadership roles, as these are seen as the most impactful and difficult to fill, this doesn’t have to be the case. If someone is being formally developed to take over a specific role — whether that’s a CEO, a baker, a personal trainer, or a receptionist — that’s a succession plan. 

Ultimately, good succession planning is all about thinking three steps ahead. Rather than resting on your laurels and thinking ‘things are going well right now’, ask yourself ‘what would we do if X person left tomorrow? Could anyone fill their role, or would we be left shorthanded?’ If the answer is that you don’t have a plan, it’s time to start identifying potential replacements in your organisation and developing their skills. 

Now that we understand what succession planning is, it’s time to examine the current state of succession planning, including which companies engage in succession planning, the costs of succession planning, and the benefits of succession planning. 

While most businesses recognise the value of succession planning, few actually succeed. 86% of leaders believe succession planning is an urgent priority for their business, yet just 14% think they’re doing it well. This is a huge discrepancy and an even bigger missed opportunity! The good news is that if you are among the 14% of businesses that are good at succession planning, you have a huge competitive advantage. 

What’s more, just 21% of teams say they have formal succession plans. An additional 20% have informal succession plans, while 20% say they don’t currently have a plan but want to develop one. By comparison, 79% of companies in top-performing quartiles engage in succession planning, underscoring the importance of succession planning for high-performing businesses. 

According to ASIS, the most common reasons teams cite for not having a succession plan are a lack of time and resources to develop one (31%) and that their organisation is too small to have one (18%). 

According to a recent report by Ceridian, 65% of organisations use succession planning for key leadership roles. This figure drops to 61% for subject matter experts, 60% for critical technical experts, and just 50% for people leaders. 

Despite this, the report recommends that good succession planning should “be broad and consider the organisation holistically” rather than focusing exclusively on senior executives. 

Ceridian also found that 57% of teams rely on technology as part of their succession planning process, using dedicated succession planning tools to map talent and identify future leaders. 

While succession planning may seem like a daunting task, it will set your business up for success in the long term. Identifying and promoting internal talent has a far higher success rate than hiring external talent. 

34% of external hires for senior leadership positions fail, compared to just 24% of internal hires, underscoring the benefits of internal mobility and succession planning. 

What’s more, the HBR estimates that only 39% of outside hires would perform better than an internal hire, while employees who move into new jobs internally are 3.5x more likely to be engaged.

Moreover, 79% of companies from top-performing quartiles hired CEO replacements internally, far higher than the overall industry average. 

Despite this, only 65% of teams even advertise open positions internally, while 57% of employees believe it would be easier to find a new job in a different organisation than to find a new job internally in their current organisation. In other words, many teams are shooting themselves in the foot by not promoting internal roles! 

Given this, it makes sense that 62% of L&D professionals are prioritising internal mobility this year.

To learn more, see our article on why internal mobility is vital in today’s workforce. 

Not having a succession plan may be costing your business. A lot. While it may seem like a significant time investment upfront, failing to have a succession plan can be incredibly expensive in the long run. 

The HBR finds that poorly managed C-suit transitions at top-performing companies result in a loss of $1 trillion in market value per year. Plus, the average cost of replacing a failed executive is 10x their salary. 

You might be thinking ‘that’s all well and good, but I work for a small business, not a C-suite organisation.’ Well, you’re not exempt. Analysis by Gartner found that employee turnover due to poor internal mobility and a lack of future career opportunities costs an average-sized organisation a whopping $49 million per year. That’s $49 million that could have been saved by succession planning and internal mobility. 

And this is just the tip of the iceberg. According to SHRM, the average cost-per-new-hire for companies is currently $4,129, far higher than the cost of transitioning an existing employee into a new role. As Toggl Hire notes, “an average company loses anywhere between 1% and 2.5% of their total revenue on the time it takes to bring a new hire up to speed.”

Whatever way you slice it, failing to plan ahead can be costly, so it pays to invest in succession planning. 

When teams do engage in succession planning, the benefits are significant. 94% of employers say having a succession plan improves employee engagement. Employees agree, with 62% saying they would be ‘significantly more engaged’ if their company prioritised succession planning. 

Employees are also more likely to want to work for a company with a strong culture of succession planning. 34% of employees say they are remaining in their current role because they foresee an opportunity to be part of the future growth of the company. 

