Design for Doing: Turning Learning into Capability

Julia: Welcome to L&D in 20, your go-to resource for all things workplace learning, brought to you by Go1. I'm your host, Julia Nieradka, Manager of Customer Success at Go1. Today on the show, I'm excited to be joined by Brian, Vice President of Content Engineering at CodeSignal, a leading skills assessment and learning platform helping organizations identify, develop, and retain talent through skills-based education.

Brian leads CodeSignal's content engineering organization, overseeing the development and tooling behind the thousands of assessments and courses that power the platform. With nearly three decades of experience in software engineering and technology leadership, including more than a decade in, in the ed tech industry, he has played a key role in building and scaling the systems :that support modern learning experiences.

Throughout his career, Brian has led content platform teams through major technology transformations, including large scale system rewrites and the integration of AI powered capabilities. His work sits at the intersection of technology and learning, where he's focused on creating the infrastructure, tools, and teams that make skills-based education effective and scalable.

Brian, welcome to the show. 

Brian: Thank you for having me. 

Julia: Pleasure. So Brian, today in our episode, we're going to deep dive into exploring what it takes to create a better learning experience at work. We discuss why traditional training alone is no longer enough to build real capability, and how organizations can better support employees in the flow of work, and the critical role that managers also play in turning learning into performance.

Brian, you've spent years building the technology behind learning experiences at scale. When you look across organizations today, what is the biggest misconception about how people actually build capability and not just acquire knowledge? 

Brian: Yeah, that's a good question. I think when you look at a lot of the traditional e-learning solutions, it's very often broadcast.

It's videos, it's slides. You know, maybe you're on a seminar, and there is a leader, but it's still classroom based and broadcast. And you can get a lot of knowledge from that sort of thing, but it's hard to build skills. And I think that's the big thing missing, because knowledge doesn't really help us in the workplace if it doesn't translate to actual skill building.

So I think active practice is mandatory, and technology is making it more and more accessible for us to go well beyond videos, slideware, things like that, that get us to a place where people are actually practicing the skill and building the skill as they go 

Julia: We know from decades of learning science that without application, knowledge fades remarkably quickly.

Brian: Mm-hmm. 

Julia: And so I think that's such an important distinction, and, you know, often learning is treated as the same thing as capability, but it's really not. 

Brian: Oh, for sure. For sure. You know, you can read a book on management, and you can find out how you need to be empathetic with your employees, but then you get in the meeting, and you realize that it's, it's just not the same.

The words that you use, the way that you talk, the tone that you use, everything that comes along with it, it has to be practiced. 

Julia: Absolutely, and I think if capability comes through doing rather than knowing, the obvious next question therefore becomes that if traditional learning helped people acquire knowledge, what has changed in today's workplace that means organizations now need something different?

Brian: Well, I would argue that they always needed something different. So up until the last five to 10 years, the technology delivery systems that we have had have been just kind of inadequate for what we really need, which is actually practicing the skills. And so if you actually-- I don't think anything really changed other than we are now enabled to practice more, and some of this will mean that you're going to be talking to an AI, and you're going to be having practice-based conversations with that AI.

And we just couldn't do that four years ago, three years ago even. The technology has enabled us to create simulations that we were never able to do before. 

Julia: What has surprised you the most, Brian, about simulation-based learning? 

Brian: You know, it's really surprising how engaging it can be. I think a lot of times people just wanna get their training over with quickly.

They like something that's passive. But when they start seeing how you can do it a different way, and you are actually, like, really engaging with the content, and when you don't understand something, you can ask questions, and you can actively build skills, I think, I think people get really engaged with that.

And, you know, it goes beyond what we have really ever understood when it comes to broadcast-based learning. 

Julia: So Brian, what does good support look like when someone needs help in the moment, and not just in a formal learning setting? 

Brian: Sure. Well, you know, I'm a manager as well as a technologist, and so I believe coaching is always the right thing for people who are trying to grow.

