Face it: Most of us like silos, boxes, and niches. We can be experts and easily navigate the small spaces they create. Living in this environment has its benefits. For years this was a practical and efficient way for learning leaders to operate. We owned training and development—we designed, developed, and delivered it. Have a simple problem? Call 1-800-TRAIN and, generally, we had a course we could pull from our files and, voila, we were ready to fix the problem for you. Have a difficult problem? We were able to do a little research and either design something new or bring in a vendor with one of their packages. Problem solved.

Then life as we knew it changed. Technology disrupted. As a profession we realized that it wasn’t about us training, it was about them learning. We swiftly moved. We documented and published charts on moving from “training” to “learning”; we changed everyone’s titles and called the leader “The CLO”—chief learning officer; we aligned our courses with our business needs; and we started acknowledging the many informal ways that employees were learning—even through discussions at the water cooler.

As technology continued to advance, collaboration between and among employees expanded. People with similar challenges and likes networked and shared, creating communities of practice. Experienced employees mentored the inexperienced. Small groups popped up to support each other. The move from “push learning” to “pull learning” was on. Google searches replaced the “hey, Joe” inquiry technique that had been so typical when an employee needed a quick answer as they worked a project. How-to videos went viral on YouTube. Oh, and this was not instigated, led, or guided by corporate L&D; this was just how life was evolving. According to Jay Cross in his 2007 book, Informal Learning: Rediscovering the Natural Pathways That Inspire Innovation and Performance, this was actually natural learning—“that which enables you to participate successfully in life, at work, and in the groups that matter to you.”

So how have we and our practices changed as a result? And more importantly, how are we positioning ourselves to adapt continuously as one change evolves into another? Yes, we are providing a broad range of learning experiences to engage and inspire employees—anywhere, any time, and in a variety of ways. Yes, we are piloting adaptive learning platforms and microlearning. Yes, we are starting coaching programs and measuring impact. Yes, 70-20-10 is now part of our daily vocabulary. But, as we expanded this portfolio of offerings and channels, were we still staying within our L&D silos, boxes, and niches? Have we changed our mindset?

Years ago, some thought leaders suggested that we expand our thinking; they talked about “the learning landscape” and the important role played by managers and colleagues in the development of an employee’s knowledge and skills. Others shared ideas on “organizational learning” and the Behavioral Engineering Model from Thomas Gilbert’s 1978 book Human Competence: Engineering Worthy Performance. More recently, we have introduced the term “workflow learning,” which pulls much of its essence from the statement “learning is the work” attributed to Roger Schank.

As we continue to learn more from the science of learning, as technologies emerge to enable new ways to connect with people and to access information, and as organizations have more competition from new entrants into the market, maybe it is time to move from our narrow training/learning mindset to a much more expansive performance mindset. Focusing on performance is not the “next big thing” or a new shiny object. We have been talking about it for years. Is now the time for talent developers to intentionally take a more systematic view of the organization and the ways we can most successfully impact performance, thus breaking down our silos? There are huge opportunities for talent developers to contribute to improved performance that drives results while advancing employee capability. Are we going to play in that larger arena and acknowledge the more holistic system we are a part of, or are we going to stay in our L&D boxes and continue to build that box?