Project BALDR: Making Better Use of What Already Exists

Organisations often have people with relevant expertise, established routines, facilities and time already allocated to development. The question is whether those resources are being used deliberately enough to influence the behaviours the organisation needs.

That is the principle behind Project BALDR, a collaborative development project between me and the Royal Army Physical Training Corps (RAPTC). Its focus is on capitalising on available resources, time and suitably qualified and experienced personnel (SQEP) to connect development with practical application.

The gap BALDR addresses

People can understand leadership, communication, teamwork and personal responsibility without applying them consistently. An organisation can explain its expectations and still leave people with too few opportunities to practise them, receive feedback and carry them into everyday work.

At the same time, activity already taking place may offer those opportunities. A routine session or shared task can require people to brief, listen, coordinate, adapt and support one another. If those behaviours are incidental rather than deliberate, much of the development value can be missed.

My assessment is that the gap is often between the potential of the existing platform and how it is used. More content or another standalone initiative will not necessarily close it.

The inception and demand

BALDR developed from examining how existing development activity could do more to turn knowledge into application. The central question was how to make better use of what was already available, rather than assume that every requirement needed a new programme.

The demand begins with the behaviours required for people and teams to work effectively. Which behaviours matter? Where is application inconsistent? What opportunities and expertise already exist? Those questions should establish the requirement before a delivery method is chosen.

This is a development rationale, not a quantified claim that every organisation has the same gap. The need must be understood in context.

Baldwin and Ford (1988) distinguish learning from its use and maintenance at work. Their review considers training design, the learner and the working environment. For BALDR, the practical implication is to plan for application from the start.

My recommendation and why

My recommendation is to give existing activity a clearer behavioural purpose. Agree what people need to practise, use appropriate SQEP to shape and facilitate the activity, then connect it to feedback, reflection and a specific opportunity for application.

For example, an existing team task could deliberately require a clear brief, agreed responsibilities and a check of understanding. The facilitator observes those behaviours and helps the team examine what worked, where it struggled and what it will do differently. The team then applies the agreed routine during its normal work.

This is an illustrative example, not a reported BALDR result. The activity creates an opportunity to influence behaviour. Repeated application and follow-up are needed to determine whether change is sustained.

The reason for this approach is practical. It connects development to a real requirement and uses the platform people already operate within. It may reduce duplication, but it does not remove the need for preparation, instructor development, coordination and assurance.

Tannenbaum and Cerasoli's (2013) meta-analysis supports the value of properly conducted debriefs. That supports including structured reflection. It does not establish that BALDR itself has been proven effective.

From recommendation to implementation

Implementation should begin with a defined requirement and ownership. Identify the available time, resources and SQEP. Check that the activity and facilitation are appropriate for the participants, then trial a focused approach within an existing routine.

Review both delivery and subsequent application. Attendance shows participation. Observed behaviours, agreed actions and evidence from everyday work provide a better basis for judging whether development is influencing practice.

Refine the approach before extending it. A session that people enjoyed may still have little effect on behaviour. Equally, an existing routine may only need a clearer aim, better facilitation and consistent follow-through to offer more value.

BALDR's central proposition is to capitalise on what already exists and use it with greater purpose. The aim is to influence the behaviours that support effective individuals and teams, then check whether those behaviours carry into practice.

Read more about the Valhalla Bear approach.

Further reading

Baldwin, T. T. and Ford, J. K. (1988). Transfer of Training: A Review and Directions for Future Research. Personnel Psychology, 41(1), 63–105.

Tannenbaum, S. I. and Cerasoli, C. P. (2013). Do Team and Individual Debriefs Enhance Performance? A Meta-Analysis. Human Factors, 55(1), 231–245.