I wish I did this more with my kids, but I also believe it with my kids, that just giving them the answer is not the right way to go about it. Helping them figure out what the right answer is and make that decision correctly in the future is the right way to do it, and the same thing is true if you're trying to teach something.

And this is again where technology gets involved in the recent years, and if you have an actual Socratic teacher, a tutor sitting right there with you that you can ask questions of but is not gonna give you the answer, it forces you to ask the right questions and get to a place where maybe the tutor's asking you questions and coaching you as opposed to just directing you.

Julia: Where do you think human coaching still outperforms AI? And I guess, two-part question, which skills and categories of coaching do you think we should not rely on AI for? 

Brian: Well, I mean, I'll be honest. If I had one-on-one coaching, I would pick that over AI. You know, AI is still a technology, and really I would like to learn from a human.

And so the thing is, it doesn't scale. This is what we learned in the '80s with Bloom's 2 Sigma, is that we know that one-on-one human interaction is... produces the best outcomes. But we don't do that in classrooms or in e-learning because it simply doesn't scale. You can't get that scale, so you have to come up with the next best thing.

And so I think AI tutors get us a lot closer. At least in the current state of AI tutors, AI tutors don't have a lot of empathy. They don't have tone of voice. They can't hear you. They can't pause properly when you're talking to them and feeling frustrated. They may be really positive and saying, "You can do it.

You can do it." But sometimes the tutor needs to stop, if it were a human, and say, "I get that this is really hard. You want to take a break?" And I don't think our tutors are there yet. I do think we can get there because they're getting better and better as we go. So your question, what type of content doesn't work as well?

You know, when you're dealing with serious human issues and you really need a human in front of you, the AI is probably not the way to go. For most of the work and the most of the training that we build, that's not the case. If you're dealing with trauma, if you're dealing with situations where it's just not appropriate to put a computer in front of you, we should definitely still avoid those things, and there are a lot of professions that have to deal with that sort of thing today and, you know, that would be a world where I would say, let's back off on the technology and make sure that the humans are there.

Julia: I think that's a fascinating distinction because, you know, AI often gets positioned as automation, whereas you're describing sort of augmentation, which sort of leads into the next question, which is, you know, we often hear that managers are the biggest drivers of capability, motivation inside an organization, but what does great management actually look like?

Sort of the goal is not simply getting work done, but helping people grow into their own capability goals. 

Brian: I guess in the world of learning, I think learning has to be an expectation. It can't be something that you are told to do and then you aren't given time for. It's built into the actual work week, month, or whatever cadence you might wanna use.

And then once that learning time is given and the practice time is given, managers and leaders, they have to be on the lookout for opportunities to give their employees the options to practice it. And, you know, even if you learn the skill, if you're not practicing it regularly, it's going to atrophy.

And, you know, you may not be ready to do it full time, but the manager needs to make that time to allow you to practice it. Beyond that, you know, along with the, just the culture of learning, you know, really sticking to the, you know, we've all heard learn it, do it, teach it. Again, creating the opportunities for the learning, the doing, and the teaching.

Maybe we create spaces where we do paired work together, where somebody who knows it well is teaching it to somebody else, and they're working together, and they're taking turns with the work, sharing a screen, things like that. We do that a lot in the software industry. And then finally, I think the manager needs to drive accountability.

So if you're gonna take the time to invest in growing the skills for someone and they are, you know, they are actually doing it, you gotta make sure that they're putting in the work, that they're taking the time, that they are actually growing the skill. And sometimes, you know, it's not a punishment.

The manager really wants you to succeed, and so the manager may have to say, "Hey, how's the skill going?" And just keep you accountable for what you're trying to build. 

Julia: Yeah, and I think that answers a couple of things because, you know, what you're saying is it's, you know, the methodology there is shifting learning from being an event to being more incorporated in the operating rhythm of the team or the individual.

And also that other question that's always being asked, which is how do managers create more learning time when everyone's already feeling overloaded? So if we're incorporating that into our operating rhythm and into the way that we are synthesizing information on a daily basis, then we're in a much better place for continuing ongoing learning.

