Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

U-Spring: 2016 Corporate University Global Survey Results


Published on

Results of BPI group's 2016 global survey on corporate universities and new methods of organizational learning. Join us in reimagining the corporate university!

Published in: Business
  • Be the first to comment

U-Spring: 2016 Corporate University Global Survey Results

  1. 1. The New Methods of Organizational Learning & Training STUDY Survey of corporate university leaders - April 2016 Survey conducted by: For: Partners
  2. 2. 2 I Survey of corporate university leaders EDITORIAL An evolution is taking place in corporate training and learning today. Corporate universities and talent development models must adapt to the challenges faced by companies and employees in an environment of constant transformation. From digital innovation to accelerated globalization, companies are experiencing profound change – and employees must also shift and build their competencies to adapt to these trends. Recognizing these challenges, BPI group, a global management and HR consulting firm with expertise in change management, surveyed 130 corporate university leaders. BPI group published these survey results at U-Spring on April 7th, 2016 – the first European event dedicated to corporate universities, learning, and talent development. METHODOLOGY: The survey was sent online to 130 executives, training managers, and HR managers. The data was processed by the MRCC institute in order to guarantee the anonymity of the responses. 130 organizations responded 72%25% 3% Organizations that are potentially affected and not planning to create a corporate university Organizations that have a corporate university Organizations in the process of creating a corporate university Sabine Lochmann President of the Management Board, BPI group Christophe Richarme Managing Director, BPI group
  3. 3. Survey of corporate university leaders I 3 72% of organizations surveyed do not want to establish a corporate university for 3 main reasons: When the newest university was created 2015 When the oldest university was created 1982 SUMMARYKEY FIGURES Structure p. 4 A centralized structure, with international aims, affiliated with the HR department. There are multiple internal sponsors, mainly HR and the senior management, or ma- nagers more broadly. Objectives p. 5 Multiple objectives for univer- sities, including developing management and contribu- ting to the corporate culture and changes in the organiza- tion, as well as to designing training programs. 92% feel that they play a role in the lar- ger organization. Factors in short-term adaptation p. 6-8 The main factors in adaptation related to digital technology: The primary factor cited was digital technology in and of it- self. Other factors, which are affected by digital technology, include new educational tools, the emergence of new mana- gement methods, new jobs, and new relationships at work. 84% state that digital technolo- gy has a major impact on uni- versities. A rapidly-changing model p. 9-11 The drivers of this change de- monstrate the expanded role of the corporate university, whose tools are evolving due to advances in digital techno- logy and changes in the or- ganizations that the university supports. of the universities are affiliated with organizations that have more than 500 employees 80% of these organizations have international reach, and their university is designed to train employees from countries other than France. However, only 43% have or will have offices abroad 70% have a centralized structure80% Size Cost 46% 31% 19% Strategic priorities Additional reasons cited: Complexity of implementation: 16% Specificities of their training engineering: 6% Culture: 6%
  4. 4. 4 I Survey of corporate university leaders The universities are principally affiliated with the HR department, and sometimes senior management. The universities are a combined internal/ external undertaking. Functional affiliation The main functional affiliation is with human resources: 65% with the HR department, 13% with the human resources development department or talent management department, 3% with the training department. 16% report to the senior management 1 case of independent EIG Internal sponsors: On average, 3 sponsors are appointed 30% Functional teams Leaders Operations managers Managers Senior management HR 32% 32% 49% 76% 81% Management model 100% of the work is done internally Up to 50% of the work is done internally Less than 50% of the work is done internally All work is done externally 16% 51% 27% 5% STRUCTURE
  5. 5. Survey of corporate university leaders I 5 Universities have multiple objectives, including development of management, influence on the corporate culture and changes in the organization, and the design of training programs. 84% 84% 78% 78% 68% 65% 49% 49% 43% 41% 27% 24% Support development of management Contribute to development of corporate culture Design training programs Contribute to changes in the organization Offer innovative approaches Develop knowledge building Develop a learning community Develop a learning organization Lead an ecosystem of chosen partners Support HR departments Engage in forecasting Have an impact in geographic areas and among clients in order to... The role of corporate universities in training, fostering a sense of belonging, and knowledge. In terms of belonging to the organization In terms of training In terms of knowledge91% 9% 92% 8% 100% Yes No OBJECTIVES
