On one of the WA groups of HR, Administrator of the groups, Mr Rajara 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 lavishing organization money when the training can be imparted in-house?
Should outbound training be treated as a picnic if it is organised with a view to deflate stress or change in 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: - Average HR prefers training programme to be interactive. They feel that in-house training programme could be theoretical one and activities give a better result. Nevertheless, how many HRís or the 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 organisation. What if the behaviour of HOD or GM/VP is too bad? Will outbound training help in changing his or her behaviour? Certainly not!
Few training companies or trainers have understood the psychology of HRís very well and promise to improve bonding or teamwork or leadership and so on. Since training effectiveness is not measured by either side, there is no liability to both the sides and arrangement works fine to both.
Q. 1 Is outbound training for employees and executives lavishing organization money when the training can be imparted in-house? Reply: - Why do we conduct the employee training? Employee training is conducted to:
a) Reduce process turnaround time of some process
b) To reduce some cost or to reduce consumption of resources
c) To increase or decrease some ratio Any training programme that does not attain any of the three above objectives is bound to fail. It is nothing but an organisation's waste of time and money. HR must try to estimate the ROI before the execution of the training programme. This has to be done for all types of programmes 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 the 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 organised with a view to deflate stress or change in environment? Reply: - The definition of picnic is "outdoor social gathering". Since the outbound training is also an outdoor event, unfortunately, both are merged together. However, we need to delink learning from the social gathering. It is better to take up only one thing at a time. A dayís 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 organisationís culture, hierarchy, work environment and so on. No outbound training helps in changing the organisationís culture. It is the job of leadership.
Thanks, Dinesh Divekar From India, Bangalore