Brian: Yeah, I totally agree. Something that I've always been a huge fan of is the brown bag lunch or the learning time or something that's on the calendar on a regular basis that the team knows they're gonna spend time in. And they're all invited, and there's a schedule on who is going to be presenting.

It doesn't have to be a single person presenting to others. It can be interactive, it can be multiple people talking, but the whole point is in the learn it, do it, teach it. We have to give people an opportunity to present what they've learned, and I find it to be a really engaging experience when people learn from their peers in a way like that.

And that can come in many, many different forms. It doesn't have to be lunch, right? Where we are, the people on the team are spread across the whole world, so we don't bother with it being a lunch, but we still make the time, and I think it's something that every team should do regardless of their function.

Julia: So Brian, if every L&D leader listening today could redesign just one aspect of their learning to make it feel more human, what is one design principle you would recommend? 

Brian: Design for doing and not just knowing. I think that kind of ties up a lot of what I've been saying here. Every outcome should require some sort of artifact.

If you're learning to code, and you give them a practice to debug some code, you should see working code. Maybe they need to write a plan. Maybe they need to have a role play with an AI agent, something that requires them to actually interact with the idea as opposed to just bring it in like a sponge. 

Julia: Do you think this can also work outside of technical skills, Brian, as well?

Brian: Oh, absolutely. I think it's actually really good for leadership skills because, again, this is where technology is now enabling us to do things we were never able to do before. But if one of the skills you're trying to learn is to talk to an employee about a performance problem, again, you can read a book about it, but then when you sit down and do it, it's hard.

But what if instead you were given a role play where you had to go through it, and then you were graded on that role play? And if you didn't quite do the things that was taught in the lesson, you go try again, and you practice it. So when it comes time to actually deliver, you know, negative feedback to somebody, you've already kind of worked through the words that you're going to say.

You've already thought through the ideas. It's not just coming out of your mouth the first time. You've actually practiced it. And it doesn't have to just be communication-based role play like that. It can be writing. Let's say you're learning product management skills. I'm gonna have you write a plan for the next, you know, the next delivery of the product that you're creating, and I'm gonna judge you with a rubric on how you wrote that plan.

And this is where the technology really enables to do things we didn't-- we couldn't do even two years ago, but we can do it now, and this job simulation is a real possibility now. 

Julia: Thank you, Brian. We always finish the show with three quick-fire practical questions. So are you ready? 

Brian: Sure. 

Julia: All right. The first one is, what is your go-to spot for practical professional advice?

Brian: Well, I actually like using Claude or ChatGPT to create scheduled prompts or deep learning and get reports sent to me about exactly what I care about. 

Julia: Who's at your table? At this time of rapid change, who do you think is a key stakeholder HR and L&D leaders should partner with across the organization, and why?

Brian: Well, I don't think I would've said this a couple years ago, but I think bringing in engineering leadership is prudent today because, you know, AI at work is a pretty vast subject, and the tech leadership is ahead of the rest of the organization, both on capability but also accessibility on what is, what is there.

And I think if you're not including your tech leadership on how to teach AI concepts to the rest of your organization, you're missing out on a pretty big resource. 

Julia: Finish this sentence for us: at its best, learning at work should feel… 

Brian: Like you just figured out something on your own. 

Julia: Brian, thank you so much for joining us. We've loved having you. 

Brian: Thank you for having me on. It was really fun.

Julia: Thanks for tuning into the show. I'm your host, Julia Nieradka, and that wraps up another episode of L&D in 20. To continue the conversation, send me a message on LinkedIn through the link in the show notes. Your comments will help inform future episodes, and who knows, maybe we'll even answer some of your questions on the show.

We'll catch you on the next episode, and until then, keep learning. 

Producer: This show is brought to you by Go1, the trusted learning foundation for a future-ready workforce. Go1 helps organizations build capable, compliant teams through the world's most comprehensive learning ecosystem, making learning easier to manage, measure, and scale with confidence.

To learn more, visit go1.com or click the link in the show notes. And to stay up to date on future episodes of L&D in 20, subscribe wherever you listen to podcasts.