Product mindset in L&D

14 min readJan 13, 2023

My thoughts after facilitating a round table at World of Learning 2022

Introduction to the product mindset

It’s no secret that the Learning & Development function has been under pressure recently. Budgets have been cut, headcount has been reduced, and the mandate to do more with less has become the norm. In this environment, it’s easy to focus on the immediate and the tactical and to lose sight of the bigger picture.

But if there’s one thing that the L&D function can’t afford to lose sight of, it’s our impact on the business. And that means having a product mindset.

Too often, the L&D function is seen as a cost centre rather than a value driver. But if we think of ourselves as product creators and managers, we can change that perception.

A product mindset starts with a focus on the user. What are their needs? What are their pain points? What are their goals? By understanding the user, we can create genuinely impactful solutions rather than just creating more content.

It also means thinking about the entire product lifecycle, from design to delivery, to evaluation. What processes do we need to ensure that our products are successful? How can we continue to improve them over time?

And finally, a product mindset means always being aware of the competition. What are other companies doing in this space? How can we ensure that our products are the best they can be?

The L&D function has always been about impact. But in today’s environment, we need to focus more on it. By adopting a product mindset, we can ensure we’re always driving value for the business.

The UUD framework

Let’s be honest; we’re already awash with models, frameworks, pyramids, and quadrants in L&D. Some may be okay, but most are not particularly useful in the real world. With this in mind, I offer the UUD framework not as a replacement for your existing process but as a way of prioritising questions you might ask during the research ideation and early design phases.

The framework challenges us to consider three key factors when creating any product, be that the course, an e-learning module, or anything else we might create. The framework works on the basis that the three factors are not of equal importance and that there is a hierarchy that we can use to prioritise where we spend our time and effort. This can help ensure that our time and effort, and in turn, our energy use, is directed to where it makes the most impact.

Useful

The first factor is Usefulness. Our primary consideration during the research ideation and initial design and development of any solution should be, “Is this useful?” Prioritising questions around usefulness ensures that whatever solution you create focuses on improving performance. This is arguably one of the most significant challenges in the L&D world, where we can often get lost in the ideas of behavioural change and understanding the why, forgetting the importance of just being useful. This is a call to always remember that the purpose of the content that we create is to help someone do their job better.

Within this phase of consideration, we can utilise a range of user experience research techniques, from journey mapping to service blueprinting. Perhaps more familiar to the L&D world, processes like action mapping would also fit into this section. Without focusing too much on any one approach, the important thing is that this stage is all about finding out what will actually help end-users do their job more effectively or efficiently or adapt to a change in how they need to do their job.

Usable

The second factor is Usability. Now you know what will be useful to your user base; the next thing is to make that content as easy to use as possible. This is often where you may get into the specifics of the chosen delivery modality. For example, during the useful phase of consideration, you may have discovered that people would like a short e-learning module. Still, it’s not until the usability phase of consideration that you’re going to start thinking about which authoring tool you might use and what the relevant accessibility considerations might be.

Within the usability phase of consideration, it’s advisable to prototype and user-test your ideas. This can start much earlier in the process than many people think. Using paper prototypes, wireframes, and perhaps medium and high-fidelity prototypes, you can regularly and consistently test the usability of your solution with real users. Conducting a usability study is not a small job, and this short piece won’t go into the detail of how to do it, but some key considerations would include:

Using real-world users
Testing with users who use assistive technologies
Ensuring the usability study avoids biasing the reviewers
Remaining open to the idea that your solution might not work

The most important thing to remember during the usability phase is that you’re never wasting time. Especially when conducting extended user testing such as AB testing, remind yourself that no matter how useful your solution is, if it’s not usable, then it’s useless.

Desirable

The third and final factor is Desirability. And this might not mean what you think it means. With increasingly exciting development tools available to us, there is a danger of creating exciting, highly desirable experiences rather than useful and highly usable experiences. We see this regularly in the L&D world, where we focus almost exclusively on engaging the learner to the point where we forget to improve their performance.

Within the desirability phase of consideration, you should focus on what your users actually want to see and not what you think they want to see. It’s all too easy to think that because people like Netflix, Netflix is what they want to see in workplace learning. Or that the latest social media trend is popular and, therefore, an excellent modality to deliver training. These kinds of assumptions can lead to massive wastes of time and energy within your team, as well as in end users. Rather than making assumptions and trying to extrapolate from popular culture what people want to see, the best and most efficient solution is to ask them. You can start by conducting open surveys and focus groups and, over time, seek regular feedback from your users.

The UUD framework is nothing new and has been used in the product management and design world for decades. Consider some of your favourite non-learning-related products, be it your mobile phone, personal computer, your camera, or just about anything else. During its design and development, these three considerations were almost certainly considered. Primarily, the manufacturer wanted to create something useful, and for something to be useful it must be usable, and for something to be a viable product, it must be desirable. This framework is a fantastic gateway into thinking about your learning and development offerings in more of a product-minded way.