On the flip side, employees are willing to jump ship to companies who do engage in succession planning. 37% of people say opportunities for career advancement elsewhere would convince them to leave their current job, while 27% say they would leave their job for the chance to learn and develop new skills.

Ultimately, 94% of HR professionals say internal recruiting helps retain their most valuable talent, while 81% added that internal hiring improves retention overall. Therefore, succession planning is essential to consistently attract and retain top talent. 

If, like many organisations, you understand that succession planning is vital but don’t know where to start, we’ve got you covered. Here are four succession planning best practices to set your business up for sustainable success. 

Good succession planning must align with your overall business strategy. As Altus puts it, “if your succession strategy seems like a departure from your long-held goals and beliefs, it will be difficult to get everyone on board with the process.” 

Employees must understand how succession planning aligns with your organisation’s broader strategy, goals, and values. Therefore, clear communication is vital throughout the process. You should explain to employees why succession planning is important and how it aligns with your company’s goals. Doing so will ensure buy-in and engagement throughout the process while also giving employees a clear path to career advancement. 

To get started on this alignment, see our article on how to align L&D to the organisation’s strategy.

It’s never too early to start succession planning. From the moment an employee comes on board, you should take note of their strengths, weaknesses, and overall potential to transition to other roles in the future. 

Of course, it is not enough to simply identify high-potential employees, you must also work with them to overcome potential skill gaps. 

According to the Harvard Business Review, this is where many teams let themselves down. 98% of businesses say they are good at identifying high-potential employees, yet, they spend just 10% of their time developing these potential leaders. 

As such, businesses must both identify and develop candidates throughout the succession planning process. 

False

We’ll analyse why succession planning is vital for your business, including four succession planning best practices to set your business up for sustainable success. 

Why succession planning is vital for your business

Partnering with Go1’s Enterprise Account Executive, Nick Ramsey, we investigate the current state of workplace stability, before diving into internal talent mobility and the interesting rise of talent marketplaces. 

The current state of workforce stability 

In a world where change is often the only constant, the idea of stability can feel like a faraway dream. One could assume there would be a limited case for ‘stability’ given the current state of the world’s workplace. 

Can today’s employees really expect, or desire, stability after the last 5 years of digital transformation, pandemic disruptions, and rapid innovation?  

Thankfully, the answer is a resounding yes. While the working world may be characteristically unstable, and could remain so for some time, there is a strong case for doubling down on efforts to stabilize your working environment. If for no other reason than to appeal as a breath of fresh air in the context of the otherwise chaotic 2020’s.  

Don’t just take our word for it, the Reserve Bank of Australia recently reported that “workers' perceptions of their own job security have declined in recent years.” Similarly, the ADP finds that just 20% of workers feel their jobs are secure.  

As such, employees are crying out for a greater sense of stability. According to a recent survey, 56% of people say that job stability is more important to them than flexibility. What’s more, 30% of people say that job stability is the number one reason they stay with their company (notably, even more important than salary for some), while 60% rate job stability among the top three most important reasons they remain at their job. On the other hand, employees who feel insecure about their job are 37% more likely to be disengaged.  

Accordingly, a sense of stability at work is vital. Yet, it is safe to assume that most of your workforce are feeling the effects of the wider working world’s instability. If they are also experiencing any lack of clarity or ownership around their position and pathways at work, you can be sure that their engagement will take a knock.  

Luckily, there’s a solution: talent mobility. Here’s everything you need to know about how internal talent mobility can help stabilize your workforce.  

Skills development and career mobility are two of the most powerful ways an employer can increase their employees’ job security.    

We spoke to Nick Ramsey, Go1’s Enterprise Account Executive, to gather his insights into where large organizations are (or should be) focusing their efforts to keep their best people in-house.  

How valuable do you believe skills development is when future-proofing an organization? 

It’s never been more important.  The ever-growing skills gaps in key industries and areas has been widely publicised and we continue to see the impact of automation, accompanied by an increasingly volatile economic climate.   

Skills development helps organizations future-proof their workforce – whilst offering employees much-desired opportunities for growth and development. 

Where do you believe the balance should lie between autonomous (led by the employee) and structured (led by the employer) skills development?  

