While cognitive and technical skills can be learned in a rule-based way, there are no clear guidelines for how people should work and interact with others.
I've been using Claude to quiz me and create practice problems for me to solve after reading non-fiction books. I recently finished Get to the Point by Joel Schwartzman (first couple of chapters were the best part of the book). After reading, I asked Claude to quiz me on the main points in the book. Claude asked me what I thought they were. Using active recall (much better than recognition) I typed out what I thought were the main points. Claude responded with yes on most, elaborated on the stuff I only got partially right, and reminded me of a few areas I completely forgot about. Then, I asked Claude to help me practice writing opening statements that lead with getting to the point. I thought I understood the concept, but after writing about a dozen statements and getting instant feedback from Claude on how I did, I'm realizing I'm not very good at it. It's not surprising. Why would I expect to be after reading a book and trying out a couple of times. If you really want to get good at something, it takes weeks and months of practice to get good at it. So, I'm working on creating a Project in Claude so that I can continue to practice writing 'get to the point' statements. I think after writing a couple of hundred I, things might start to stick.
This is such a great idea on how to use AI. I imagine in person practice could be of higher quality, however AI giving you the opportunity to practice things on your own and your own pace makes it very accessible. Thanks for sharing this David, I will try it out myself!
In their book, The Daily Stoic, Ryan and Stephen provide a model of how to practice (page 392 in the fancy leather bound edition). They provide three levels of practice: 1) Study/Learn, 2) Practice, and 3) Hard Training. Most training and leader development programs stop at 2 - Practice. People attend, learn something, try things out, then go on about their way. I love the idea of holding clinics afterwards where they can come in and sharpen their skills. Definitely forwarding today's post to my team who's meeting tomorrow to build out something to address this issue. However, they're leaning toward offering more 1 and 2 - (which is fine), but I'm going to challenge them to add in a couple of 3) too. Thanks for the post.
One of those rooms you pay to destroy property. Take your hammer of choice into a china cabinet.
Just thinking of a practice clinic that is so hands on that it’s visceral. Like extreme role playing with a group of great actors who won’t break character at all.
I love to role play! Practice clinics are such a smart approach to teaching social skills because they align with Albert Bandura’s work on social learning theory, which emphasizes the importance of modeling and experiential learning. Building self-efficacy one awkward role play at a time.
How does your organization ensure that practice clinics reflect the real-world complexities team members face, rather than oversimplified situations?
Great article, 🙏. I think these skills should be taught in school/ to young adults. I also think they require a certain curiosity, openness and respect for people who are different to ourselves. I am not sure that is always a given in certain corporate culture/subcultures. How is this addressed in these practice rooms?
Repetition and practice, who would have thought. We learn soft skills through trial and error, through seeing what works and what does not work. We put labels on this process such as empathy, listening, advocacy, and conflict resolution - but they all amount to ways in which we learn, not startling reservations about how to function. We learn the most by doing, not practicing situations that others might have experienced, because each interaction is different and requires different approaches. Yes, there are certain patterns that repeat but for the most part teaching creative problem solving would serve people the best.
Remember MacGyver? He used the resources at hand along with his knowledge of the way things reacted and operated to solve difficult problems nonviolently.
I've been using Claude to quiz me and create practice problems for me to solve after reading non-fiction books. I recently finished Get to the Point by Joel Schwartzman (first couple of chapters were the best part of the book). After reading, I asked Claude to quiz me on the main points in the book. Claude asked me what I thought they were. Using active recall (much better than recognition) I typed out what I thought were the main points. Claude responded with yes on most, elaborated on the stuff I only got partially right, and reminded me of a few areas I completely forgot about. Then, I asked Claude to help me practice writing opening statements that lead with getting to the point. I thought I understood the concept, but after writing about a dozen statements and getting instant feedback from Claude on how I did, I'm realizing I'm not very good at it. It's not surprising. Why would I expect to be after reading a book and trying out a couple of times. If you really want to get good at something, it takes weeks and months of practice to get good at it. So, I'm working on creating a Project in Claude so that I can continue to practice writing 'get to the point' statements. I think after writing a couple of hundred I, things might start to stick.
This is such a great idea on how to use AI. I imagine in person practice could be of higher quality, however AI giving you the opportunity to practice things on your own and your own pace makes it very accessible. Thanks for sharing this David, I will try it out myself!
In their book, The Daily Stoic, Ryan and Stephen provide a model of how to practice (page 392 in the fancy leather bound edition). They provide three levels of practice: 1) Study/Learn, 2) Practice, and 3) Hard Training. Most training and leader development programs stop at 2 - Practice. People attend, learn something, try things out, then go on about their way. I love the idea of holding clinics afterwards where they can come in and sharpen their skills. Definitely forwarding today's post to my team who's meeting tomorrow to build out something to address this issue. However, they're leaning toward offering more 1 and 2 - (which is fine), but I'm going to challenge them to add in a couple of 3) too. Thanks for the post.
Make it like a rage room or an escape room. :)
Someone has been reading our internal memos...
A rage room? Please share details!
One of those rooms you pay to destroy property. Take your hammer of choice into a china cabinet.
Just thinking of a practice clinic that is so hands on that it’s visceral. Like extreme role playing with a group of great actors who won’t break character at all.
Love it... my mind is racing with different kinds of in-person practice sessions one could provide.
Better than a trust fall too!
I love to role play! Practice clinics are such a smart approach to teaching social skills because they align with Albert Bandura’s work on social learning theory, which emphasizes the importance of modeling and experiential learning. Building self-efficacy one awkward role play at a time.
How does your organization ensure that practice clinics reflect the real-world complexities team members face, rather than oversimplified situations?
Great article, 🙏. I think these skills should be taught in school/ to young adults. I also think they require a certain curiosity, openness and respect for people who are different to ourselves. I am not sure that is always a given in certain corporate culture/subcultures. How is this addressed in these practice rooms?
Repetition and practice, who would have thought. We learn soft skills through trial and error, through seeing what works and what does not work. We put labels on this process such as empathy, listening, advocacy, and conflict resolution - but they all amount to ways in which we learn, not startling reservations about how to function. We learn the most by doing, not practicing situations that others might have experienced, because each interaction is different and requires different approaches. Yes, there are certain patterns that repeat but for the most part teaching creative problem solving would serve people the best.
Remember MacGyver? He used the resources at hand along with his knowledge of the way things reacted and operated to solve difficult problems nonviolently.
Isn't practicing a form of doing?
Yes, but it is standardized, established, and anticipated, not random and unexpected as life .