Challenge 

 My occupation involves multiple methodologys for a wide variety of clients as an independent   human resource consultant , who use human relations as his focus or primal resource . I´ve been   gathering information and studying different aproaches for 5 years , through stable work at a   consultant office , a few proyects on my own , learning from studies and papers about the   bussiness , and gathering inputs from different perspectives like collegues or people that would   eventually be my client type , to finally be able to step up from my own perspective of doing things   and work independently . The question i ask myself is , how do i provide a service that solves the   problem that my client can see , but also prepare the way for the problems to come ? My question   comes from the imperative necesity of building human relations for the development in work and   personal life . 

 Selection 

 I chose Learning Launch , it´s the tool that lets me try certain technichs that would attempt to   prove the theories i´ve been working on . The goal as to why choosing this tool is to learn wich   methologys and techniques would work best with a wider variety of people that i consider to be   my potential clients in the near future . This choice is considering the ammount of information i   have been gathering along the years accordingly to the sense of purpose that identify my way of   thinking and the resources that are in my scope . So the Learning Launch tool seems to be the best   option in this specific point i´m at , allowing me to test the different aproaches i came to develop at   this point , as Bruce Velasquez says , i need to launch lots of experiments , at low cost , to confirm my   hipothesis or to learn why it doesn´t work so i can pivote to new aproaches more in sinc with what   i´m aiming at . 

 Aplication 

 I started the launch by stating which my hypothesis would be , defining that my ultimate theory   would be that people learn better when involved in the process , this comes from the actual model   that uses lots of information and focuses only on transmitting that knowledge , hoping for   understandment . So the question that followed it was how do i involve people , and to get to the   answer i conducted a series of experiments to learn which methods worked better . So i had to   think how do i test those workshops . First , i managed to get a common space for the workshops   with in the building i live in by providing quotas for residents who want to streghten their human   resources , avoiding the cost that renting some place would mea ( also got coffee and snacks for   peopple attending , the acomodation of the place was made from me and my girlfriend ) . Second , i   had to gather people that were in the market i wanted to apply , and a few stakeholders that were   some of my collegues and their acquaintances who knew better the business , i made all of the   coordination reducing expences . Third , i had to choose and develop the workshops with the   different approaches i built with to prove the different methodologies ( Actually this was a previus   step , before thinking the place , but only when i got the space and the people i chose wich ones i   was going to do ) , in accordance with the key assumptions i priorized , which were : 1.- Use people   opinions as facts 2.- Build knowledge from experience 3.- Validate different perspective 4.- Use   dynamic excercises 5.- Argue with the attendants from their perspective . Four , i ran 20 workshops   in total ( the starting number were 10 , but more people came along and the people on the building   asked for more sessions ) by testing these assumptions and some others that born along the road , 

 and tried 5 more to compare with the traditional method . Five , i asked for anonymous feedback   by writing their opinions at the end of the workshop , aiming for more honest declarations wearing   the mask of anonymity , and finally sending afterwards a simple test via mail to analyze the   learning level from the participants . 

 Insight 

 The ressults of the experiments were astonishing . The difference between what the people with   standard method learnt to the people with more human approach did made me realice that the   people in traditional method weren´t even there , note ven remotely interested , not been able to   remember the things spoke during the workshop as to creating asnwers that weren´t even near   the subject , as to the other group that not only gave good answers but also using examples from   what they were able to do when involved . Also in the feedback with this group , the comments   were most grattitude and possitive declarations asking as why didn´t have this kind of workshops   at their own workplace . More objectively speaking , from the metholodies used and the quality of   the answers and feedback i was able to confirm : 

 -   People need to be listened , as hearing and validating their opinions makes them feel more   conffident about themselves and cooperate more during the workshop , but it´s not   enoygh as to keep with that opinion as a fact , it´s needed to build more knowledge using it   as a start point . 

 -   The experience helps to build solid knowledge but it´s necessary to link that experience to   a goal , for itself is justa n experience , son to be forgotten . 