I definitely believe the employer has the responsibility to make the right development opportunities available for their employees.  The utopia is to build a learner-driven culture of curiosity as the pillar of a world-class learning culture.  It’s definitely easier said than done. Learners need direct motivation and to understand the “why” of what’s in it for them.   

Tools that can unlock this include targeted learning campaigns, marketing learning correctly and using data & insights to drive engagement.  That’s why talent marketplaces have so much potential – they can identify the gap in the learner’s knowledge and present an opportunity to fill that gap with a relevant, personalised learning experience.  

A Talent Marketplace is essentially an internally leveraged platform which connects talent to opportunities. Employees promote their individual skills, career goals and preferences while gaining access to a broader selection of pathways than a traditional talent management program would provide. Josh Bersin describes them as a ‘Linkedin, but within the company’.  

Have you noticed any increase or change in the conversations around Talent Marketplaces in the industry of late?   

Absolutely.  I'm noticing that agile organizations are recognizing the challenge of identifying and mapping the skills and capability of their workforces – and beginning to address how they can fill the gaps.  It’s a task riddled with complexity but there is some amazing tech hitting the market that can have a huge amount of value when deployed correctly.   

It’s still a space that’s growing – but one that will only continue to become more prevalent in the coming years.   

Do you know examples of organizations successfully implementing a Talent Marketplace?  

The early-adopters of talent marketplaces in Enterprise organizations are already starting to see the benefits.  By their own admission, it is still early days, and they recognize that they are still in something of a pilot/MVP phase, particularly on identifying the right skills frameworks and technology to use.   

Tools like Gloat and Eightfold.ai are being widely adopted, whilst we’re also seeing the conversation in more mid-market sized organizations, too.  The positive here is that organizations are both identifying the gaps in their organization – and in turn the solutions required to address them.   

What place does skills development have in talent mobility? 

As always, L&D has a major role to play in this process to encourage talent mobility and stability. Attaching upskilling, reskilling and development opportunities is critical to a well-rounded talent mobility program. A robust development programme provides employees with the opportunity to gain new skills, thereby allowing them to explore new roles and opportunities outside of their current remit and take up other positions internally. In other words, L&D and internal mobility go hand in hand.   

One sure-fire way to achieve this is by offering an integrated talent marketplace platform. Providing employees with a clear understanding of where they might need to upskill, as well as the learning pathways to gain these skills, will win their loyalty and engagement.   

Josh Bersin also notes that promoting internal opportunities is one of the most powerful management practices in business. In fact, 94% of HR professionals say that internal recruiting helps retain their most valuable talent, while employees who move to a new role internally are 3.5x more likely to be engaged at work. 

To learn more, check out our blog on why internal mobility is essential in today’s workforce.  

For more insights, be sure to subscribe to the Go1 newsletter to stay on top of all the latest L&D trends. Or, you can book a demo today to find out how Go1 can help with your team’s learning needs. 

With insights from Nick Ramsey, Go1's Enterprise Account Executive we explore investing into skills development and competency, with a close look at the rise of talent marketplaces.

Stabilize your workforce with internal talent mobility

With insights from Nick Ramsey, Go1's Enterprise Account Executive, we explore investing into skills development and competency, with a close look at the rise of talent marketplaces.

The term ‘sustainability’ is appearing increasingly often in the world of business. Whether it’s social sustainability, environmental sustainability, or economic sustainability, this is something that companies can no longer afford to ignore. As such, taking a strong stance on sustainability is no longer an optional extra. It’s essential.  

But before you start thinking that sustainability is all about planting as many trees as you can (though that certainly wouldn’t hurt), there’s much more to it than just that! 

Let’s jump right into the world of sustainability in business and check out some of the different types of sustainability. We’ll also offer actionable steps that businesses can take to increase sustainability. Finally, we’ll attempt to answer the question that we’re sure is on everyone’s people’s lips: “why should you even care about sustainability in business?” 

Social sustainability can often be left by the wayside in favour of other types of sustainability initiatives that are deemed ‘more important’. The truth is, it plays a key role in employee safety and wellbeing in the workplace. It’s equally as important as environmental and economic sustainability.  

The question is: how can we move social sustainability up the priority ladder so it sits in its rightful place next to environmental and economic sustainability?  

