Dear all,
"There is nothing that training cannot do. Nothing is above its reach or below it." Mark Twain regarded training as a panacea, but training manager Corsini comments, "I believe in education and the development of people, but I see what happens in our schools, and then I see what happens in companies, and I don't know who's dumber. The business world has nothing on the education world. Both sets of students are bored to death." While practically every management leader emphasizes the importance of training, when it comes to allocating resources, management would rather invest in a new photocopier! Employee perception varies when it comes to training. Most of them hesitate to attend training programs, as they would have to work extra to make up for the hours spent on training. Gone are the days when participants perceived training programs as a well-deserved break from the routine office work!
However, companies believe that their training sets them apart from competitors. It is thus assumed that training in today's competitive environment is undervalued because of poor managers who adopt traditional methods and organizations with burnt-out staff following outdated policies. This is not always true. It's time organizations review critically the training profession. The problem could be with training practitioners.
Shortfalls
Professional trainers today focus more on selling training. So their interest in improving organizational efficacy and employee performance wanes. Moreover, few professionals opt for a primary career as corporate trainers; most are into training for want of anything better. Hence, they lack proficiency in psychology, interpersonal relationships, learning, and training content. The profession is also hounded by the belief that trainers don't require updated and advanced knowledge about what they are teaching.
Analysts observed that most training functions are independent of HR and other benchmarking activities concerning training strategies. This silo approach keeps training from being integrated into strategic organizational planning. To be considered valuable in this rapidly changing business world, training needs to be contemporary. But almost all training programs are based on 'pre-events.' Training should be designed to solve 'current problems' as management problems generally occur overnight. Most training programs target underperformers and refuse to treat top performers differently. By 'dumbing' training to fit the 'masses,' training often loses its value to high performers. In the global market, training must be customized to suit diverse cultures. Ridden with such problems, it shouldn't come as a shock to the management when enormous investments in training programs fail to yield desired results.
Selling training - pros/cons
When trying to sell training programs, training vendors face a strange dilemma. Though training qualifies as a business, effective training cannot be categorized as a consumer item. Training vendors often walk into corporate offices armed with impressive brochures hoping to market their programs. A backward approach to training!
Training is a service that should be customized to meet specified workplace needs. Training needs to be designed to plug in the gaps in employees' current performance. So while training vendors can be very good with their sales pitch and classroom training, employees seldom benefit specifically from training. Hence, the indiscernible differences in overall employee performance. As consumers, organizations should look for professional trainers who are inquisitive and question the purpose of training. Such trainers invariably customize their training content after a thorough assessment of organizational needs. More importantly, they don't treat training as a car sales activity but as a consulting service. Organizations should avoid trainers who believe in the 'one-size-fits-all' training approach and claim that their training can solve all issues.
Poorly trained trainers
A case in point
A trainer was contracted to demonstrate ways to conduct searches in a proprietary legal database. This trainer did not know all the keystroke equivalents for the "point and click" mouse/icon instructions. He was also unfamiliar with screen readers and their effect on the usability of the database. Trainers with such a meagre smattering of knowledge reinstate the belief that 'little knowledge is dangerous'!
Consumer organizations are unaware of different training models. Yet they are not expected to spend time knowing more about them. End-users, in fact, expect training vendors to be equipped with contemporary and comprehensive training programs. As most trainers lack sufficient academic acumen, they are more rigid in their approach to learning. Trainees are likely to detect that when such trainers conduct a seminar on one topic and then move on to the other, they use identical learning activities!
To camouflage their inadequacies, smart trainers create seminars that are fun but teach minimal skills and concepts. As participant feedback ratings are highly influenced by enjoyment rather than the amount of learning, the lack of expertise in training methods and content is seldom detected. After such a training session, the employee returns to his workstation no wiser than before!
Even though it is hard for organizations to be always educated 'training' consumers, they need to review the training backgrounds of each of the prospective trainers and the training content. Ideally, a trainer should be academically qualified. Though it doesn't guarantee effective training, he would at least be aware of the principles of training and learning.
A lack in training culture
Lotus Development Corporation spent millions to develop tools and a training curriculum to reinforce their sales methodology. Nevertheless, the trainers were unable to present skills to suit the new sales practices. Moreover, the new product training was more aligned with the old way of selling. Wendy Stone, the training manager, says, "It (training) frustrated salespeople." She terms such training as 'destructive investment.' Trainers generally move into training after reading a couple of books on training and attending a seminar or two! They believe that trainers need not be highly proficient, and that basic knowledge of the subject matter qualifies them as trainers. The following quotes by trainers reflect this culture.
"What's wrong with stand-up trainers working in content areas they are not experts in?"
"When I first started out on my own as a trainer, I said yes to almost anything."
"We quite frequently agree to undertake training projects in which we are not all familiar with the associated content."
Such a culture promotes trainers with knowledge based on half-truths and myths. Incompetent trainers lose their credibility when they cannot answer queries that require advanced knowledge. If a trainer can learn a skill from a book so can an employee!
While shopping for trainers, organizations should search for trainers specialized in specific training content. They should ask trainers from where they have mastered the topic. An expert trainer will give multiple references. Less competent trainers mar the reputation of the profession. Fortunately, there are many skilled professionals who can undo the damage. It's for organizations to identify them.
Solutions through answers
The Forum Corporation, a training consultancy firm, looked at decades of research on training and learning to understand what creates value for training. Their report recommends that training managers answer the following questions for a reality check.
Is training linked and relevant to business goals?
Does strong leadership support it and does it reflect organizational culture?
Does it help the organization address customer retention, acquisition, lower costs, and greater innovation?
Can it map an employee's path to mastering skills?
Does it lead to measurable results?
Valuable training is instantly gratifying. If delivered on the job by a credible person, it results in measurable business impacts.
Regards,
RAJEEV Saini
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
62"There is nothing that training cannot do. Nothing is above its reach or below it." Mark Twain regarded training as a panacea, but training manager Corsini comments, "I believe in education and the development of people, but I see what happens in our schools, and then I see what happens in companies, and I don't know who's dumber. The business world has nothing on the education world. Both sets of students are bored to death." While practically every management leader emphasizes the importance of training, when it comes to allocating resources, management would rather invest in a new photocopier! Employee perception varies when it comes to training. Most of them hesitate to attend training programs, as they would have to work extra to make up for the hours spent on training. Gone are the days when participants perceived training programs as a well-deserved break from the routine office work!
However, companies believe that their training sets them apart from competitors. It is thus assumed that training in today's competitive environment is undervalued because of poor managers who adopt traditional methods and organizations with burnt-out staff following outdated policies. This is not always true. It's time organizations review critically the training profession. The problem could be with training practitioners.
Shortfalls
Professional trainers today focus more on selling training. So their interest in improving organizational efficacy and employee performance wanes. Moreover, few professionals opt for a primary career as corporate trainers; most are into training for want of anything better. Hence, they lack proficiency in psychology, interpersonal relationships, learning, and training content. The profession is also hounded by the belief that trainers don't require updated and advanced knowledge about what they are teaching.
Analysts observed that most training functions are independent of HR and other benchmarking activities concerning training strategies. This silo approach keeps training from being integrated into strategic organizational planning. To be considered valuable in this rapidly changing business world, training needs to be contemporary. But almost all training programs are based on 'pre-events.' Training should be designed to solve 'current problems' as management problems generally occur overnight. Most training programs target underperformers and refuse to treat top performers differently. By 'dumbing' training to fit the 'masses,' training often loses its value to high performers. In the global market, training must be customized to suit diverse cultures. Ridden with such problems, it shouldn't come as a shock to the management when enormous investments in training programs fail to yield desired results.
Selling training - pros/cons
When trying to sell training programs, training vendors face a strange dilemma. Though training qualifies as a business, effective training cannot be categorized as a consumer item. Training vendors often walk into corporate offices armed with impressive brochures hoping to market their programs. A backward approach to training!
Training is a service that should be customized to meet specified workplace needs. Training needs to be designed to plug in the gaps in employees' current performance. So while training vendors can be very good with their sales pitch and classroom training, employees seldom benefit specifically from training. Hence, the indiscernible differences in overall employee performance. As consumers, organizations should look for professional trainers who are inquisitive and question the purpose of training. Such trainers invariably customize their training content after a thorough assessment of organizational needs. More importantly, they don't treat training as a car sales activity but as a consulting service. Organizations should avoid trainers who believe in the 'one-size-fits-all' training approach and claim that their training can solve all issues.
Poorly trained trainers
A case in point
A trainer was contracted to demonstrate ways to conduct searches in a proprietary legal database. This trainer did not know all the keystroke equivalents for the "point and click" mouse/icon instructions. He was also unfamiliar with screen readers and their effect on the usability of the database. Trainers with such a meagre smattering of knowledge reinstate the belief that 'little knowledge is dangerous'!
Consumer organizations are unaware of different training models. Yet they are not expected to spend time knowing more about them. End-users, in fact, expect training vendors to be equipped with contemporary and comprehensive training programs. As most trainers lack sufficient academic acumen, they are more rigid in their approach to learning. Trainees are likely to detect that when such trainers conduct a seminar on one topic and then move on to the other, they use identical learning activities!
To camouflage their inadequacies, smart trainers create seminars that are fun but teach minimal skills and concepts. As participant feedback ratings are highly influenced by enjoyment rather than the amount of learning, the lack of expertise in training methods and content is seldom detected. After such a training session, the employee returns to his workstation no wiser than before!
Even though it is hard for organizations to be always educated 'training' consumers, they need to review the training backgrounds of each of the prospective trainers and the training content. Ideally, a trainer should be academically qualified. Though it doesn't guarantee effective training, he would at least be aware of the principles of training and learning.
A lack in training culture
Lotus Development Corporation spent millions to develop tools and a training curriculum to reinforce their sales methodology. Nevertheless, the trainers were unable to present skills to suit the new sales practices. Moreover, the new product training was more aligned with the old way of selling. Wendy Stone, the training manager, says, "It (training) frustrated salespeople." She terms such training as 'destructive investment.' Trainers generally move into training after reading a couple of books on training and attending a seminar or two! They believe that trainers need not be highly proficient, and that basic knowledge of the subject matter qualifies them as trainers. The following quotes by trainers reflect this culture.
"What's wrong with stand-up trainers working in content areas they are not experts in?"
"When I first started out on my own as a trainer, I said yes to almost anything."
"We quite frequently agree to undertake training projects in which we are not all familiar with the associated content."
Such a culture promotes trainers with knowledge based on half-truths and myths. Incompetent trainers lose their credibility when they cannot answer queries that require advanced knowledge. If a trainer can learn a skill from a book so can an employee!
While shopping for trainers, organizations should search for trainers specialized in specific training content. They should ask trainers from where they have mastered the topic. An expert trainer will give multiple references. Less competent trainers mar the reputation of the profession. Fortunately, there are many skilled professionals who can undo the damage. It's for organizations to identify them.
Solutions through answers
The Forum Corporation, a training consultancy firm, looked at decades of research on training and learning to understand what creates value for training. Their report recommends that training managers answer the following questions for a reality check.
Is training linked and relevant to business goals?
Does strong leadership support it and does it reflect organizational culture?
Does it help the organization address customer retention, acquisition, lower costs, and greater innovation?
Can it map an employee's path to mastering skills?
Does it lead to measurable results?
Valuable training is instantly gratifying. If delivered on the job by a credible person, it results in measurable business impacts.
Regards,
RAJEEV Saini
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Raj,
A good reading. Nevertheless, I have certain points to make. When you speak of trainers having the concerned knowledge, what kind of qualification, in basic terms, are you looking at or speaking about? But yes, the points highlighted by you in the final paragraph are, in fact, the most important.
Also, the latest trends in training suggest not to look at the ROI format but rather on the Return on Expectation. This, according to the experts in training, will help assess training even better.
Vini
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
A good reading. Nevertheless, I have certain points to make. When you speak of trainers having the concerned knowledge, what kind of qualification, in basic terms, are you looking at or speaking about? But yes, the points highlighted by you in the final paragraph are, in fact, the most important.
Also, the latest trends in training suggest not to look at the ROI format but rather on the Return on Expectation. This, according to the experts in training, will help assess training even better.
Vini
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Rajiv,
I completely agree with the issues raised by you pertaining to T&D. Being myself a training professional, these are the very bottlenecks that I have faced for the last 9 years. Training is not seen as value addition or an approach to equip ourselves in gaining new skills. I have encountered very few managers in the project teams who are active and understand its importance. At times, they are totally blank and are not able to conduct skill gap analysis for their own teams. Obviously, the intended objectives of the training programs are lost, and we are not in a position to evaluate training effectiveness.
Thanks and regards,
Karthik
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I completely agree with the issues raised by you pertaining to T&D. Being myself a training professional, these are the very bottlenecks that I have faced for the last 9 years. Training is not seen as value addition or an approach to equip ourselves in gaining new skills. I have encountered very few managers in the project teams who are active and understand its importance. At times, they are totally blank and are not able to conduct skill gap analysis for their own teams. Obviously, the intended objectives of the training programs are lost, and we are not in a position to evaluate training effectiveness.
Thanks and regards,
Karthik
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Yes, Karthik, you are absolutely right.
As far as my experience is concerned, we are lacking passionate people in training and development. The present scenario is that novice trainers are not learning the technical aspects of training; they simply believe in delivering the session.
We, as trainers, are like actors, and we have to play our roles so that the session becomes a super hit – in other words, a highly powerful and impactful session.
I believe that if you are not passionate about your work, it means you are affecting the entire process. What do you think?
Regards,
Rajeev
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
As far as my experience is concerned, we are lacking passionate people in training and development. The present scenario is that novice trainers are not learning the technical aspects of training; they simply believe in delivering the session.
We, as trainers, are like actors, and we have to play our roles so that the session becomes a super hit – in other words, a highly powerful and impactful session.
I believe that if you are not passionate about your work, it means you are affecting the entire process. What do you think?
Regards,
Rajeev
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Very true, Rajiv. I think, Rajiv, you are the only person in my whole career who is in sync with my thoughts on T&D. The training is not at all linked to performance. There is no process for training effectiveness.
I have been talking to a lot of trainers, and all they are concerned about is how many programs they can do in a month and make money. That holds true for organizations as well. They just want some training to be done for their employees, irrespective of whether they are relevant to the team or individual. It's more of a paid holiday for the participants.
I am yet to come across really good professionals who understand the impact and significance of T&D, and they are not linked to HR, as rightly pointed out by you. Almost all training functions are independent of HR.
Thanks, Karthik
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I have been talking to a lot of trainers, and all they are concerned about is how many programs they can do in a month and make money. That holds true for organizations as well. They just want some training to be done for their employees, irrespective of whether they are relevant to the team or individual. It's more of a paid holiday for the participants.
I am yet to come across really good professionals who understand the impact and significance of T&D, and they are not linked to HR, as rightly pointed out by you. Almost all training functions are independent of HR.
Thanks, Karthik
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
People are just reading books and becoming trainers. They make their sessions full of entertainment packages rather than a session that is conducive to learning. Entertainment should be included, but it should be related to the topic being covered in the session.
I have attended two sessions by these so-called trainers, but there was only entertainment and no learning. These types of people are making our job tough, and the quality of training is becoming ineffective and cheap.
As the training business is booming, individuals with only bookish knowledge will have a negative impact on the entire training community.
Regards,
Rajeev
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I have attended two sessions by these so-called trainers, but there was only entertainment and no learning. These types of people are making our job tough, and the quality of training is becoming ineffective and cheap.
As the training business is booming, individuals with only bookish knowledge will have a negative impact on the entire training community.
Regards,
Rajeev
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Rajiv,
It's nice that you have taken the time to document all the critical points. Here are my thoughts.
Training is still evolving in India with both the trainers, training service providers, and HR/L&D as well. Eventually, things that don't work will get phased out. But there is another question that bothers me all the time - how do we sustain learning in organizations? Because the moment people leave the training hall, they go back to fire fighting, and all action plans are out of the window.
There we see a larger challenge, especially in an Indian context where the term discipline is still used with children in school. We at Nine Dots are fighting a war to sustain learning every time there is a flavor-of-the-month initiative in organizations.
My two cents.
Regards,
Shankar
www.ninedots.in
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
It's nice that you have taken the time to document all the critical points. Here are my thoughts.
Training is still evolving in India with both the trainers, training service providers, and HR/L&D as well. Eventually, things that don't work will get phased out. But there is another question that bothers me all the time - how do we sustain learning in organizations? Because the moment people leave the training hall, they go back to fire fighting, and all action plans are out of the window.
There we see a larger challenge, especially in an Indian context where the term discipline is still used with children in school. We at Nine Dots are fighting a war to sustain learning every time there is a flavor-of-the-month initiative in organizations.
My two cents.
Regards,
Shankar
www.ninedots.in
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The common fault that besets practitioners in training and development is the lack of program follow-up for their participants.
Many trainers are content that their participants have a "feel-good" reaction to a training program they conducted, but sadly, they do not realize if the learning has been transferred to the workplace. In fact, many companies do not even bother to pursue the other three levels of training evaluation. Hence, the value of training is lost along the way.
In my 16-year career in training and development, I would say that it is better for a company to have its training and development department rather than outsourcing this activity. In the first place, training and development are part of HR management. Unfortunately, management nowadays prefer to have training outsourced. The reason for this is they look at training merely as another activity with no quantifiable value.
If there is a department dedicated to training and development, it can demonstrate to the management the ROI of training by providing information on the third and fourth level of evaluation and, secondly, through its initiative, develop a follow-up program for training participants to ensure that learning is being used in the workplace. The training department can also provide proactive consultancy for its internal clients (i.e., training officers checking periodically on the manager and his staff regarding their development). By doing this, the training practitioner can also evaluate if his training program is effective or not before undertaking the whole training cycle again.
This can be a gargantuan task, but I believe it is worth the effort. However, it will be better to sell the idea to other managers as well to keep them supporting and actively participating in the initiative.
