Business Finance - Management Business Finance - Management Business Finance - Management ASSIGNMENT (APA, NO PLAGARISM, GREAT WORK, ON TIME)

Leading edge

Interview with Andrew Kilshaw, Chief Learning Officer at Nike Inc.

Interview by William Strange

A ndrew Kilshaw is Chief Learning Officer at Nike Inc., responsible for overseeing the

development needs of over 37,000 employees in Nike’s global work-force. His varied

background led from studies at Manchester University and Coventry Business

School, to IMD, Lausanne, where Andrew received an MBA with distinction. Andrew has

since worked with numerous top-tier global companies, and specializes in leadership

development and talent management.

Your professional background has been quite diverse, focusing around areas such as talent management, leadership development, business strategy and change management to name a few. What is it that attracted you to this particular role?

Many factors made this a really attractive opportunity. Obviously there’s the power of the

Nike brand – one of the most iconic in the world, with its mission statement of

bringing inspiration and innovation to every athlete in the world (‘‘If you have a body, you are

an athlete’’ – Bill Bowerman). This was a new global centralized learning function to shape,

which hadn’t been done before – I’m a builder and I thrive on global opportunities.

It’sbeen an intellectual and pragmatic challenge to work out how to align a global function

that serves the professional, functional and leadership/management development needs of

over 37,000 global Nike Inc employees in one of the most highly matrixed structured

companies in the world. We’ve made great progress in the past 18 months, and now have a

very solid foundation on which to delivery great learning experiences to all Nike Inc’s

employees.

How do you align your own L&D strategy to support the Nike business?

At the portfolio level, we mirror and align with the corporate strategic planning process.

During each annual cycle, we look at business strategy from a vertical functional perspective

(for example, global sales, global finance etc) then six months later, from a horizontal market

perspective (cross-functionally within a geography, category, brand). We support the same

process – looking at three year talent development strategies in support of functional

strategies (to build global curricula that drive functional excellence), then looking at creating

geographic assortments from the global curricula to support specific business unit targets.

This minimizes duplication of effort, while allowing for tailored offerings within markets. We

PAGE 32 j DEVELOPMENT AND LEARNING IN ORGANIZATIONS j VOL. 26 NO. 3 2012, pp. 32-34, Q Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1477-7282 DOI 10.1108/14777281211225820

Andrew Kilshaw

use this process to focus on those priorities which will drive our businesses forwards – while

we can do anything, we realize we cannot do everything.

As Nike matures as a business, what strategies do you see need to be employed to maintain the energy and innovation of its early years?

The tension that the matrix structure of Nike provides is a natural promoter of energy and

innovation – being able to navigate and succeed in this ambiguity is definitely a common

trait that is needed in all employees in order to be successful. Due to the matrix, there are

always many fingerprints on any decision that is made, or product or service that is created.

That environment, coupled with a real free market for good ideas (that transcends

hierarchy), means that we leverage the power of the team.

Our culture helps too. We have 11 corporate values which we call our maxims. Many of these

reflect the ‘‘Just Do It’’ mentality – such as ‘‘simplify and go’’ and ‘‘evolve immediately’’. The

values aren’t just words on a page but really describe and guide how we work.

Lastly, Mark Parker (our CEO) describes that the distance between us and our potential is far

greater than that between us and our competition. Our strong sporting heritage drives us to

better ourselves, set personal records and be the best we can.

What trends do you see emerging in the L&D field and where do you see the profession heading over the next five to ten years?

The biggest trend I see (continuing) is the democratization of learning – social technology is

disaggregating ownership of knowledge. What that means for learning functions is that

rather than being the font of all knowledge (the hub (instructor) and spoke (learners) model),

we need to become brokers and matchmakers – connecting teachers with learners by

providing virtual and real platforms where we maximize the value of interactions between the

two. At Nike, we’re betting on this right now by building peer to peer learning in to several of

our programs – one of our function’s brand truths reflects this – ‘‘we are catalysts for

learning, not just providers of learning’’.

Another significant trend is akin to Moore’s law in computing. The world is moving

exponentially faster (search for ‘‘Did You Know? 3.0’’ on YouTube for a quick lesson!) and is

also currently increasingly volatile. I believe the effect on learning organizations means that

we are more effective if we can increasingly make learning (either knowledge or skill transfer)

accessible at the point and time of need, rather than ‘‘sign up for the course we’re running in

three months time’’ – although there will always be a place for developing long term

capabilities.

What are some of the strategies that employers can adopt to retain and engage talented staff?

I think the timeless classics still very much apply. Two I adhere to are:

1. Delegate and empower people. Not only is it a great development opportunity, when you

give people power, they generally are respectful of it – to the point they will ask for your

advice anyway.

2. Provide broad direction, but let employees navigate their own route.

Not only does this encourage diversity (and each of us will leverage our differing strengths in

achieving the same outcome), the ownership this provides to the employee helps with

change adoption – people generally don’t fight their own ideas.

VOL. 26 NO. 3 2012 jDEVELOPMENT AND LEARNING IN ORGANIZATIONSj PAGE 33

Have you seen a noticeable difference in the type of career expectations that the ‘‘.net generation’’ have of the workplace, compared with previous generations?

I do not think it is as stark as often described, however in some aspects, yes – one well

documented difference is around what is called ‘‘delay of gratification’’. Millennials are

typically not as willing to wait for what they want – be it a promotion, a pay rise or a new

challenge. What concerns me in the long term is how this expectation combines with what is

referred to as the lost generation – the fact that Gen Y’ers have been badly hit by the job

crisis. Two implications of this will likely be a skills shortage once the economy does

eventually recover, and secondly a significant gap between the haves and have nots in this

generation.

Keywords:

Learning and development,

Talent management,

Mobile learning,

Learning,

Development

PAGE 34 jDEVELOPMENT AND LEARNING IN ORGANIZATIONSj VOL. 26 NO. 3 2012

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected]

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.