 -   The point is not to validate every perspective , but the reason behind the perspective . The   perspective alone generates more conflict than solution . 

 -   The dynamic excercises helps people make more real the learning process and are always   welcome when the person in charge is able to be aware of the context and different needs   from the participants . 

 -   Discussing the themes aproached during the workshop allows to align and state in specific   concepts for a better understanding . 

 So in summary , the more human aproach is more effective in the learning process than the   traditional one , but is also needed to specify certain settings as to how to approach diferent   people . 

 Approach 

 In the end i was able to come to the realization that the service i wanted to provide couldn´t be a   standard method , but could have a standard base . So for me to be able to provide that kind of   service , i had to come to the next agreements with mi clients before starting any process : 

 -   Meet the person in charge and gather all information posible and ask some more : 

 o The actual situation   o The real need   o The expectation   o The theories as to why did it happened   o The people involved 

 -   Ask for the perspective from the people involved , using a tool created from the   information gathered from the first aproach . 

 -   To have a base of different aproaches to develop the themes asked from clients , and be   able to adapt the models to tha actual need and context . 

 -   Ask for perfomance indicators that will alow us to evaluate progress in the future . 

 Making these agreements will allow me to specify the persona type that will receive the services   and also allign my efforts to the expectation put on the services and control the evaluation   method from the indicators , focusing on the improvemente of those indicators . 

 What this tool taught me , and the methology itself , is even when i can think that the work is done ,   it could also be an opportunity to keep improving on time , and to never be too comfortable to not   keep improving . 


EMAIL: 
ID_NUM: 
NAME_STUDENT: 
PHONE_NUM: 
STREET_ADDRESS: 
URL_PERSONAL: 
USERNAME: 

### Task: You are a PII (Personal Identity Information) Detection. Given a essays written by students, you have to identify ONLY the following:
NAME_STUDENT - The full or partial name of a student that is not necessarily the author of the essay. This excludes instructors, authors, and other person names.
EMAIL - A student’s email address.
USERNAME - A student's username on any platform.
ID_NUM - A number or sequence of characters that could be used to identify a student, such as a student ID or a social security number.
PHONE_NUM - A phone number associated with a student.
URL_PERSONAL - A URL that might be used to identify a student.
STREET_ADDRESS - A full or partial street address that is associated with the student, such as their home address.
### Input: Challenge 

 My occupation involves multiple methodologys for a wide variety of clients as an independent   human resource consultant , who use human relations as his focus or primal resource . I´ve been   gathering information and studying different aproaches for 5 years , through stable work at a   consultant office , a few proyects on my own , learning from studies and papers about the   bussiness , and gathering inputs from different perspectives like collegues or people that would   eventually be my client type , to finally be able to step up from my own perspective of doing things   and work independently . The question i ask myself is , how do i provide a service that solves the   problem that my client can see , but also prepare the way for the problems to come ? My question   comes from the imperative necesity of building human relations for the development in work and   personal life . 

 Selection 

 I chose Learning Launch , it´s the tool that lets me try certain technichs that would attempt to   prove the theories i´ve been working on . The goal as to why choosing this tool is to learn wich   methologys and techniques would work best with a wider variety of people that i consider to be   my potential clients in the near future . This choice is considering the ammount of information i   have been gathering along the years accordingly to the sense of purpose that identify my way of   thinking and the resources that are in my scope . So the Learning Launch tool seems to be the best   option in this specific point i´m at , allowing me to test the different aproaches i came to develop at   this point , as Bruce Velasquez says , i need to launch lots of experiments , at low cost , to confirm my   hipothesis or to learn why it doesn´t work so i can pivote to new aproaches more in sinc with what   i´m aiming at . 