Problem statements vs objectives

Another way you can embrace the product mindset is by considering the use of problem statements as well as learning objectives. At their best, learning objectives tend to lean towards what the business wants to see and can, at times, fail to take into account the real-world performance implications. In contrast, problem statements focus entirely on the user and help us clearly define precisely what we are trying to resolve.

Whenever L&D is asked to intercede in the business, you’re trying to solve some kind of problem. That problem could be an impending change or an existing performance issue, as well as many other things. Regardless of the specifics, at the centre will be a problem you want to solve. A problem statement, or a collection of them, allows you to clearly define the problem as it pertains to your specific users. It allows you to understand the needs of your users better and, through this increased understanding, improve the effectiveness of whatever intervention your design. The process of creating problem statements can also enlighten your team about both the user base and the real problems that exist within the wider organisation.

Creating a problem statement

A good problem statement is made up of five key components. All five components must be present for a problem statement to be as valuable as possible.

1. Who

The first part of any problem statement is identifying the user, the person you’re trying to help. This does not go down to the level of personas but focuses on groups or roles within your business. Perhaps the target audience for this intervention will be the C suite, a very specific group of users, or new line managers leading teams for the first time. The more specifically you define the user group at this stage, the more effective your problem statement will be.

The general way to do this is to say, “I am…” Followed by the label you have attached to your chosen user group.

2. Action

Next, we must define what the user group is trying to do. Once again, the more specific you can be about the desired action or performance, the more effective your problem statement will be. For example, are those brand-new first-time line managers trying to complete their very first annual reviews? Or is the C suite looking to inspire its middle management to work more collaboratively across the business?

The convention at this stage is to say, “I’m trying to…” Followed by the desired action or performance.

3. The problem

The third step is clearly defining the obstacle or problem. What is explicitly stopping the specified group from completing the defined action? For example, is there a lack of knowledge about how to conduct an annual review? Or is there a lack of confidence in having challenging conversations with underperforming team members? Regardless of the problem, ensure it’s stated as clearly and directly as possible.

The convention here is to say, “But…” Followed by the obstacle, challenge, or problem.

4. Root Cause

Step four is all about the root cause. During your analysis, you must dig past not only what’s needed, who needs to do it, and what the existing blockers are but what’s behind those blockers. Is the root cause within the control of your defined user base? Does another group of users have control over this particular situation? Is an organisational or budgetary limitation preventing peak performance from the defined user group?

The convention here is to say, “Because…” Followed by the root cause of the problem.

5. Empathy

The final step of defining your problem statement is to apply empathy. Having defined a group of users, a desired action, the challenge that faces them, and the root cause, you must now consider and define how that situation makes the user group feel. Are they motivated to take on this challenge? Do they feel dejected, downtrodden, and disengaged from the business? Do they feel valued by the organisation in this situation? Do they need, already have, an advocate within the organisation to help drive this change?

The convention here is to say, “Which makes me feel…” Followed by the way your users currently feel.

As an example of a completed problem statement, let’s look at those first-time line managers again. The full problem statement might read:

I am a first-time line manager. I’m trying to complete my first set of annual reviews, but I’m struggling to have challenging conversations with some underperforming members of my team because I have no experience in having this kind of conversation and do not believe I can do so competently. This makes me feel like I am underperforming as a team leader and not supporting my team as I should.

It’s fair to say that this looks very unlike a learning objective but is arguably far more helpful in designing a solution.

A special note here: I do not advocate putting problem statements in front of end-users during your solution. Whether or not you choose to put learning objectives in front of your users is up to you, but a problem statement is just designed for your internal use.

Realistic user research and testing

One of the biggest obstacles to embracing and using user testing and research is the time and financial commitment required. As with everything that pulls in your organisation’s resources, this will need buying, and buying takes time. Luckily, you don’t need to go from 0 to 100; in fact, I would strongly advise you not even to try. User researching and testing is an inherently iterative process, so it lends itself to being brought in piecemeal. This allows you to prove the value of a small implementation rather than needing to try and gain buying for a massive initial outlay.

In the following sections, we’ll look at some of the easiest and quickest to implement user research and testing approaches, as well as how they can be helpful to you.

User surveys

User surveys are arguably the lowest point of entry in the research space. They can be conducted remotely or face-to-face and take very little time for the end users to complete. The data you can gather will be a mix of qualitative feedback and quantitative responses, using response options Likert scales. User surveys are a great way of gathering existing opinions regarding things the user has seen or would like to see. You could, for instance, survey your users on how they prefer to access training materials or when and where they use your training content. Anything that can be distilled into clear, concise questions can be asked in a user survey.

