CIPD - Development planning for individual employees

Learning, training and development

Revised September 2008

This factsheet gives introductory guidance. It:

examines approaches to development planning for individuals
provides some frameworks through which organisations can make effective decisions about development planning
suggests advice which can be given to learners to help them benefit from the process.

This factsheet looks at development planning for individuals within the context of the organisation. Organisations may use particular labels for their approach, for example:

Personal development plans (PDPs)
Individual development plans (IDPs)
Learning contracts
Learning action plans.

There are often important differences in approach behind these labels. One key factor is the focus of development planning. There has been a growing concern that, by using the language of ‘personal’ or ‘individual’ plans, the business needs get lost. The issue may need to be how to integrate the personal/individual with the business need – and not focus solely on the personal. So this factsheet is about development planning as a whole, not PDPs or IDPs per se. Organisations may wish to use the latter terminology, but they don’t have to – hence the use here of the wider term ‘development planning’.

This factsheet concentrates mainly on the generic issues of development planning and indicates choices available to organisations. These choices are blurred in much organisational practice but, by starkly suggesting choices, it may aid clarity of analysis. There are also some practical recommendations.

Development planning may be a good idea if done well; done badly it may not be at all useful. The issues raised below point to some ways in which development planning can work more effectively.

Rationale for development planning

The main rationale for development/learning planning is that planned and organised learning and development is likely to be more beneficial, for individuals and their organisations, than unplanned and random learning activities. After the first flush of enthusiasm for training, organisations many years ago started to feel that they were potentially wasting money in sponsoring courses where participants or their managers responded to what was on offer, rather than learning and development choices being driven by real identified needs.

This leads to the first two choices open to organisations.

Choice one - Planned or not

Clearly much learning occurs randomly in organisations. A chance conversation may lead to a person learning some new ideas. A re-organisation may force new learning on people. And so on.

Hence it is apparent that much learning cannot be pre-planned. However the evidence is that relying totally on random learning activities is not functional. Merely responding to offerings, such as standardised training courses, does not lead to cost-effective development activity. Also by planning learning it does not mean that the unplanned learning will not occur. However the evidence is that having a plan can orient the person’s energies and focus so that they are more likely to seek out relevant learning and to leave aside activities that will not assist them.

Research also shows that a written plan is more likely to be implemented than one that just resides in the person’s head. The latter is more like a list of New Year’s resolutions – nice ideas but not organised so that they are implemented.

Choice two – Learning or training led

Historically much initial development planning concentrated on providing a list of training courses and the learner was assisted to pick the most relevant courses from a pre-defined menu. Many organisations came to realise that this was not necessarily the best way forward. Most learning in organisations does not occur via training courses. Also development needs not packaged in courses were neglected.

Development planning has now been much more associated with identifying what learning needs the individual has and then looking for the appropriate ways of achieving them.

Choice three – Who does it?

The evidence is that development planning is best driven by the individual doing the learning. However it is recognised in most organisations that the individual may need help with this. Also many organisations are keen to link learning to business needs and so want to see a role for the person’s line manager. This means that a common approach is for there to be an annual development review during which a line manager works with the learner to create a plan for the coming year. For more on the role of line managers in training and learning, see our Change Agenda Learning and the line.

Go to Learning and the line

Learning and development (L&D) professionals may be called in to assist with development planning for specific individuals. In some organisations L&D are centrally involved in planning for those identified with potential for senior roles – for example as part of a talent management strategy. In many cases L&D play a more reactive role – they wait to be asked by line managers or learners before getting involved.

Some progressive organisations have recognised the evidence that demonstrates that it is the peer group that has the greatest influence on an individual and their development. This links to the next choice.

Choice four – Vertical versus horizontal

Most organisations rely on a purely vertical mode – that is the person’s manager is the sole person to assist the learner with their planning and the conversation is a vertical one. However some organisations have seen that using peers as well as the line manager can be helpful. This is especially a factor where learning groups of peers are brought together to assist each individual with their learning. The evidence is that plans shared with others, especially peers, are more likely to be implemented than if no-one else sees the plan or only the line manager is involved. This approach can be characterised as more horizontal.

The choice here may then be not between the vertical and the horizontal, but about how much, and in what ways, the various parties are involved. Using both line managers and peers has been shown to be particularly effective¹.

