The “seat at the table” complaint. I’ll be honest — it’s difficult for me to even write this phrase. Whenever I hear the words “seat at the table,” it’s like nails on a chalkboard inside my brain. Why? Because complaining about not having a seat reveals we don’t understand how things actually work. We are essentially admitting our own ignorance.
So before going further, let’s clarify what’s actually implied by the “seat at the table” phrase and what’s really going on when learning and development (L&D) pros complain about not having one.
What is "the table"?
When learning and development pros talk about “the table,” we are generally referring to meetings and conversations with influencers. Often, we are referring to the top, most influential leadership in a division or company. While these conversations once regularly took place around a physical table and chairs, it’s now just as likely that they take place in virtual meeting rooms.
L&D pros long for a seat at this “table,” mostly because we see it as crucial to influencing talent development strategy and adding our voice to important decisions before they are made. Many believe that a seat at this table is the secret to moving beyond being a transactional order taker into becoming a strategic decision-maker.
In response to that belief, I say, “Sure.” It’s logical to assume that if we participated in strategic conversations and decisions before they were made, we would be able to work in partnership with the business at a more strategic level. But it’s my opinion that we believe in the wrong reasons for why we are left out — and complaining about it won’t change anyone’s mind.
In many cases, the real reason L&D isn’t included is that we haven’t done anything to show that we deserve to be at this “table.”
We act like once we get invited to the table, then we can start being more strategic. But this approach is completely backwards.
We aren’t invited in because we don’t act strategically now. We don’t demonstrate an understanding of business initiatives now. Based on how we act when we aren’t at the table, why would a senior leader believe that we would act differently once we’ve pulled up a chair?
It’s like hiring someone who hasn’t demonstrated any experience for the role or in the industry. That’s not a good, strategic decision. That’s a gamble. And most senior leaders aren’t gamblers when it comes to making important decisions.
The art of self-sabotage: L&D pros can be their own worst enemy
It’s true that there can be some organizational barriers in play, but in most cases, we are the ones stopping ourselves from getting a “seat at the table” — and we don’t even realize we’re doing it. The very actions that we think are helpful are the same actions that hold us back. Consider the following “helpful” work patterns exhibited by the typical L&D team. Do you see yourselves in any of them?
1. We take and deliver orders as requested. It’s great to fulfill neatly outlined requests from stakeholders for training, but it’s also our downfall. Every time we say yes to a request without diving deeper or ensuring it ties to a strategic initiative, we reinforce our message to stakeholders about how to best work with L&D.
2. We strive to be helpful and easy to work with. We often go into this profession because we genuinely want to help. Pushing back on requests doesn’t feel helpful. It seems like it will cause conflict and discomfort and make others not want to work with us. But our desire to help keeps us from asking the tough questions, proposing alternatives, or simply saying “no.”
3. We believe someone else vetted training as the needed solution. When a stakeholder comes to us requesting a learning or training solution for their pain point, we often assume that they have already vetted other options. This stakeholder can be quite convincing, even using our language, telling us that people don’t know how to do “x,” so that means training must be needed. We believe them. Why wouldn’t we? Don’t they know their team better than we do?
The truth is this same stakeholder is likely overwhelmed, buried in other problems, and may not have done the legwork to determine whether training is the best answer. Without diving deeper, we often waste time, energy, and resources creating fantastic training that doesn’t solve the problem.
4. We create great content based on the latest request. We push out content continuously, based on the latest request. Our course libraries are packed with expertly created content. But each offering is somewhat one and done. There isn’t a strategy for continued development of that skill or, if there is, it is continuously changing. For those outside of L&D, this reinforces the order-taking narrative and makes our work appear haphazard.
5. We love our own solutions. When our L&D programs are well-designed and enjoyed by participants, it’s easy to get wrapped up in the glow of our own solutions. In truth, the rest of the organization probably doesn't care that much. They’re more worried about responding to demanding customers, as well as how to meet their metrics, how to respond to daily challenges, and how to succeed in their role. The pretty L&D program isn’t their first priority. Whenever we let our own egos take over, we sabotage our success.
6. We lean into our learning expertise first and foremost. We show up as learning experts who work in a business. Not business pros with an expertise in learning. Yet everyone who sits at “the table” thoroughly understands the business, how it operates, and its major challenges and goals. Sure, they bring their individual areas of expertise along for the ride and tap into them when needed, but they don’t start there. Without understanding the business first, we aren’t seen as credible partners worthy of a seat. Instead we’re seen as nice-to-have extras waiting in the wings.
7. We capture and share positive activity and engagement metrics. We can easily report how many people attended a training, completed eLearning modules, or clicked on videos. We can also report that people enjoy our courses. So when we’re asked for metrics, this is what we tend to report. But these metrics only show that we are busy and that people like us.
Now put yourself in the shoes of the people “at the table” who are making critical decisions and setting the strategy and direction for the company to succeed. Would you conduct that work based only on participation numbers and smile sheets? We need to share metrics that help to make business decisions and show how our work is moving business forward.
Final thoughts
From our L&D lens, we might see all these actions as positive. We aren’t trying to sabotage our success. But we are living smack in the middle of a pretty big blind spot in terms of what’s needed to think and work differently.
From the standpoint of the senior business leader sitting “at the table,” each of these approaches reinforces the narrative that L&D is great at taking and delivering on orders. They don’t show any inkling of L&D’s ability to work as a strategic partner to the business.
If we want to work as strategic business partners, we need to drop our complaint about not having a seat at the table and focus on doing the strategic work that shows we understand what it means to sit there. In other words, we need to practice and gain some experience doing the job we want before we’re invited to join the team.
This post was originally published in the L&D Must Change newsletter on LinkedIn.
Jess Almlie is a learning and performance strategist with over 25 years of experience across multiple industries. In that time, she has worked in all the people development roles, from her very first job as a trainer at McDonald’s to vice president of learning experience at WEX Benefits. Now, as an independent consultant, she helps L&D leaders and teams shift their approach to work more strategically, intentionally, and impactfully.
...
Originally posted on LinkedIn