Dear members, On one of the WA groups of HR, the Administrator of the group, Mr Rajaram Thorve, has raised the topic for discussion. Today's topic for discussion is on "Efficacy of Outbound Vs Inbound Training." He has asked the following questions: Is outbound training for employees and executives a waste of organization money when the training can be imparted in-house? Should outbound training be treated as a picnic if it is organized with a view to deflate stress or change the environment? I have given the replies to the above questions, and these are as below: +++++ Dear Mr Rajaram Thorve, The replies to your questions are as below: Introduction: The average HR professional prefers training programs to be interactive. They feel that in-house training programs could be theoretical, and activities give a better result. Nevertheless, how many HRs or training companies have measured the ROI of the outbound training is a point to moot. Outbound training helps in bringing physical engagement but not necessarily mental or intellectual engagement with the organization. What if the behavior of an HOD or GM/VP is too bad? Will outbound training help in changing his or her behavior? Certainly not! Few training companies or trainers have understood the psychology of HRs very well and promise to improve bonding, teamwork, leadership, and so on. Since training effectiveness is not measured by either side, there is no liability to both sides, and the arrangement works fine for both. Q. 1 Is outbound training for employees and executives a waste of organization money when the training can be imparted in-house? Reply: Why do we conduct employee training? Employee training is conducted to: a) Reduce process turnaround time of some processes b) Reduce some cost or reduce consumption of resources c) Increase or decrease some ratio Any training program that does not attain any of the three above objectives is bound to fail. It is nothing but an organization's waste of time and money. HR must try to estimate the ROI before the execution of the training program. This has to be done for all types of programs, be it technical, semi-technical, or non-technical. As far as a reply to the question is concerned, let me state that HR should calculate ROI on both types of training, inbound as well as outbound. HR should take up either of the two where the estimate is higher. A few months later, HR is expected to do a variance analysis of estimated ROI and actual ROI. This analysis completes the entire training process. Q. 2 Should outbound training be treated as a picnic if it is organized with a view to deflate stress or change the environment? Reply: The definition of a picnic is "outdoor social gathering." Since outbound training is also an outdoor event, unfortunately, both are merged together. However, we need to delink learning from social gathering. It is better to take up only one thing at a time. A day's outbound training may reduce stress, but it might reduce stress only for that day. As the employee resumes his/her duties, he/she is bound to get affected due to stress. This is because the causes of the stress lie in the organization's culture, hierarchy, work environment, and so on. No outbound training helps in changing the organization's culture. It is the job of leadership.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(2)
Amend(0)
8072From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(2)Amend(0)CiteHR is an AI-augmented HR knowledge and collaboration platform, enabling HR professionals to solve real-world challenges, validate decisions, and stay ahead through collective intelligence and machine-enhanced guidance. Join Our Platform.
Introduction to Employee Training and Development - PPT 1.ppt
Improving ROI on Training & Development.pdf
ROI Training.zip