  6. 6. 6 I Survey of corporate university leaders There are multiple factors in adaptation; first among them is the emergence of digital technology. On a scale of 0 to 10 8.0Emergence of digital technology 7.8Emergence of new pedagogical approaches 7.2Emergence of new management methods 7.0Adaptation and emergence of new jobs 6.9Emergence of a new relationship to work 6.5Intergenerational exchanges 6.3Changing economic models 6.2Globalization of organizations 5.1Legislative changes FACTORS IN SHORT-TERM ADAPTATION
  7. 7. Survey of corporate university leaders I 7 84% think that digital technology has a major impact on universities. Methods and tools are affected by e-learning, gaming, and MOOCs and their variations. In your opinion, what is the level of impact of digital technology on corporate universities? Major Impact Minor Impact 16% 84% What methods and tools inspired by digital technology do you consider the most relevant? FOCUS ON DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY E-learning Gaming / Gamification / Serious Games MOOC Blended Learning Virtual classroom COOC (Corporate Online Open Course) Communities of practice Online forum / discussion forum Micro learning Mobility (smartphone, tablet, ...) Webinars Pedagogical learning Disse- mination of short knowledge pills Hackathon Online Q&A Online quiz Rapid learning Social learning Tutorials Interactive whiteboard SPOC (Small Private Online Courses) Immersion (e.g., oculus)
  8. 8. 8 I Survey of corporate university leaders Nearly all the respondents measure the quality of their services. One or two methods are used, with the traditional satisfaction survey topping the list. Half of respondents have implemented performance indicators. 84% Opinion/satisfaction survey 51% Measurement of performance indicators 43% Other systematic evaluations of initiatives 3% No measurement The primary expected advancements are focused on the development of the employee. Efficiency, innovation, training methods, and the use of digital tools are also among the most cited expectations. On a scale of 0 to 10 Use training to make employees agents in their own development 7.7 Greater efficiency 7.6 Innovative solutions combining educatio- nal approaches 7.6 Better connection between learning and on-the-job application More digital tools Greater proximity More clarity in the service offering Cost reduction More mentoring Greater employee involvement in the design of services 7.5 7.1 6.8 6.8 6.6 6.3 5.3
  9. 9. Survey of corporate university leaders I 9 Key factors contributing to change in the corporate university model: changes in educational methods due to digital technology, the need to retain talent, and changing economic models. Retention of talent Pedagogical advances due to digital technology Important drivers of change that are not currently anticipated: the levers of tomorrow Important drivers of change that are currently anticipated: the key elements of today Drivers of change seen as less important and not currently anticipated: neglected levers? Towhatextentwillthefollowingfactorschangethemodels ofcorporateuniversitiesinthemediumterm? Change in economic modelAppeal of employer offering Obsolescence of knowledge Organizational certification (on the job education)Extended enterprises Public-private partnership 3,0 4,0 5,0 6,0 7,0 8,0 9,0 10,0 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% For your university, what drivers of change do you currently anticipate? Average MODELS IN (R)EVOLUTION YES 22% 3% 14% 84% 62% Yes, absolutely Yes, somewhat No, not really No, not at all Do you think the corporate university model will change radically in the next 5 years?
  10. 10. Major change in progress regarding adult learning preparation for jobs that do not exist need for leadership skills that are still underdeveloped (manage complexity, agile leadership, etc.) L&D as an element of Employees Value Proposition,* for differentiation of the employer changes in required knowledge and skills, specifically in France, significant lag in pedagogies. 10 I Survey of corporate university leaders Why will the corporate university model change in the next 5 years? Digital technology has a major impact on tools and on the organizations that the universities support, as well as on price, cus- tomization, speed, and operationality. Adaptation to new business challenges and new tools. Taking into account cost control and control of the development of digital tools. Definitely the digital transformation will conduct to a major transformation. Emergence of new ways of learning. Universal use of Digital. Needs for co- development and coaching close by. They will become a true support for sales; sponsor = senior management and not HR. Arrival of new jobs (digital, data) Skills issues, regulatory issues, technological issues, efficiency issues. Dual impact of digital technology and globalization. Digitalization and internationalization of training offerings under severe budget constraints. Do not be merely a service provider