Like so many things in the workplace, the answer is education. 

Workplace learning tools are more than just compliance-based training. Many of these platforms have courses that can educate all members of the workplace about how they can be more socially sustainable. 

It can help them answer questions like:  

What can we do to increase psychological safety in the workplace? 

How can we make sure that everyone feels represented within the company? 

How can social sustainability help public perspective of a company? 

One example of social sustainability that we saw explode in popularity at the height of the pandemic was giving employees the option to work from home. By providing this option, employers showed that they cared about their employees’ wellbeing during a very uncertain time around the world. In other words, it gave employees one less thing to worry about!

Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you’ll know that environmental sustainability is a hot topic in business from an individual level right up to major corporations.  

Understandably, different companies will have different capacities for how they can demonstrate environmental sustainability. However, the point is that companies must make an effort that is visible to both employees and consumers. 

The increasing pressure for businesses to demonstrate economic sustainability is more than just hearsay to make businesses feel guilty. There are some real stats behind it! For example, a 2018 Nielsen study of US consumers revealed that a huge 81% of global consumers feel strongly that companies should be doing something to protect the environment. 

While it may not be initially expected, environmental sustainability has an impact on employee retention too. Another study of 1000 US employees revealed that more than 70% would choose to work at a company if it had a strong environmental agenda. 

Here are some ways, both big and small, that companies can demonstrate a commitment to environmental sustainability: 

Investigate the type of power used to produce products. If they’re made with coal power, is there any potential to switch to a more sustainable power source like solar or wind? 

For documents that you would typically print onto paper, try keeping them as a digital file. Many programs allow for documents to still be highlighted or have notes made on them digitally, negating the need for a printout. You’d be shocked how quickly a sheet of paper or two adds up to thousands of sheets in a business! 

For every waste bin you have around the office, have one for recycling as well. You’ll find that simply having the option to recycle will mean that a lot less goes to waste. It’s a small, short term financial investment for long term environmental gain. 

A big part of maintaining economic sustainability within a business is finding that sweet spot between cutting unnecessary spending while also still investing money in things that could benefit the business’s long term financial growth. 

As much as we’d like it, there’s no yellow brick road that leads straight to Oz in the world of economic sustainability for businesses. 

To determine what increased economic stability may look like for a specific business, it’s best to get in touch with a financial advisor or equivalent professional. In doing so, businesses can get a clear idea of what specific actions they can take to increase and maintain economic sustainability. 

Why should you care about sustainability in business?

You may think sustainability is more of a ‘nice to have’ rather than a ‘must have’ for your business. After all, shouldn't things like financial growth and creating a superstar team of staff be the priority? The truth is, sustainability goes hand in hand with both of these things. 

While environmental, social, and economic sustainability all have distinct business functions, they can be likened to a house of cards. If all three are there, the house of cards can stand with ease. The moment one of them is removed or bumped a little too hard, the house of cards is at risk of collapsing.  

That’s not to say that not focusing on one of these types will cause a business to collapse entirely (there’s usually a lot more to it than that). However, if for example, environmental sustainability is being neglected, the social and economic sustainability of a business is likely to suffer as well. 

For more insights, subscribe to the Go1 newsletter to stay on top of all the latest L&D trends. Or, you can book a demo today to find out how Go1 can help with your team’s learning needs. 

Before you start thinking that sustainability is about planting trees, there’s more to it than that! We’ll answer the question: “why should you care about sustainability in business?”

Sustainability as a business priority

Have you ever stayed late at work for a meeting in a different time zone, kept your Slack notifications on because your boss expects immediate responses, or, that dreaded cliche, attended a meeting that could have been an email? If these problems sound familiar, you’re experiencing the pitfalls of synchronous communication. 

Synchronous communication is just a fancy way of saying real-time communication. Common examples of synchronous communication include face-to-face conversations, in-person meetings, and phone calls. In other words, any form of communication where you respond instantly. 

While this type of communication certainly has its upsides, the alternative  — asynchronous communication — can be equally beneficial. Yet, it is often overlooked in the workplace, even though a majority of employees (52%) prefer asynchronous communication, and 42% say asynchronous communication is the future of work. 