The major challenge of user surveys is the inability to follow up and expand to gain a better contextual understanding. To ensure data security, surveys should be anonymous, and therefore you, as the researcher, will not be able to reach out to the users that completed your survey to learn more.1

Overall, user surveys are the easiest and quickest form of user research you can deploy within your organisation. They require comparatively little time to create and very little commitment from the user base and wider organisation. Once you have the data from your first surveys, consider putting together a research pack that you can share not only with your team but with the wider business. If you can demonstrate the value of these insights to others beyond your team, you’ll start to create advocates for future expansions of user testing within the organisation.

Focus groups

Focus groups represent a fantastic opportunity to gather groups of your ideal user base in one place and get their direct feedback. Unlike user surveys, you’re engaged in a conversation and can ask almost as many questions as you need to gain the necessary insights. The additional involvement required in focus groups can also be seen as a positive from within the user base as they’ll feel their view has merit. You are valuing it, your team, and the wider organisation.

Focus groups must be run by a well-prepared facilitator and observed by a researcher. It’s not realistic to expect to be able to simultaneously run a multi-person conversation and take down notes or record critical insights. My advice is to have 1 facilitator per 5 to 8 people and 3 to 4 researchers observing the conversation. This number of researchers will help reduce the impact of bias.

Focus groups, whilst requiring a higher level of input than user surveys, are a valuable process that can be used to gain feedback on content that has been launched or pre-existing services. They allow for further contextual questioning when users bring up something unexpected and clearly demonstrate the value you place on your users’ experiences within the workforce.

User (usability) testing

User or usability testing is about observing real users using the solution you have designed. This approach targets situations where you are creating some form of digital content. In this situation, a user is asked to complete the course or e-learning module, and the researcher observes that process. Throughout the process, the researcher may ask the learner questions about the experience, especially if they see them struggling with something. The focus here is on usability, although this is also an opportunity to spot any potential usefulness issues.

It’s important to note that usability testing does not have to wait until the final, full-fidelity version of the course is created. Usability testing can begin as soon as the user interface is designed and operable, even at the prototype stage. In the product world, this could start as early as a paper prototype and continue through wireframes, low-fidelity to high-fidelity prototypes, and then the production version of the content. In our context, it’s unrealistic to expect this much iteration within the process, at least to begin with. So, consider creating a functional prototype without the final design elements included. By testing this for basic usability, you ensure you don’t waste time and energy making a full-fidelity version of the course that is ultimately going to have to be changed.

One of the most challenging things about usability testing is the temptation for the researcher to help the user. This mustn’t happen, as it completely invalidates the test results. Unless the researcher is going to be there to help every real-world user in the future, they are giving this particular user an unfair advantage in how to navigate or use the content.

User or usability testing can reveal a vast amount of information, such as preferred UIs, platform issues, and even attitudes towards digital learning content within your business. These insights are valuable to everyone, not just you. Because of this, you must share this information after the research is completed and you’ve analysed the data. This is a prime opportunity to deliver additional value to your business beyond your current project and start to generate future buying for user testing.

Card sorting

Organising information into logical chunks and connecting pieces is a key part of creating an effective learning experience. But what the organisation thinks is logical, and what the L&D team think is logical, does not always match what end users experience on the job. Card sorting exercises can give insight into how people who do the job, day in and day out, would organise and arrange information to help them better understand their job.

The basic process of a card sorting exercise is to gather between 5 and 10 individuals and lay out all the pieces of information you want to include in the experience. Each piece of information is headlined on a simple card. The participants should then organise these cards into small groups, with the guidance being that each group should have between 3 and 8 items. Once they’ve done this, ask them to explain their choices.

Next, have them create a heading or title for each group, and again ask them to explain their decisions. Throughout this process, researchers should observe.

Card sorting is an effective and straightforward way of organising information in your experience to best suits your target audience. When you first use this approach, you may discover that your understanding of a process or how information joins together radically differs from those doing the job. If this happens, don’t panic. In most organisations, there’s some form of disconnect between senior leadership, middle management, and those actually working on the ground in how they associate different pieces of information with others.

What next?

Adopting a product mindset and beginning to use some of the UX and UI researching and user testing approaches used in the product world can feel a little strange. They are certainly not a one-to-one fit for the existing L&D world, and that’s okay! This isn’t about replacing what we already have or throwing out decades of L&D practice and research. This is about taking the very best of what makes digital products work in the modern world and adapting it to our needs in the learning space. As the great Guy Wallace says, “Adopt what you can, adapt the rest.”

If you found this approach interesting, I would encourage you to read more about the world of product management and product design. This is a rapidly growing and developing space full of fantastic professionals who are very much willing to share their experiences. In terms of reading material, I would suggest the following: