Case Study - long and rigorous training for mechanic

Bhagyal
Hi, I am working on case study. Kindly help me with your inputs.

Anand, supervisor of training for Southern Services, wondered whether the information he had just heard anything to do with the high dropout rate the company had experienced in its diesel mechanics-training program. In an informal discussion, a former trainee had said that he was afraid of the training program and had quit to avoid the possibility of failure. More than 70 percent of the trainees in the program were dropping out, which added significantly to the already high cost of training.

Anand decided to examine and compare closely the actual work performed by the firm’s mechanics with the training program. He eventually discovered that the work pattern consisted of three broad categories of tasks. About 70 percent of the work were basic in-shop work, 20 percent was out-of-shop work, and about 10 percent were diagnostic work. In the twelve-month training program, by comparison, about 30 percent of the instruction was devoted to supervised diesel mechanics work in the shop, 20 percent to unsupervised out-of-shop work, and about 50-percent to diagnostics.

Southern had operated the training program with the philosophy that every mechanic completing the training should be able to do every job he or she might encounter. Thus the training was long and rigorous. As Anand reflected on the company’s experience, he wondered whether he should make any changes in the training program.

Questions:

1. What is your opinion of Southern’s philosophy that every mechanic be able to do every job he or she might encounter?

2. How would you change the training program at Southern’s?

3. What steps are needed to understand the reasons for dropout?

4. Is the planned training commensurate with the technical profile of people?

5. Was the precision required during training so high to frighten the trainees?

6. Is the trainer more monarchy type ? not taking the team along?
skhadir
Dear Mr. Bhagyal,

I didn't understand your case study; maybe I failed to interpret it correctly or I need more information to answer your queries. Please provide more information point-wise, if possible.

I have noted a few points:

1) Mr. Anand, the supervisor, hasn't had detailed conversations with the Diesel Mechanics to understand why they haven't shown interest in learning something productive that could have helped them perform much better than expected.

2) He should have studied the "TECHNICAL PROFILES" of all Diesel Mechanics to gather more information about their EXPERIENCE, BACKGROUND, SKILLS, KNOWLEDGE, etc.

3) He should have conducted an analysis to identify TECHNICAL SKILLS LACKING in individual mechanics. This would have helped him prepare a training module to BRIDGE THE TECHNICAL GAP.

4) The TRAINING DURATION is quite long and shouldn't be RIGOROUS, thus scaring them. He should have designed PHASE-WISE TRAINING MODULES, supporting Diesel Mechanics to acquire relevant skills PHASE-BY-PHASE (step by step development process) followed by MENTORING/COACHING STRATEGIES to help/support them IMPLEMENT what they had learned within a specific TIME FRAME.

A trainer should consider and look into those factors that enable trainees to attend the training program with great passion/interest. Training programs shouldn't be rigorous but more interactive, facilitating desired skills and knowledge transfer.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

With profound regards
Bhagyal
Yes, Khadir, even I felt that this case has some missing information. Thank you for your inputs. It's helping me in analyzing this case more in detail.

- Bhagya
If you are knowledgeable about any fact, resource or experience related to this topic - please add your views. For articles and copyrighted material please only cite the original source link. Each contribution will make this page a resource useful for everyone. Join To Contribute