but an actor in the organization’s success. Customization of programs based on managers’ needs. The impact of digital technology makes it necessary to rethink the training model. It promotes the individualization of learning programs and multiple methods, and therefore a greater pedagogical impact and more compact content that also makes it possible to follow the “just requisite to just-in-time” regarding training tools. In addition, in a world that continues to become more complex and shifting, trainings must constantly be adjusted to reflect the reality on the ground and respond to both business challenges and operational needs. Need to train more quickly, people are less available. Importance of cultural regionalization, use of technology to connect groups of individuals in learning relationships. The mission of corporate universities is expanding: beyond training, the university is an incubator making it possible to pay attention to internal and external advances and offer innovative methods/solutions in order to remain effective and agile in an environment of constant change. The digital economy entails radical changes in the organization and will spur reinvestment in human capital and employees. There will be a need for support to implement these level 2 changes systemically. Shift toward role of group leader and facilitator in sharing knowledge and experience, rather than an organizer of transfer of knowledge. Because - of the public (employees) intergenerationnel approach, - of the definition between knowledge acquisition and training - of the network environment - ... They must be closer to talent development. Adapt to the proliferation of Learning sources and organizations. Focus more on Learning offerings than on pure training. With cost reduction and the development of digital technology, remote training should be booming. Also, the reform of training has had a negative impact on the financial management of the corporate university. What they told us...
  11. 11. Survey of corporate university leaders I 11 Change in management method. Change in our clients’ expectations. Internationalization, globalization. A new generation with different expectations. Learning organizations, liberated organizations. Change in corporate strategy – Change in core activities – Need to strengthen the sense of belonging. Regulation (FP, bank and insurance, etc.) digital revolution and impact on ways of working and managing. Digitalization of organizations, change in manager’s role, social role of the organization as a dynamic human community. Better reporting, which enables better promotion of the impact. The use of mobile technology for corporate training and the ability to share knowledge instantly. In your opinion, what other factors would be likely to stimulate change? Distance learning. Burden for the administrator – Availability of participants and instructors – Requirements/obstacles in obtaining approval from public authorities. Shortage of training offerings in France (archaic pedagogy) providers’ inability to effectively launch a program on several continents, while being relevant in each culture and cost effective. Relationship with OPCA [Joint Commission for Collective Training], constant changes in the organization’s strategy and needs, budgets. Volumes to process, spurt of needs in the project vs. time needed to develop and implement. Change in business model related to shift from a training service to the creation of a group university in the form of a profit center + internationalization of our deployments. Budget – Competition with local or entity initiatives Location in relation to training teams of large entities – Lead times and launch times compared to expectations – Supply- side communication – Agility in order to respond to demands between collective expectations and local needs. Complexity of regulation of French training. Administrative burden – Difficulty for organizations to release employees for training given the pressured environment. Availability of internal stakeholders. Internationalization. Multi language country culture legal requirements between countries IT materials. Management of a consultant pool. Complexity of administrative processes and logistical management of trainings – Decision makers’ understanding of digital technology. Internationalization of the offering. Internal training = more interruptions than with an outside provider. Major challenges faced in the management of their corporate university
  12. 12. l 01 55 35 70 00 l l 37 rue du Rocher - 75008 BPIgroupFR Contact : Spirit of conquest Sustainable performance Perseverence Alignment with core business Performance Expertise Participation Leadership Satisfaction Operationality Develop the head and the heart Certification Work-study Integration Ambitions Creativity Professionalization Engagement Courage Learning Group Service Progress Strategy Cooperation Collaboration Excellence Connect Trust Humane Listening skills Goodwill Respect Guest passionAgility Culture Boldness CollaborativeDiversity Innovation Communication Sharing Fairness Cross-functionality Simple Humility Transformation Enthusiasm Confidence Expected value High standards Responsibility Transmission Horizontal Values embraced by corporate universities