With this in mind, we’ll explore the benefits of asynchronous communication for L&D. We’ll start by contrasting synchronous and asynchronous communication, before diving into the benefits of asynchronous communication, and finally outlining best practices to embrace asynchronous communication. 

Synchronous communication vs asynchronous communication

To understand the benefits of asynchronous communication for L&D, it’s vital to first understand the difference between synchronous and asynchronous communication. Let’s compare the two communication styles. 

Synchronous communication is simply a fancy way of describing real-time communication. Any time you are talking to someone and they reply instantly, that’s synchronous communication. Examples of synchronous communication include: 

To expand on this, RingCentral defines synchronous communication as “that which takes place in real-time between two or more parties. Put simply; a synchronous communication exchange is an interactive, ‘live’ interchange between people.”

Accordingly, the key characteristic of synchronous communication is that it’s immediate. Synchronous communication happens in real-time as a ‘live’ exchange between two or more people. When you picture a conversion in your head, there’s a 99% chance you’re picturing synchronous communication. 

In contrast, asynchronous communication features a lag between one person sending a message and another person responding. Where synchronous communication happens in real-time, asynchronous communication involves a delay.

For example, sending a message on Slack and waiting an hour for a reply is a form of asynchronous communication. Other examples of asynchronous communication include: 

Basically, any form of communication where you don’t reply instantly is asynchronous. 

As Owl Labs explains, “asynchronous communication is any type of communication where one person provides information, and then there is a time lag before the recipients take in the information and offer their responses.” 

Likewise, Holloway adds that asynchronous communication “happens when information can be exchanged independent of time. It doesn’t require the recipient’s immediate attention, allowing them to respond to the message at their convenience.” 

Thus, the key characteristic of asynchronous communication is that it is not immediate, affording greater flexibility and more time to digest information. 

Essentially, if synchronous communication is live, then asynchronous communication happens on delay. 

To learn more, start your free trial with Go1 today to access word-class training on synchronous vs asynchronous communication and much more. 

The benefits of asynchronous communication

Now that we understand the difference between synchronous and asynchronous communication, let's explore the benefits of asynchronous communication. Strap in, because there’s a lot to cover! 

First things first, asynchronous communication is what employees want. The majority of employees (52%) prefer asynchronous communication to synchronous communication, with 42% saying asynchronous communication is the future of work. It’s never a bad time to give your employees what they want! 

Employees prefer asynchronous communication because it offers far more flexibility and autonomy than synchronous communication, putting them in control of their communication.

Rather than feeling like they have to be ‘on call’ to respond to any request at a moment’s notice, asynchronous communication allows employees flexibility to work at their own pace, digest information, and give more considered and thoughtful responses. 

Why is flexibility so vital? According to the HBR, 59% of people say that flexibility is more important than salary or other benefits. That’s right, most employees would prefer more flexibility to more money, making asynchronous communication an easy win. 

This flexibility can be vital if your employees work across different continents and time zones. In these situations, getting everyone online simultaneously can be a massive logistical challenge, making asynchronous communication a lifesaver.  

When flexibility increases, employees also feel they have a better work-life balance. 

By encouraging asynchronous communication, employees have more control, autonomy, and ownership over how they communicate, rather than being beholden to rigid, synchronous communication. 

For example, rather than attending a mandatory 7:30 meeting, with asynchronous communication, employees might drop their kids off at school, log on when they get home, and contribute their brilliant ideas in a dedicated Slack thread instead. 

All of this leads to a significantly better work-life balance — and the stats back this up. 61% of employees say asynchronous communication results in a better work-life balance, while 35% say asynchronous work results in more purposeful and less distracting communication.

If you’re a results-focused manager, you might be thinking: ‘flexibility and work-life balance are great, but will asynchronous communication result in better output from my employees?’ The answer is a resounding yes. 

64% of people believe asynchronous communication maximises their productivity, as they don’t have to wait for others to complete tasks. Moreover, 69% say it gives them time to perfect ideas and responses before communicating.

Further, research by Slack finds that asynchronous communication saves three hours per week on average by replacing in-person meetings and inefficient communication styles. As a result, employees can reclaim wasted time and be far more efficient. 

While flexibility, productivity, and efficiency all fall under the modern L&D remit, asynchronous communication also benefits L&D teams in a direct, tangible way. 

