How Can HR Improve Training Effectiveness Without Overburdening Employees?

Hi All the HR,

I'm a student, and my friend and I have written a case study on observing the condition of a leading AC manufacturing company. We are now presenting this case study to all of you to provide your views on the questions posed after the case study.

I request all the HR sirs/ma'ams to help us find a suitable result for the cause.

HERE IS THE CASE STUDY:

XYZ was established in 1985 as a joint venture between various foreign companies. The company has grown from a capacity of 15,000 AC units in 1985, largely comprising an assembly operation, into the largest and only integrated manufacturing unit in India for Auto Air Conditioning systems. The company has the capability to manufacture compressors, condensers, heat exchangers, and all the connecting elements required to complete the AC Loop. The company has three plants in Noida, one in Manesar, and one in Pune. It also has an R&D center and Toolroom in Noida. The manufacturing capacity has grown to a level of 750,000 AC units per annum, with a plan to reach 1,000,000 per annum by 2008.

The HR department of the company has a well-developed training and development process but aims to enhance the training effectiveness evaluation process to make it more competitive. They have implemented a policy where employees are required to undertake a project based on the training they received and demonstrate practical application of their learning. Employees are then evaluated for 'On-the-job training effectiveness evaluation' based on their performance accordingly. In simple terms, they are assessed on how they apply their learning in their job. Employees are given three months to evaluate themselves and complete a project based on their learning. They self-rate their learning, then their HOD (Head of the Department) rates them based on the project, learning, and its application. Finally, the HOD compares the self-rating with their assessment, provides remarks, and recommendations to the HR department. This evaluation helps determine the need for re-training or assess the success of the employee's training investment. However, the challenge faced by the HR department is that employees perceive this project work as an additional burden on their daily tasks and tend to avoid it. They fail to recognize the importance of completing the Training Effectiveness Form and undertaking a project. Until the HR Audit date, HR personnel have to chase employees to submit the Training Effectiveness forms, only to find out that many employees do it as a formality.

After much discussion, the AGM (HR) of the company expresses that frequent policy changes will create a negative impression among employees, implying that the HR department changes policies whenever issues arise. The AGM believes that policies should not be altered frequently. Surprisingly, when employees interact with the HR Dept., this issue is not raised, even when prompted.

The AGM argues that if only 10-12% of employees take this exercise seriously today, he will focus on motivating those employees to make the policy successful, despite the majority of employees avoiding the exercise. He is firm in his stance but still aims to find a solution for the successful execution of this policy.

QUESTIONS:

1. Is the stand taken by the HR manager of not changing the policy justified?

2. What would be your course of action if you were in the place of the HR manager?

3. Is the method implemented by the HR department to evaluate on-the-job training effectiveness appropriate? If not, what alternative do you suggest?

Please share your responses and suggestions.

Thank you,
Aanchal

Dear sir,

According to my view, retraining is better for any organization's development. At the same time, please motivate the people to do real exercises by providing promotions like salary increases if they meet your requirements and provide any incentives.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, Krish Sir and Sujatha. I am looking forward to more responses. I need to provide the solution to the company soon. Your answer, Krish Sir, is truly valuable.

Regards,
Aanchal

Anchal,

Many companies and management teams suffer from myopia. The problem could be the culture of the organization and/or the poor skill sets of managers, among other factors that inhibit change. For example, a worker or supervisor may have been promoted to manager as a reward for 20-30 years of service.

The effectiveness of training comes into play from the job description stage. If the job description is done correctly, quality products and services cannot be sustainably produced without effective training roles. Do you have training schedules for the trainers themselves? Also, what is the threshold for older employees to receive refresher training?

One solution could be to have a worker or executive spend at least a year in training before becoming a team leader, making the trainer an intermediate post.

This is a complex topic, so it might be better to raise doubts, and I will try to help.

Suryavrat

Hi, very nice effort done by you people. Okay, then see my views on this. My answer to the third question is, "Yes, the job effectiveness forms should be maintained because only through this can management determine how effective the training is. It should also convey the importance of the forms to the trainees so that they take it seriously.

If I were in that situation, I would put in my best effort to convey the importance of the training and the forms. Once we make them understand the importance, they will follow suit.

Regarding the policy on whether it should be continued or not, it can be continued as 10-12% are taking it seriously. Hopefully, over time, others will also recognize its importance.

I have shared my views; I'm not sure if they are useful to you or not. Anyhow, thanks for posting such a nice case study.

Regards, Jyothi.

Thank you so much, Jyothi.

Your response to the case study is greatly appreciated. What we are aiming for is to view the situation from different angles of the prism so that we arrive at the right answer.

Thanks a ton for your help.

Regards,
Aanchal

Aanchal and everyone else on CiteHR,

I think this is a typical case where HR keeps chasing the rest of the organization for the implementation of HR initiatives, whether it be training effectiveness forms, performance appraisal forms, or even data verification.

The ideal role of HR is to be the 'strategic partner', where it is the onus of HR to ensure its acceptability within the organization. Those managing the HR function should demonstrate interest in domains beyond HR, which can be achieved through effective contributions of thoughts and ideas based on a proper understanding of the processes.

The best method to handle this situation is through a CFT (Cross-functional team), where the emphasis and benefits of the initiatives should be highlighted, and the CEO should chair the CFT meeting. It depends on how well-equipped HR is in 'belling the cat'!!

Regards,
Dhruva
www.percontsi.com

Respected MPMS Sir,

Thank you again for the appreciation. I also need your views on the case study!

Dear Dhruva Sir,

Thank you very much for your response. I agree that the role of an HR is not just running around for salary slips and payroll. I also second your thought of being a strategic partner in the organization. However, I feel that implementing CFT in each company is challenging. No matter how much we emphasize teamwork, making teams work is a tremendous task. These are just my plain thoughts. Please correct me on that.

Regards,
Aanchal