We often help clients out of crisis situations, but our passion is preventing crises from occurring in the first place. This means (a) establishing robust systems, (b) empowering leaders, and (c) upskilling teams.
This post reveals the science and art behind our approach to lasting skills development.
We’re practical people. It’s not enough for our students to understand theory. If they haven’t incorporated our proven techniques into their day-to-day behaviors, we have failed.
CÆDENCE has decoded decades of business experience to reveal the intuition and practices of top performing teams and individuals to radically accelerate people and teams toward excellence. We know the theory, but we've also lived everything we teach and honed best practices for decades. This arms us with tons of real-world examples to engage students and clarify techniques.
But being experts in engineering, quality, manufacturing, communication, and management isn't enough. We also understand teaching and learning. We know what it takes to guide students through the stages from becoming aware of a skill to having that skill engrained in their intuition to use flexibly and consistently. That's what's covered in this infographic. If you want to dive deeper, check out the links below.
References supporting teaching philosophy:
Motivation: https://eagleman.com/podcast/what-sticks-in-your-brain-and-what-doesnt/
Environment: https://pubs.aip.org/physicstoday/article/67/5/43/414732/Psychological-insights-for-improved-physics?searchresult=1
Communicating with non experts: https://podcastaddict.com/episode/42996216 and https://podcastaddict.com/episode/42996217
Design of materials for clarity: https://www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/books_pp
Spaced repetition: https://www.supermemo.com/en/blog/did-ebbinghaus-invent-spaced-repetition and https://www.wired.com/2008/04/ff-wozniak/ and https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/BF03194050
Mentoring: https://www.caedenceconsulting.com/blog/don-t-train-do-this-instead and https://www.caedenceconsulting.com/blog/confucius-and-gladwell-were-partially-correct