From Saudi Arabia,
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Many trainers are content that their participants have a "feel-good" reaction to a training program they conducted, but sadly, they do not realize if the learning has been transferred to the workplace. In fact, many companies do not even bother to pursue the other three levels of training evaluation. Hence, the value of training is lost along the way.
In my 16-year career in training and development, I would say that it is better for a company to have its training and development department rather than outsourcing this activity. In the first place, training and development are part of HR management. Unfortunately, management nowadays prefer to have training outsourced. The reason for this is they look at training merely as another activity with no quantifiable value.
If there is a department dedicated to training and development, it can demonstrate to the management the ROI of training by providing information on the third and fourth level of evaluation and, secondly, through its initiative, develop a follow-up program for training participants to ensure that learning is being used in the workplace. The training department can also provide proactive consultancy for its internal clients (i.e., training officers checking periodically on the manager and his staff regarding their development). By doing this, the training practitioner can also evaluate if his training program is effective or not before undertaking the whole training cycle again.
This can be a gargantuan task, but I believe it is worth the effort. However, it will be better to sell the idea to other managers as well to keep them supporting and actively participating in the initiative.
From Saudi Arabia,
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I am totally in favor of an in-house training department because, as a part of the organization, the trainer should create a good rapport among employees if he knows all the technicalities of the training process.
Regarding the evaluation of training, the trainer has to build a good relationship with managers from all departments because managers are the key individuals responsible for implementing the learning in the workplace post sessions. If managers are not aware of the processes, there will be no impact on the employees' skills as per the training, and the training's justification within the organization will be lacking.
In conclusion, I would like to emphasize that if a trainer is not passionate about his job and does not follow the evaluation process aligned with the objectives, there will be no improvement in the skill set.
Thanks,
Regards,
RAJEEV SAINI
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Regarding the evaluation of training, the trainer has to build a good relationship with managers from all departments because managers are the key individuals responsible for implementing the learning in the workplace post sessions. If managers are not aware of the processes, there will be no impact on the employees' skills as per the training, and the training's justification within the organization will be lacking.
In conclusion, I would like to emphasize that if a trainer is not passionate about his job and does not follow the evaluation process aligned with the objectives, there will be no improvement in the skill set.
Thanks,
Regards,
RAJEEV SAINI
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi all,
As we are discussing training, can anyone let me know of any off-the-shelf training tool or software that I can implement to automate the training function within my organization? I badly need some info on this. Any inputs would be appreciated.
Thanks and Regards,
Karthik
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
As we are discussing training, can anyone let me know of any off-the-shelf training tool or software that I can implement to automate the training function within my organization? I badly need some info on this. Any inputs would be appreciated.
Thanks and Regards,
Karthik
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Rajeev,
Thank you for sharing this valuable knowledge. Since I am a fresher and have just begun my career, this will help me a lot to understand the ambiguity of training and development.
Regards,
Rekha
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thank you for sharing this valuable knowledge. Since I am a fresher and have just begun my career, this will help me a lot to understand the ambiguity of training and development.
Regards,
Rekha
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thanks for the idea.
Do any of you ever think that HR can deliver training with a limited budget? If yes, how can we do that? Please share here.
In my humble opinion, I will capture the knowledge of those who still stay in the company. This means that we exactly have a chance to hire an internal trainer from senior staff members, which is better than recruiting an external trainer. After that, we will ask our senior staff to conduct the training.
From Indonesia
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Do any of you ever think that HR can deliver training with a limited budget? If yes, how can we do that? Please share here.
In my humble opinion, I will capture the knowledge of those who still stay in the company. This means that we exactly have a chance to hire an internal trainer from senior staff members, which is better than recruiting an external trainer. After that, we will ask our senior staff to conduct the training.
From Indonesia
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Rajeev,
Fantastic post!!
You are absolutely right when you say people nowadays are reading a few books and attending a couple of seminars and declare themselves as trainers. I have worked as a training coordinator and had the opportunity to meet some faculty members from IIM and other good business schools. Believe it! They are marvelous in what they do. They are the most senior people in their organization, and the amount of knowledge they have does not come from just reading books.
But on the other hand, I have worked with a faculty member of an institute who did not know the basics of etiquette and was giving a training session on personality grooming. I think training is a very sensitive topic, and it should be handled very carefully and intensively. I appreciate the fact that you said that nowadays people are reluctant to attend training for the reason that they will have some more work.
Thanks a lot for sharing such a wonderful topic with us.
Regards,
Anuradha
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Fantastic post!!
You are absolutely right when you say people nowadays are reading a few books and attending a couple of seminars and declare themselves as trainers. I have worked as a training coordinator and had the opportunity to meet some faculty members from IIM and other good business schools. Believe it! They are marvelous in what they do. They are the most senior people in their organization, and the amount of knowledge they have does not come from just reading books.
But on the other hand, I have worked with a faculty member of an institute who did not know the basics of etiquette and was giving a training session on personality grooming. I think training is a very sensitive topic, and it should be handled very carefully and intensively. I appreciate the fact that you said that nowadays people are reluctant to attend training for the reason that they will have some more work.
Thanks a lot for sharing such a wonderful topic with us.
Regards,
Anuradha
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I hope with the long chain everyone still knows what training we are talking about.
While it is a very cost-effective idea to develop internal trainers and deliver them, this is most suitable for programs which are technical, business-related, and some soft skills. However, you need to realize quality trainers from an external organization bring with them a wide exposure, having worked with many firms, and can enrich the whole exercise. Also, trainers (most) update themselves constantly by doing research, interacting with business leaders, and reading books.
So, it would be a good idea to internalize some of the programs and judiciously outsource specialized programs like leadership, change management, innovation, and creativity to an external agency. You can also ask external training companies to develop the content and train your internal faculty to deliver programs.
My 2 cents.
Regards,
Shankar
www.ninedots.in
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
While it is a very cost-effective idea to develop internal trainers and deliver them, this is most suitable for programs which are technical, business-related, and some soft skills. However, you need to realize quality trainers from an external organization bring with them a wide exposure, having worked with many firms, and can enrich the whole exercise. Also, trainers (most) update themselves constantly by doing research, interacting with business leaders, and reading books.
So, it would be a good idea to internalize some of the programs and judiciously outsource specialized programs like leadership, change management, innovation, and creativity to an external agency. You can also ask external training companies to develop the content and train your internal faculty to deliver programs.
My 2 cents.
Regards,
Shankar
www.ninedots.in
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Yes, it will be a good idea to outsource some of the programs depending on the capability of the training department. If, for example, several employees need to upgrade their technical skills in purchasing and shipping and which the training department cannot adequately provide their needs then it is best to get a subject matter expert (SME) in that field. In training, we also have to recognize our capabilities and limitations and not try to act as a unit that knows it all.
But as a rule, it is best to maintain a training department that would take care of the actual needs of the organization and simply not leave it alone with external training institutions. A training department will have the advantage of conducting a thorough training needs analysis (TNA) from three different levels within the organization and what is best, it can get the support and commitment of the management with it. Moreover, a training department can always align its learning objectives with the goals of the organization thereby contributing to the bottom line, something which an external institution cannot do unless it is clearly stipulated in the contract that it will do all the necessary requirements that will ensure the development of the employees. These requirements call for stringent follow-up including workplace evaluations of learnings, consultancies with employees, and a clear demonstration of training ROI.
The training department also knows each and every employee and can work in conjunction with other HR initiatives, an important aspect for the balanced scorecard in HR management.
These are just a few reasons why it is good to have a training department and not leave it all to outsourcing per se. Of course, we should not be rigid in its application and depending on the situation and budget, outsourcing some of the programs will help to maximize the initiatives.
From Saudi Arabia,
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
But as a rule, it is best to maintain a training department that would take care of the actual needs of the organization and simply not leave it alone with external training institutions. A training department will have the advantage of conducting a thorough training needs analysis (TNA) from three different levels within the organization and what is best, it can get the support and commitment of the management with it. Moreover, a training department can always align its learning objectives with the goals of the organization thereby contributing to the bottom line, something which an external institution cannot do unless it is clearly stipulated in the contract that it will do all the necessary requirements that will ensure the development of the employees. These requirements call for stringent follow-up including workplace evaluations of learnings, consultancies with employees, and a clear demonstration of training ROI.
The training department also knows each and every employee and can work in conjunction with other HR initiatives, an important aspect for the balanced scorecard in HR management.
These are just a few reasons why it is good to have a training department and not leave it all to outsourcing per se. Of course, we should not be rigid in its application and depending on the situation and budget, outsourcing some of the programs will help to maximize the initiatives.
From Saudi Arabia,
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
A company that we have been working with for the past 3 years conducting training programs has a Matrix hierarchical set up. We have been the sole training vendors for the behavioral skills programs. While there have been constant changes in the Training Department and HR Senior Management, we have remained constant. In fact, the new staff in HR and Training consult us when implementing any new initiatives as we have been with the organization for some time and understand the business needs and culture.
So, there are some advantages to outsourcing training after all; at least there is something constant in the dynamic world.
Regards,
Shankar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
So, there are some advantages to outsourcing training after all; at least there is something constant in the dynamic world.
Regards,
Shankar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Rajiv has made very valid points. The joke I heard about training is that in good times you don't really need it, and in bad times, you will have to think twice because you cannot afford it. One also comes across write-ups on the retention of what is learned in training workshops and how the benefits tend to recede with time.
Along with training done by a credible person, the person who is trained should also be suitable. In the book "First, Break All the Rules," it is clearly stated that only people with a suitable profile should attend such workshops to enhance their skills.
Rajiv has also mentioned a passion for the job. The trainer and trainee should both be passionate - "Muhabbat karne ka mazaa tab aata hai jab dono taraf barabar ki aag lagi hui ho." - http://mypyp.wordpress.com/
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Along with training done by a credible person, the person who is trained should also be suitable. In the book "First, Break All the Rules," it is clearly stated that only people with a suitable profile should attend such workshops to enhance their skills.
Rajiv has also mentioned a passion for the job. The trainer and trainee should both be passionate - "Muhabbat karne ka mazaa tab aata hai jab dono taraf barabar ki aag lagi hui ho." - http://mypyp.wordpress.com/
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Rajeev,
I've been following this post and completely relate to all the comments posted in this thread. I was moved to the training field from sales and customer service because my management felt I was the best person to train others in these fields as well as the organizational culture. I have been training new and existing employees for about 5 years now. Hundreds of employees have gone through me, and the organization is proud of its customer service standards as well as growth rate. The top management recognizes my contribution, and I am given a lot of independence in my work.
The challenge that I see is that I am expected to update my skills on my own, be it through in-house modules that I can read or through material available on the internet. The top management has met with a couple of training vendors on my insistence but rejected all, saying that I am more capable of handling the various trainings.
I am getting buried in work without any time for self-development. I am expected to train the fast-track employees on management skills, communication skills, and more. Sometimes I myself wonder if I really have the skills to conduct behavioral and management trainings!
When I read your post, you mention that people deliver training by reading books! How do you think management can be made to see the need for developing the trainers? What suggestions do you have for me?
Suman
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I've been following this post and completely relate to all the comments posted in this thread. I was moved to the training field from sales and customer service because my management felt I was the best person to train others in these fields as well as the organizational culture. I have been training new and existing employees for about 5 years now. Hundreds of employees have gone through me, and the organization is proud of its customer service standards as well as growth rate. The top management recognizes my contribution, and I am given a lot of independence in my work.
The challenge that I see is that I am expected to update my skills on my own, be it through in-house modules that I can read or through material available on the internet. The top management has met with a couple of training vendors on my insistence but rejected all, saying that I am more capable of handling the various trainings.
I am getting buried in work without any time for self-development. I am expected to train the fast-track employees on management skills, communication skills, and more. Sometimes I myself wonder if I really have the skills to conduct behavioral and management trainings!
When I read your post, you mention that people deliver training by reading books! How do you think management can be made to see the need for developing the trainers? What suggestions do you have for me?
Suman
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Rajeev,
In fact, you put 'words into my mouth'. This was a topic that was plaguing me for some time — the quality of teaching or training. What we see in our education system is reflected in this area as well.
People who don't find jobs, or are waiting for other jobs, or even those who want to make some pocket money... are getting into teaching/training. Training organizations are looking for the cheapest trainers around and end up hiring immature, inexperienced trainers. Having a degree in HR or Training is not the criteria. Training comes from maturity, life's experience, and the love of imparting and sharing knowledge.
So, I think we should put our foot down and insist on certain basic qualities. If not in 5 years to a decade, we will see the same mess we see in the education sector.
Lisa
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In fact, you put 'words into my mouth'. This was a topic that was plaguing me for some time — the quality of teaching or training. What we see in our education system is reflected in this area as well.
People who don't find jobs, or are waiting for other jobs, or even those who want to make some pocket money... are getting into teaching/training. Training organizations are looking for the cheapest trainers around and end up hiring immature, inexperienced trainers. Having a degree in HR or Training is not the criteria. Training comes from maturity, life's experience, and the love of imparting and sharing knowledge.
So, I think we should put our foot down and insist on certain basic qualities. If not in 5 years to a decade, we will see the same mess we see in the education sector.
Lisa
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thanks for pointing this out, Lisa. We should really draw the line on who is a trainer.
This is one dark area that needs to be addressed and the reason why it is important to professionalize this function. I have met trainers who even have doctoral or masteral degrees annotated in their names, but I would say they are better off teaching or giving lectures in the universities than dealing in training because a trainer should have at least a good knowledge in adult education or learning, which some of them do not possess.
To be a good trainer, one must have the following:
A. Skills
- communication skills
- interpersonal skills
- leadership
- reading
- organization and planning
- platform skills
- decision making
- flexibility
- analytical
- problem-solving
- listening
- negotiating
- coaching
- facilitating small group discussions
- awareness of learning styles
- testing and measurement
B. Knowledge
- good knowledge of a subject matter
- good knowledge of the company
- knowledge of the trainee population
- knowledge of adult learning or education
etc.
C. Characteristics
- energy
- enthusiasm
- commitment
- integrity
- self-presentation
- self-objectivity
etc.
In the past, trainers were expected to: assess training needs, design training, deliver training, and measure the impacts of training. But now, a good trainer should be able to perform the following:
- grill executives about strategic directions
- stay in touch with workers and work processes to be aware of skill needs
- broker training delivered by internal and external suppliers
- teach line managers how to train
- facilitate process improvement and/or teach line managers how to do it
- know learning cycles
- author interactive multimedia training
- push training upstream (front-end of a business initiative)
- go online to access electronic training opportunities, both internally or on the internet
- help managers think through performance problems and find solutions, whether the solution is training or something else
- make big picture observations of work processes for problems or potential improvements that people might not see
- facilitate problem-solving teams (TQM initiative)
- bring about change that will develop competencies and push up the bottom line.
- facilitating organizational change
You might not believe it, but these are the demands of modern times. In this era of globalization wherein changes are happening in the workplace brought about by the influx of new technologies, competition is cutthroat, and the company's survival is at stake.
It is for this reason why big companies are looking to what we call an empowered trainer. This kind of trainer should also possess the following attributes aside from what was listed above:
- genuine respect for the learner wherein he: acknowledges resistance and feelings of the participants; has patience and humility; learns from participants
- continuous hunger for learning (doesn't mind being a trainer or participant)
- loves training; likes what he's doing, fired up or has a passion for it
- ability to innovate
- ability to negotiate with sponsors
- ability to work with others
- facilitation skills (i.e. presentation skills, training techniques, handling questions, managing discussions)
- awareness of personal impacts on others
- ability to confront and manage confrontation
- willingness to take risks
- having some positive core values
- ability to express oneself simply and clearly
- psychological maturity
For a trainer, reading is good but definitely not enough. Are we up to the challenge? After all, training is not "cheap."
From Saudi Arabia,
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
This is one dark area that needs to be addressed and the reason why it is important to professionalize this function. I have met trainers who even have doctoral or masteral degrees annotated in their names, but I would say they are better off teaching or giving lectures in the universities than dealing in training because a trainer should have at least a good knowledge in adult education or learning, which some of them do not possess.
To be a good trainer, one must have the following:
A. Skills
- communication skills
- interpersonal skills
- leadership
- reading
- organization and planning
- platform skills
- decision making
- flexibility
- analytical
- problem-solving
- listening
- negotiating
- coaching
- facilitating small group discussions
- awareness of learning styles
- testing and measurement
B. Knowledge
- good knowledge of a subject matter
- good knowledge of the company
- knowledge of the trainee population
- knowledge of adult learning or education
etc.
C. Characteristics
- energy
- enthusiasm
- commitment
- integrity
- self-presentation
- self-objectivity
etc.
In the past, trainers were expected to: assess training needs, design training, deliver training, and measure the impacts of training. But now, a good trainer should be able to perform the following:
- grill executives about strategic directions
- stay in touch with workers and work processes to be aware of skill needs
- broker training delivered by internal and external suppliers
- teach line managers how to train
- facilitate process improvement and/or teach line managers how to do it
- know learning cycles
- author interactive multimedia training
- push training upstream (front-end of a business initiative)
- go online to access electronic training opportunities, both internally or on the internet
- help managers think through performance problems and find solutions, whether the solution is training or something else
- make big picture observations of work processes for problems or potential improvements that people might not see
- facilitate problem-solving teams (TQM initiative)
- bring about change that will develop competencies and push up the bottom line.
- facilitating organizational change
You might not believe it, but these are the demands of modern times. In this era of globalization wherein changes are happening in the workplace brought about by the influx of new technologies, competition is cutthroat, and the company's survival is at stake.