Choice five – Using diagnostics or not

In many organisations the manager may indicate to the person what development they see that person needing. They typically base this on observations of the person in action and any feedback they have received on the person’s performance. This evidence may be limited and various ways have emerged to get better evidence of need.

Some typically used approaches include:

Psychometric tests and instruments – these may be administered by HR/L&D professionals in order to assist the person and their line manager to explore relevant factors – see our factsheet on testing for more information.
- Go to our factsheet on Psychological testing
360 degree feedback – in many organisations this has become the dominant mode in order to get richer evidence of needs – see our factsheet on this topic for more information.
- Go to our factsheet on 360 feedback
Development/assessment centres – these appear to be being used less - in part due to cost.

Line managers and learners may need assistance with interpreting diagnostic evidence, as it is not always clear what responses need to be made to data collected. L&D professionals, or outside consultants skilled in this work, might be used to assist this process of making sense of diagnostic evidence.

Choice six – Outcome-based or input-based

The discussion above points to the value of an outcome-based, goal-based approach to development. This means working with the learner to assist them to develop useful goals before exploring what development approaches to use. Input-based approaches focus on what the learner might do, for example attend a training course, without a consideration of what they will get from the course.

This point links to the distinction between demand-led and supply-led development. A crude distinction is that:

demand-led approaches are based on real needs in the business and in the person
supply-led approaches are based on what the L&D department decide to offer.

Choice seven – Competence-based or not

Many organisations are committed to using competencies and they tie all development needs to the improvement of specific competencies. Research evidence points to a number of issues about this approach:

Many learning needs are not encapsulated in competencies. For instance there may be a need for the person to learn specific professional knowledge – and this may be linked to the requirements of professional bodies and not be part of a generic competence list.
The language used by learners to identify needs may not fit a competence list and force-fitting can distort learning goals.
Much learning activity will cut across competence categories.

The issue here is to consider the extent to which organisational competence lists (if they exist) will dictate the content of a development plan. The alternative is a free mode where the learner and their supporters (line manager, peers, L&D, etc) work together to produce a language appropriate to the individual and their context.

For more information on the use of competencies, see our factsheet on that topic.

Go to our factsheet on Competency and competency frameworks

Choice eight – Strategic versus tactical

One criticism of many PDPs is that they are quite short term. They focus on immediate job needs. This can be especially so when the line manager drives the process in order to get their person to improve in areas that will help the line manager achieve short term objectives. Where talent management, engagement and career development factors are starting to bite in organisations there is a growing recognition that development planning needs to be more strategic and to encompass longer term development processes. Indeed the research evidence suggests that a focus on career development has a marked positive impact on learning and development activity.

See more on our research into talent management

Where a talented manager is seen as capable of moving into a more senior role, the focus on solely short term deliverables is recognised as potentially limiting the person’s development. For instance an individual may want to develop leadership capabilities that will take them forward in their career, but their line manager only wants learning that will deliver against immediate projects.

This points to the need for a greater involvement of HR/L&D in development planning and also the greater use of the peer group to assist people’s strategic development. If organisations are serious about talent management and career development purely tactical development plans may be unhelpful.

None of this is to say that the tactical should be ignored. It’s about doing both the strategic and the tactical.

Choice nine – Individual versus team

In the above (and in most organisations) the focus is on the individual. But we know that much useful organisational learning is a social process. The evidence on ‘communities of practice’ points to the potential for more team based approaches which encourage mutual support in learning². This factor links to choice four above (vertical and horizontal) but it makes a broader case for team-based learning. Again this does not deny the focus on the individual – it’s just extending the basis of learning.

Choice ten – Choosing learning approaches

When the process of creating a PDP just involved picking from a list of courses, it was relatively easy for the learner and their line manager to make choices. Now it is recognised that much learning takes place in work. Cunningham identified 58 different work based learning approaches that have proven usefulness³. Most managers and learners have little idea of the rich choices available. This suggests again the need for a greater involvement from HR/L&D in providing support, so that people can choose the most cost-effective approaches available.

One problem, though, is that where the L&D department is purely a re-badged training department this expertise may not be present. Many L&D people were trainers, still think like trainers and want training to be the first option for development. Also many managers can be quite blinkered about trying alternative approaches. They went on a brilliant course 10 years ago and want everyone else to have the same experience because it worked for them, hence imposing their preferences on others.