36% of remote workers say they would prefer to give up email than Slack, Microsoft Teams, or other asynchronous collaboration tools. Given the ubiquity of email, this statistic underscores how valuable asynchronous communication tools are. 

Yet, 70% of L&D teams say their eLearning platform isn’t integrated with their preferred communication platform — a huge missed opportunity for L&D teams looking to get an edge on their competitors! 

Despite these incredible benefits, many businesses are shooting themselves in the foot by not offering asynchronous communication. 58% of people say their company doesn’t have the tools to support asynchronous work, while just 38% work for a company with asynchronous work policies. 

Additionally, in a recent survey, workers said that 40% of meetings could be replaced by asynchronous communication tools like Slack. We know that ‘meeting that could have been an email’ is a common cliche, but that’s a staggering amount. 

If you’re among the 58% of teams who currently don’t have the tools to support asynchronous work, we’re here to help. Below, we’ll dig into best practices for how businesses can embrace asynchronous communication. 

Best practices for asynchronous communication

At this point, it’s clear that the benefits of asynchronous communication are too good to ignore. So, what should your team do to embrace the async way of life? While there is no one-size-fits-all guide to asynchronous communication, here are a few best practices. 

Many people default to synchronous communication because it’s all they’ve ever known. In-person meetings and face-to-face conversations have long been the norm, and it’s hard to break these ingrained habits and unlearn our unconscious biases. 

However, by opening a dialogue (you could start by sharing this article or exploring Go1’s vast training catalogue) and explaining the benefits of asynchronous communication, your teammates will quickly get on board.

We’ll explore the benefits of asynchronous communication for L&D, outlining best practices to embrace asynchronous communication.

The benefits of asynchronous communication for L&D

How do you learn? If you ask the average person this question, they’ll probably recount a few standard answers; memorising facts, researching data, reading textbooks, discussing topics with friends or colleagues, or completing online courses. Some people may go a step further and consider themselves visual learners or aural learners (despite learning styles being a myth). While most of these are valid answers, they describe learning activities, rather than getting to the core of how we learn. 

At Go1, we believe it is vital to understand how we learn — to learn about learning, as it were. While this is a vast, complex topic, and there is much we still don’t understand about our brains,  neuroplasticity, or how we learn, a love of learning is a core component of what makes us human, so it is a worthy pursuit to understand learning on a deeper, more meaningful level. 

Thankfully, there are a variety of theories that describe how we learn. The five most common learning theories are constructivism, behaviourism, humanism, connectivism, and cognitive learning theory. 

In the coming months, we’ll be launching a learning theories series. Throughout this series, we’ll analyse each of the five most common learning theories to help you better understand how people learn. Already, you can check out our article on cognitive learning theory, and be sure to check back regularly in the coming weeks for more content on behaviourism, humanism, and connectivism. 

Today, we’ll kick off our learning theories series (say that five times fast!) by discussing constructivism, to help you understand constructivist learning theory. We’ll start by asking what constructivism is, before breaking down the types of constructivism and key constructivist principles, and finally analysing the benefits of constructivism for learning and development. 

Constructivism is one of the five most common learning theories, alongside behaviourism, humanism, connectivism, and cognitive learning theory. Constructivist learning theory posits that learning is an active and internal process whereby learners construct information based on their experience of the world. In this way, they build on a foundation of prior knowledge. 

The words ‘active’ and ‘internal’ are key to understanding constructivism, differentiating constructivism from many other learning theories. For example, behaviourism views learning as a passive process that happens in response to external stimuli, whereas constructivism views learning as an active process that happens internally. 

Think of constructivism like an architect designing a skyscraper: each new piece of knowledge is a brick that builds upon your pre-existing foundation. Just as we use mortar to bind bricks together to form a greater whole, constructivism encourages us to synthesise pieces of information to form a deeper, more well-rounded understanding of a given subject. 

As American psychologist Anita Woolfolk summarises, “​​learning is active mental work, not passive reception of teaching.” In this way, constructivism gives learners more control and agency throughout the learning process. 

The University of Buffalo expands on this definition, explaining, “[with constructivism] learners construct knowledge rather than just passively taking in information. As people experience the world…they build their own representations and incorporate new information into their pre-existing knowledge.” 