It is for this reason why big companies are looking to what we call an empowered trainer. This kind of trainer should also possess the following attributes aside from what was listed above:
- genuine respect for the learner wherein he: acknowledges resistance and feelings of the participants; has patience and humility; learns from participants
- continuous hunger for learning (doesn't mind being a trainer or participant)
- loves training; likes what he's doing, fired up or has a passion for it
- ability to innovate
- ability to negotiate with sponsors
- ability to work with others
- facilitation skills (i.e. presentation skills, training techniques, handling questions, managing discussions)
- awareness of personal impacts on others
- ability to confront and manage confrontation
- willingness to take risks
- having some positive core values
- ability to express oneself simply and clearly
- psychological maturity
For a trainer, reading is good but definitely not enough. Are we up to the challenge? After all, training is not "cheap."
From Saudi Arabia,
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi all,
I have been watching this space for quite some time, and it's a revelation that so many training professionals are in sync with me on this. Unfortunately, the management within organizations does not think on similar lines, and that's why I personally feel the training function is in such a sorry state of affairs here.
I had the opportunity to work for an international organization and had first-hand experience in dealing with very senior individuals. I see a lot of difference in the way they perceive training. It's methodical, clear, and goal-oriented, unlike the managers that I have been interacting with here.
Training is not seen as a value addition but a task that needs to be done on a yearly basis and a good-to-have option. No understanding of available training processes and lack of clarity on training objectives seem to be big issues.
For the present organization that I work with, I see no vision coming out from the leadership team. My manager is busy appeasing people and trying to have good rapport with all those who matter. It's very unfortunate, and I am sure they would not even understand the points that have been raised in this forum for quite some time.
I hope that these discussions lead us to a position where we can emphasize what this is all about and how organizations can gain from T & D, provided it is aligned with the business objectives of the organization.
Let's continue our discussions and see if we can change some of the issues that we are faced with routinely in our daily work.
Keep it up, guys. This is getting very informative and interesting.
Thanks,
Karthik
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I have been watching this space for quite some time, and it's a revelation that so many training professionals are in sync with me on this. Unfortunately, the management within organizations does not think on similar lines, and that's why I personally feel the training function is in such a sorry state of affairs here.
I had the opportunity to work for an international organization and had first-hand experience in dealing with very senior individuals. I see a lot of difference in the way they perceive training. It's methodical, clear, and goal-oriented, unlike the managers that I have been interacting with here.
Training is not seen as a value addition but a task that needs to be done on a yearly basis and a good-to-have option. No understanding of available training processes and lack of clarity on training objectives seem to be big issues.
For the present organization that I work with, I see no vision coming out from the leadership team. My manager is busy appeasing people and trying to have good rapport with all those who matter. It's very unfortunate, and I am sure they would not even understand the points that have been raised in this forum for quite some time.
I hope that these discussions lead us to a position where we can emphasize what this is all about and how organizations can gain from T & D, provided it is aligned with the business objectives of the organization.
Let's continue our discussions and see if we can change some of the issues that we are faced with routinely in our daily work.
Keep it up, guys. This is getting very informative and interesting.
Thanks,
Karthik
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear all,
Lisa, Evanjerik, and Karthik have made excellent posts. Yes, lately I find that management, probably to save money, want to utilize the services of 'internal' trainers, a majority of whom are inadequate for the job. Due to this, the employees who are 'trained' by such persons gain nothing from the training, and in fact, begin to consider training per se to be a waste of time. This causes a lot of problems when professional trainers are then asked to train these employees. Management's conception of proper training must be changed. How can we achieve this very laudable goal? I look forward to concrete suggestions on how we can achieve this.
Jeroo
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Lisa, Evanjerik, and Karthik have made excellent posts. Yes, lately I find that management, probably to save money, want to utilize the services of 'internal' trainers, a majority of whom are inadequate for the job. Due to this, the employees who are 'trained' by such persons gain nothing from the training, and in fact, begin to consider training per se to be a waste of time. This causes a lot of problems when professional trainers are then asked to train these employees. Management's conception of proper training must be changed. How can we achieve this very laudable goal? I look forward to concrete suggestions on how we can achieve this.
Jeroo
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi,
In my view, all these points are relevant until we are able to bring about changes and produce good trainers. The industry requires training, but many good trainers are unable to find opportunities in the corporate sector. I am happy to see the material you have shared.
Good regards,
Mrs. Sapna Agrawal
Kota
From India, Jaipur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In my view, all these points are relevant until we are able to bring about changes and produce good trainers. The industry requires training, but many good trainers are unable to find opportunities in the corporate sector. I am happy to see the material you have shared.
Good regards,
Mrs. Sapna Agrawal
Kota
From India, Jaipur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hello everyone,
It's a good feeling to have people like you who are as passionate towards training as I am. We all know what qualities a good trainer should have, but can some of you give suggestions on how trainers should update their skills? Especially if it's a single person training division? I am talking about soft skills training. There are hundreds of PowerPoint presentations that one could download from the internet, but that wouldn't result in the trainees learning new skills and behaviors. How should a trainer learn the delivery of soft skills training?
Many of you probably deliver these trainings in your current positions, how did you get into it? What do you do to make these sessions not mere PowerPoints or discussions but a tool that does result in a change of behavior even much after the session?
I would be very grateful if you could share some insight and real-life examples.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
It's a good feeling to have people like you who are as passionate towards training as I am. We all know what qualities a good trainer should have, but can some of you give suggestions on how trainers should update their skills? Especially if it's a single person training division? I am talking about soft skills training. There are hundreds of PowerPoint presentations that one could download from the internet, but that wouldn't result in the trainees learning new skills and behaviors. How should a trainer learn the delivery of soft skills training?
Many of you probably deliver these trainings in your current positions, how did you get into it? What do you do to make these sessions not mere PowerPoints or discussions but a tool that does result in a change of behavior even much after the session?