Choice eleven – Part of a performance review or separate

Most organisations link development planning to a performance review/appraisal of the individual. The advantage is claimed to be that performance gaps can then be addressed straight away. The disadvantages of this approach can include:

The need for a switch of emphasis from appraisal and judgements on performance to learning
The problem that this is the last item on the agenda and it gets rushed
If the person has had significant gaps identified they may not be emotionally ready to respond
The emphasis is usually tactical not strategic.

There is a case for separating a development review from a performance review, not least because research evidence suggests that in fast-moving organisations the chances of the next annual review featuring the same two people is less than evens. That is either the manager has moved job or the individual (learner) has moved job so that the idea of a cycle of development planning and then a review of the plan with the same two people does not work out in practice.

Choice twelve – Planning versus contracting

Some organisations have become concerned that a plan can mean that it stays as a plan - and there is variable commitment to implementing such plans. These organisations have moved more to a contracting model where there is a learning contract created – usually with a group of peers and with the line manager – and maybe L&D as well. The notion of a contract is that the organisation will provide learning opportunities provided the person delivers on them.

The expectation is that if the planning process produces agreed learning goals the learner will deliver on them. On its side the organisation is agreeing to provide support to the learner – it’s a two-way deal. The contracting model provides both a more rigorous and challenging process as well as a more supportive approach. It usually requires more up-front work to create such contracts but the evidence is that pay-off down the line is much greater.

Some practical advice

The focus of the above has been to clarify issues and to point to developments in this field. However for the individual learner they are more likely to have to operate within the framework of the organisation’s existing approach. The following advice to learners will help them to benefit from the process and is offered as a way of moving the more general discussion above into concrete specifics.

The following advice is structured around three headings: benefits, limitations and operating hints. This structure (with suitable modifications of the text below) can be used in an organisation as a handout to assist learners as part of a conversation about development planning.

Possible benefits of development planning

Relevant learning and development is more likely to happen in practice when you are goal directed.
Learning that is planned is more efficient.
Unanticipated learning opportunities are more likely to come to your attention when you are prepared for them.
The choices of learning methods are more likely to be appropriate following completion of a development plan and their use can be designed and managed to provide a tailored fit with your needs and interests.
Motivation and confidence in taking responsibility for one’s own learning can be enhanced.

Possible limitations of development planning

The quality of a completed development plan can suffer without timely and relevant diagnostic information from others.
The creation of a valid and useable plan is particularly difficult to achieve without the active support and agreement of others who are relevant to you in your current role.
The successful implementation of even a well-crafted plan is not guaranteed without continuing support and challenge from others.

Operating hints

Ensure that there is ready access to relevant and valid diagnostic data in the identification of learning needs.
Ensure that there are opportunities for, potentially, several iterations of the plan in draft form to which relevant others in the organisation have the opportunity to contribute by way of ideas and information.
In choosing learning methods, explore and clarify these thoroughly prior to making decisions about which to use. This may involve discussion and agreement with others who will need to provide time or other help.
Ensure agreement is reached about learning goals and methods between, for example, you and your manager.
Ensure that clear targets and other ‘mileposts’ associated with learning goals are agreed between yourself and other interested parties.
Arrange for coaching or mentoring help where appropriate to cover both the creation and implementation of the development plan.

More could be added to the above to suit local circumstances: the material here is more offered as a prompt for thought than a totally comprehensive list.

Case studies

Some examples of organisational approaches to development planning can be found in the case studies in the Helping people learn area of our website. In particular, the following case studies may be useful: The Army, Ford, Scottish Fire & Rescue Service, and Jardine Engineering Corporation.

Go to our Helping people learn case studies

CIPD viewpoint

It is difficult to justify the notion that organisations should avoid doing proper development planning. Learning and development is crucial for organisational success, but it can’t be left to chance. However the approach to development planning has to be made carefully and be based on the strategic needs of the business as well as the needs of individuals in the organisation. This factsheet provides some frameworks through which organisations can make effective decisions about development planning.

References

CUNNINGHAM, I., BENNETT, B. and DAWES, G. (eds) (2000) Self managed learning in action: putting SML into practice. Aldershot: Gower.
WENGER, E. (1998) Communities of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
CUNNINGHAM, I. DAWES, G. and BENNETT, B. (2004) Handbook of work-based learning. Aldershot: Gower.

Development planning for individual employees