What do we really gain from training? How good are we at assessing the real returns on this investment?
Those connected with training will argue that training is a fundamental necessity that helps determine the morale, productivity and performance of employees at all levels, including managers.
Although the underlying premise is true, the question is whether it is actually happening. The mere fact that training is undertaken does not automatically result in added value to the trainees or to the company. The only people who are guaranteed to gain are the trainers.
There are two factors to consider:
- The lack of effective assessment of value added, if any.
- The barriers preventing us from obtaining value from training
To really make a difference, we need to go back to fundamentals.
Why train?
From a business perspective, it is the application of learning to bring higher performance. For the individual, it brings job satisfaction and potential advancement in terms of rewards.
This is where our training focus should be and where our measurements should be.
Currently, in many organisations, there is little, if any, feedback on such issues. There are (what I term) the “Happy Sheets” at the end of the course. These tell us what participants think about the content and delivery: relevance to their work, clarity of what was taught, etc. Hopefully, there will be some useful critiques to help us further improve the training experience into the future.
What does all this tell us about the efficacy of the training?
Nothing — it gives no assessment of subsequent performance improvements.
One can correctly argue that the participants have not had time to put the learning into action yet. This therefore demands that we get more measurements later. But do we collect them?
Let’s get real. I am sent on a training course. Great stuff, enjoyable and informative. I get back to my desk and the pending work has grown and I have to get re-settled. I put the training notes in a drawer to refer to later and get on with tackling the pending items and the daily things that need to be done. The next time I see the training notes is when I move to a new role and have to clear my stuff from the desk.
The performance input has been a big, fat, nothing.
What about performance appraisals, one might ask. By the end of the appraisal period, who can remember what difference, if any, has occurred in my abilities and performance?
What has been the cost of the training? What impact has it had on my performance? How have the organisation and myself benefited?
If the forgoing is not enough, there are other contributory factors that create barriers to effective training outcomes.
Are we sending them to the right course?
Is training the right solution? If a person isn't performing effectively, then train them. One of the most pertinent examples is leadership training. Having worked with psychometrics, I've seen so many cases of non-leaders (by nature) being made to attend training on how to lead, when the behaviours required for this are almost completely uncomfortable for the individual — and most likely always will be, and therefore not actioned.
Are we cramming too much into the course — nice to know vs need to know? I want to resolve a specific situation, so how do I deal with that? Why spend your time and mine by going into other topics that I may possibly need one day (but will have forgotten what you've taught me by then)?
Do I really need to attend a formal training session or could the input I need be given by my manager or someone else close by? Bite-sized learning, on demand, as needed, and put into action immediately.
Especially for behavioural inputs (e.g. leadership, motivation) and areas such as problem solving and creativity, to what extent are the new behaviours supported by the culture of the organisation?
Unless the behaviours expected are enacted and encouraged by the CEO downwards, we cannot expect any differences from training people in them — except for a higher level of cynicism, of course.
Similarly, do the processes support these ideas and concepts?
And this includes performance measurement and appraisals?
An example is in the training function itself. What are the key aims? What are the targets set? What are we measured on?
If our trainers only have goals such as numbers of courses run, number of participants put through, the feedback (scores) given by participants at the end of the course, and keeping within a certain budget, then the plot has already been lost.
It is easy to criticise but how do we do things differently and more productively?
I would start by asking a question. Can you tell me about a time in your working life when you had a great learning experience that really made a difference to you and your ability to perform?
Our greatest learning points, by and large, have most probably been with our manager having one-to-one discussions with us based on our current, pressing, needs, where there has also been follow up support and encouragement.
Especially too when our manager also recognises the kinds of challenges we enjoy and which will stretch our abilities — and makes a point of throwing us into them.
These gave us a step up in our performance as well as a great feeling of achievement, together with respect for our manager. S/he showed an interest in helping us better ourselves.
The subject matter of the discussion was an immediate issue, enabling us to put it into practice straight away and see the benefits — making it a real lesson learnt.
The cost was basically the two of us having taken time out for the discussion.
Question
Isn’t the best and most effective training really undertaken by a person's direct manager?
If this raises the response that there aren't many managers in our organisation who are capable of doing this, we get even closer to some real issues on performance. Three main points:
- Are we recruiting/promoting the right people into management or, to be more precise, are we using the right criteria for selecting them?
- AND are we, as senior managers, ensuring we create a culture of coaching and mentoring our direct reports in this positive manner?
- AND are we ensuring the processes in use support a positive way forward rather than undermining people's ability and willingness to be great performers who get a great deal of satisfaction from producing great results?
I have also witnessed a manager insisting he attend the training he wanted undertaken to help his team move forward. His reason was practical — to enable him to better support his team in applying what they are learning. This commitment paid dividends in morale and performance.
So this is no fancy pipe dream. It's hard reality, but how many of us are prepared to accept it and, most of all, work at it?
.