For example, a group of high-school students are asked to measure a piece of wood without using a ruler or measuring tape. Rather than simply stabbing in the dark, the students can bring their prior knowledge to the table to construct an informed guess. One student knows that they are 5 feet 11 inches tall, another adds that the heels on their standard-issue school shoes are 1.5 inches, while another knows the exact length of an A4 piece of paper. Using this pre-existing foundation of knowledge, they can construct a close estimate of the wood’s length. 

Thus, one of the key defining principles of constructivism is that each new piece of information builds on our prior understanding of the world, rather than each piece of knowledge being discreet. 

Accordingly, the University of Phoenix adds that “constructivists believe learning doesn’t happen in a vacuum. Instead, the theory suggests that people internally and unconsciously relate new information with existing information. In this way, learners actively “construct” their knowledge: They organise information into a unique, individualised base of knowledge.” 

To help solidify these definitions, most conceptions of constructivism outline a few shared, overarching principles. These are: 

1. Knowledge is constructed within learning environments.

2. People discover new ideas as they learn. That is, they learn about learning. 

6. Learning is personal, individual, and unique to the learner. 

7. Learning is an internal mental process, not a response to external stimuli. 

For a more detailed analysis of these constructivist principles, see this handy guide by Simply Psychology. 

Ultimately, while understanding an entire theory of learning can feel like a daunting task, keeping these eight simple principles in mind will go a long way to comprehending constructivism. 

Broadly, there are three main types of constructivism: cognitive constructivism, popularised by Jean Piaget, social constructivism, popularised by Lev Vygotsky, and radical constructivism, popularised by Ernst von Glasersfeld. Below, we will outline the key features of each type of constructivism.

Cognitive constructivism was popularised by Jean Piaget, expanding his theories of cognitive development. Cognitive constructivism is similar to the constructivist theories  we outlined above, emphasising that learning should tie in closely to the learners’ specific stage of cognitive development. 

According to the GSI Teaching and Resource Centre, “cognitive constructivism states knowledge is something that is actively constructed by learners based on their existing cognitive structures. Therefore, learning is relative to their stage of cognitive development. Cognitivist teaching methods aim to assist students in assimilating new information to existing knowledge.”

The University of Phoenix notes that cognitive constructivism was born out of frustrations with behaviourist learning theory, with many psychologists being “critical of behaviourism’s focus on behaviour that could be observed externally, and what they felt was its disregard for the internal psychology of individuals.” 

Lev Vygotsky popularised social constructivism. As the name suggests, social constructivism believes learning is an inherently collaborative and social process. According to social constructivism, learners develop knowledge from interactions with their peers, culture, and society. Therefore, learners rely not just on themselves to construct knowledge, but on others too.

While social constructivism builds on the pioneering work of Piaget, Vygotsky believed Piaget didn’t go far enough. Rather, he saw cognitive constructivism as a theory that “conceived of the learner as an independent entity absorbing information from the environment. That process could be seen as essentially spontaneous and independent.” In contrast, Vygotsky proposed that “learning could not be separated from its social context.” 

Finally, Ernst von Glasersfeld popularised radical constructivism. As the name suggests, von Glasersfeld proposed a far more radical notion of constructivism than either Piaget or Vygotsky.

As the University of Phoenix explains, “von Glasersfeld proposed that objective reality does not exist. In other words, he proposed that subjective knowledge constructions are the entirety of a person’s reality…whereas constructivists say that new knowledge (objective, shared) builds on existing knowledge (subjective, personal) Von Glasersfeld simply takes that concept to its most radical form: that at their most basic level, human beings grow what they know from a place of subjectivity.” 

Likewise, Simply Psychology notes that according to radical constructivism “the knowledge individuals create tells us nothing about reality, and only helps us to function in your environment. Thus, knowledge is invented, not discovered.” 

While this is a difficult concept for many to get their heads around (we don’t blame you if this one’s a head-scratcher), radical constructivism simply proposes that knowledge doesn’t offer us any objective, shared, or universal truth. Instead, it merely helps us to function and interpret the world around us. Therefore, all knowledge is subjective — it is ‘invented’ based on our interpretation, not ‘discovered’ based on absolute fact. Because of our inherent biases and limitations, von Glasersfeld believes it is impossible to construct an objective truth, so we have to make do with interpretations of knowledge, which will vary from person to person. 

