Candidates kept a video diary of their every session. Watch and learn from it.
70 training sessions = 70 video diaries = 2 minute footage each. Before each session, a candidate must create a video diary discussing their preparation and concerns about their progress or the program.
We created the video diary for one purpose only: to see if the candidate would take the communication guidance we provide and apply it to their communication,when they believe they are not being assessed on communication. We wanted to see if candidates were taking the advice seriously.
By watching the video diaries, it is easy to see which candidates are prepared and thoughtful in their planning. It is a very effective tool for the coach to gauge the candidates level of motivation and use of the feedback already provided.
Candidates talk through the preparation, worries about the program, challenges in learning material and their goals. Use this feedback against the candidate’s online calendars to plan your own preparation. Look for patterns in feedback as performance improves and drops. Test your own preparation and results against the candidates. The video diaries are a useful tool to refresh your understanding of each candidate’s thoughts and strategy for the training.
All the videos are annotated with key concepts and ideas highlighted on the videos.
Why do we have them: The video diaries were initially designed as a tool to capture the thoughts of the candidates and help the coaches understand their challenges. They were meant to be short, between 1 and 3 minutes, and focus on the candidates’ needs. Yet, over time, they started to serve more useful training purposes.
First, we noticed that candidates who strayed outside the questions we asked them to answer in their video diaries did the best. Samantha stuck to the questions almost verbatim, as did Sanjeev and to some extent Rafik. Felix typically raised additional points for discussion. This helped Firmsconsulting and her mentor, Kevin, gain a deeper understanding of what we could do to help Felix. At times Sanjeev also did this, as did Samantha and Rafik, but it was far more consistent with Felix.
Second, the best candidates directly discussed their level of preparation or lack of preparation for a session. They did not hide it. For example, Felix and Sanjeev would clearly state whether or not they had prepared for the session or completed the prescribed readings. Rafik tended to avoid the question and Samantha only answered the 4 questions. On very few occasions did she volunteer additional information to help her coach.
Third, the best candidates prepared their video diaries or at least had considered points for discussion. Beyond a few occasions, the weaker candidates seemed unprepared to discuss their preparation or had not considered areas they wanted to raise earlier with their coach. In other words, they were not using the video diaries as a tool to manage their coaches and take accountability for the training.