 Aplication 

 I started the launch by stating which my hypothesis would be , defining that my ultimate theory   would be that people learn better when involved in the process , this comes from the actual model   that uses lots of information and focuses only on transmitting that knowledge , hoping for   understandment . So the question that followed it was how do i involve people , and to get to the   answer i conducted a series of experiments to learn which methods worked better . So i had to   think how do i test those workshops . First , i managed to get a common space for the workshops   with in the building i live in by providing quotas for residents who want to streghten their human   resources , avoiding the cost that renting some place would mea ( also got coffee and snacks for   peopple attending , the acomodation of the place was made from me and my girlfriend ) . Second , i   had to gather people that were in the market i wanted to apply , and a few stakeholders that were   some of my collegues and their acquaintances who knew better the business , i made all of the   coordination reducing expences . Third , i had to choose and develop the workshops with the   different approaches i built with to prove the different methodologies ( Actually this was a previus   step , before thinking the place , but only when i got the space and the people i chose wich ones i   was going to do ) , in accordance with the key assumptions i priorized , which were : 1.- Use people   opinions as facts 2.- Build knowledge from experience 3.- Validate different perspective 4.- Use   dynamic excercises 5.- Argue with the attendants from their perspective . Four , i ran 20 workshops   in total ( the starting number were 10 , but more people came along and the people on the building   asked for more sessions ) by testing these assumptions and some others that born along the road , 

 and tried 5 more to compare with the traditional method . Five , i asked for anonymous feedback   by writing their opinions at the end of the workshop , aiming for more honest declarations wearing   the mask of anonymity , and finally sending afterwards a simple test via mail to analyze the   learning level from the participants . 

 Insight 

 The ressults of the experiments were astonishing . The difference between what the people with   standard method learnt to the people with more human approach did made me realice that the   people in traditional method weren´t even there , note ven remotely interested , not been able to   remember the things spoke during the workshop as to creating asnwers that weren´t even near   the subject , as to the other group that not only gave good answers but also using examples from   what they were able to do when involved . Also in the feedback with this group , the comments   were most grattitude and possitive declarations asking as why didn´t have this kind of workshops   at their own workplace . More objectively speaking , from the metholodies used and the quality of   the answers and feedback i was able to confirm : 

 -   People need to be listened , as hearing and validating their opinions makes them feel more   conffident about themselves and cooperate more during the workshop , but it´s not   enoygh as to keep with that opinion as a fact , it´s needed to build more knowledge using it   as a start point . 

 -   The experience helps to build solid knowledge but it´s necessary to link that experience to   a goal , for itself is justa n experience , son to be forgotten . 

 -   The point is not to validate every perspective , but the reason behind the perspective . The   perspective alone generates more conflict than solution . 

 -   The dynamic excercises helps people make more real the learning process and are always   welcome when the person in charge is able to be aware of the context and different needs   from the participants . 

 -   Discussing the themes aproached during the workshop allows to align and state in specific   concepts for a better understanding . 

 So in summary , the more human aproach is more effective in the learning process than the   traditional one , but is also needed to specify certain settings as to how to approach diferent   people . 

 Approach 

 In the end i was able to come to the realization that the service i wanted to provide couldn´t be a   standard method , but could have a standard base . So for me to be able to provide that kind of   service , i had to come to the next agreements with mi clients before starting any process : 

 -   Meet the person in charge and gather all information posible and ask some more : 

 o The actual situation   o The real need   o The expectation   o The theories as to why did it happened   o The people involved 

 -   Ask for the perspective from the people involved , using a tool created from the   information gathered from the first aproach . 

 -   To have a base of different aproaches to develop the themes asked from clients , and be   able to adapt the models to tha actual need and context . 

 -   Ask for perfomance indicators that will alow us to evaluate progress in the future . 

 Making these agreements will allow me to specify the persona type that will receive the services   and also allign my efforts to the expectation put on the services and control the evaluation   method from the indicators , focusing on the improvemente of those indicators . 

 What this tool taught me , and the methology itself , is even when i can think that the work is done ,   it could also be an opportunity to keep improving on time , and to never be too comfortable to not   keep improving .
### Output: 