For further insights, this helpful guide puts radical constructivism in von Glasersfeld’s own words. 

Now that we understand what constructivism is, common constructivist principles, and the different types of constructivism, it’s time to ask the big question: what are the benefits of applying constructivism over other learning theories? 

As we’ve alluded to, constructivism is a more active process than other learning theories, affording learners more agency, control, and ownership over what and how they learn. This, in turn, makes learners feel more engaged and invested in the learning process. 

By giving learners more agency and ownership over their learning, constructivism also helps to promote more diverse voices, ideas, and opinions. Moreover, it can aid students in developing crucial skills such as analysis, synthesis, critical thinking, and evaluation. This is because constructivism forces students to think more deeply and ‘join the dots’ to synthesise existing knowledge with new ideas. 

Constructivism (particularly cognitive constructivism) can also provide a more relevant and targeted approach to learning, as educators are encouraged to design lessons to suit their students' unique cognitive needs and abilities. By encouraging collaborative learning, students also have the opportunity to develop social skills. 

Don’t just take our word for it, several studies have quantified the benefits of constructivism for learning and development. For example, one study explored the benefits of constructivism for first-year environmental management students. To achieve this, students were “introduced to the idea of a learning or professional journal and provided with guidelines on its structure, but the content was very much of their own choosing.”

Accordingly, the researchers found that students became far more motivated and active participants in their study, using phrases like “I must commit myself here and [I am] at the centre of my own learning.” More specifically, researchers found that students were motivated by “their perception that the topic offered room for autonomy, independent learning, commitment, expanded conceptual understanding and improved capacity to reason.”

Finally, a study published by the Informing Science Institute found that students who followed a constructivist approach had better overall outcomes in terms of grades and motivation. They state, ​“students taught under the constructivist approach have higher mean scores, higher grades, and higher motivation levels as compared to their counterparts taught with other teaching approaches.”

For more insights, subscribe to the Go1 newsletter to stay on top of all the latest L&D trends. Or, you can book a demo today to find out how Go1 can help with your team’s learning needs.

We’ll kick off our learning theories series by discussing constructivism, to help you understand constructivist learning theory.

Understanding constructivist learning theory

We’ll kick off our learning theories series by discussing constructivism, to help you understand constructivist learning theory. 

We’ve all been there. You have a mountain of work to complete, and you’ve finally sat down to begin. Headphones in. Eyes forward. Phone set to silent. You’re fully focused. Then, suddenly, you feel a tap on your shoulder. A colleague needs to ask you an urgent question. Five minutes later, you’ve given a satisfactory answer, and you’re back to it. That was a bit frustrating, but not too bad. It was urgent, after all. 

Twenty minutes later, you receive an email from your boss that needs a quick reply. Then, it’s a Slack message. Then, your phone lights up, and you can’t resist the temptation. Then, you need to attend a meeting. Before you know it, two hours have passed, and between all these distractions, you’ve barely started on the work you desperately need to complete. 

Does this sound familiar? Unfortunately, for many of us, it should. According to a study by Time Magazine, the average office worker is interrupted a whopping 56 times per day. That’s right, 56. Even worse, 80% of these are considered trivial interruptions. As you can imagine, these interruptions add up quickly, leaving just 8.5 minutes between distractions on average in an 8-hour workday. 

So, we’ve examined the importance of focus time for workplace productivity. We’ll start by analysing the frequency of workplace interruptions, before looking at the relationship between distractions and productivity, and finally offering three concrete tips to reduce distractions and carve out some much-needed focus time. 

As we mentioned, the average employee is interrupted a lot. According to a study by ReclaimAI, the average worker spends 1.96 hours per day on unproductive tasks, with other studies finding that office workers spend 41% of their time on ‘low-value activities’. These findings make sense, as a typical worker is interrupted a whopping 56 times per day leaving an average of just 8.5 minutes between distractions.

Unfortunately, these statistics are only the tip of the iceberg. Research by Clockwise finds that 53% of employees waste at least one hour per day dealing with distractions — and one hour is a conservative estimate. 

We’ve examined the importance of focus time for workplace productivity, offering concrete tips to reduce distractions and carve out some much-needed focus time.

Blog