I would be very grateful if you could share some insight and real-life examples.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I love what you have written and yes, reading is not enough....so can you please guide, what else one could do? Khushi
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
This has been a very interesting thread. I always used to wonder how a trainer is different from a coach. The United States has a rich tradition of life coaches, business coaches, and what not. In my view, a coach would be a more hands-on guy than a trainer, and in that context, in-house trainers can be deemed coaches. Cricket and other sports have several examples of how a good player need not be a good coach and vice versa. One gets emails from people like [link outdated-removed] and wonders about the credentials of such people or many other "Training institutions" in India. One gentleman had made a post on this forum of how to judge such people, but no one replied, and when you ask for details, they just show a fancy client profile. One training company even started offering a franchise! Just as the Institute of Chartered Accountants is there to validate a CA's credibility, there should be some HR organization doing something similar for independent trainers.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi, Hiren,
The idea of having a body judge the professional attributes and success in imparting training is excellent, but who would be the judges? How would the judges be judged?
Also, technical training can be judged on course content and method of delivery because there is very little difference in technical course content, though the approach to imparting the training differs, sometimes markedly.
But soft skills training is so different - both the course content and the methodology vary so much, how can you judge effectively? For instance, two trainers may have the same course content, but one merely lectures, reading from a set of notes, while the other constantly interacts with the participants, has case studies and role plays, and a completely interactive methodology. A judge who believes in lecturing will grade the first trainer as A and the second as C, while a judge who is into interactive training will judge the second trainer as A and the first as C. What is the solution?
Kushi
I agree with you - there are a number of courses on 'Train the Trainer' but mostly they are superficial and only for beginners. We need to have some sort of institute/body that can impart training to more senior trainers to keep them up to date with the latest trends in effective training. For instance, we have Evanjerik's excellent posting on how trainers should evolve. But we do not have such facilities here. Could Evanjerik perhaps assist us with working out how we can have such facilities?
All
Also, what do we do with inexperienced 'trainers' who are being inducted into large training institutes and foisted on unsuspecting companies who feel that a group of trainers may be more experienced and efficient than a single trainer who is a much better trainer?
Again, how do we 'educate' management to make the right choice when choosing external trainers and not relying on inadequate internal trainers?
This is not to say that an internal training unit is always unsatisfactory, but most are made up of less experienced trainers, and this does not help the employees who are made to undergo such training. Such employees become blasé and indifferent to training and have to be retrained to be active and effective participants.
Looking forward to your views.
Jeroo
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The idea of having a body judge the professional attributes and success in imparting training is excellent, but who would be the judges? How would the judges be judged?
Also, technical training can be judged on course content and method of delivery because there is very little difference in technical course content, though the approach to imparting the training differs, sometimes markedly.
But soft skills training is so different - both the course content and the methodology vary so much, how can you judge effectively? For instance, two trainers may have the same course content, but one merely lectures, reading from a set of notes, while the other constantly interacts with the participants, has case studies and role plays, and a completely interactive methodology. A judge who believes in lecturing will grade the first trainer as A and the second as C, while a judge who is into interactive training will judge the second trainer as A and the first as C. What is the solution?
Kushi
I agree with you - there are a number of courses on 'Train the Trainer' but mostly they are superficial and only for beginners. We need to have some sort of institute/body that can impart training to more senior trainers to keep them up to date with the latest trends in effective training. For instance, we have Evanjerik's excellent posting on how trainers should evolve. But we do not have such facilities here. Could Evanjerik perhaps assist us with working out how we can have such facilities?
All
Also, what do we do with inexperienced 'trainers' who are being inducted into large training institutes and foisted on unsuspecting companies who feel that a group of trainers may be more experienced and efficient than a single trainer who is a much better trainer?
Again, how do we 'educate' management to make the right choice when choosing external trainers and not relying on inadequate internal trainers?
This is not to say that an internal training unit is always unsatisfactory, but most are made up of less experienced trainers, and this does not help the employees who are made to undergo such training. Such employees become blasé and indifferent to training and have to be retrained to be active and effective participants.
Looking forward to your views.
Jeroo
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Evanjerik,
Wow, your reply was full of wisdom (not joking). I think you should take the initiative and start a 'train the trainer' program. This is very essential. Many people do conduct these programs, but some of them are way beyond the means of others in terms of pricing. I sincerely feel a forum should start on this.
Kushi, I think you asked about how one feels one has done justice to training (evaluating the trainer). Personally, I feel that when you are one with your group, you can sense whether you are reaching out or not. In fact, audiovisual aids are just tools that assist you; you cannot rely solely on them for your effectiveness.
Someone else (Karthik?) suggested a body for giving recognition/certification. I feel this will not work in our context. I have written about ISTD. Very few of our certifications are worth the paper they are printed on. I am sure I don't have to elaborate.
Training has become the trend now; everybody is a trainer, and the sanctity of the trainer has been lost. But then, if a few people like Evan can initiate, we can make the spark come alive.
Ciao,
Lisa
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Wow, your reply was full of wisdom (not joking). I think you should take the initiative and start a 'train the trainer' program. This is very essential. Many people do conduct these programs, but some of them are way beyond the means of others in terms of pricing. I sincerely feel a forum should start on this.
Kushi, I think you asked about how one feels one has done justice to training (evaluating the trainer). Personally, I feel that when you are one with your group, you can sense whether you are reaching out or not. In fact, audiovisual aids are just tools that assist you; you cannot rely solely on them for your effectiveness.
Someone else (Karthik?) suggested a body for giving recognition/certification. I feel this will not work in our context. I have written about ISTD. Very few of our certifications are worth the paper they are printed on. I am sure I don't have to elaborate.
Training has become the trend now; everybody is a trainer, and the sanctity of the trainer has been lost. But then, if a few people like Evan can initiate, we can make the spark come alive.
Ciao,
Lisa
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
If only I could have the opportunity to work in India, I could help a lot.
To Jeroo:
Thank you for the private message you sent. However, I'm sorry I have not come across any ebooks or posts that could help you hone your training skills.
To Kushisharma:
I cannot think of anything other than for you to attend a trainer's training if you want to update your skills, especially when it comes to effective delivery. But I would like you to know that effective delivery of training is not everything since you will be dealing only with one aspect.
If you are enrolling in a trainer's training program at one of the learning institutions there, I suggest checking first their course outline, the schedule or timing of the class, etc. The reason for this is that many learning organizations would throw in as many topics as they could to encourage you to enroll, but when the actual delivery comes, the speaker or trainer could only discuss a topic for 15-30 minutes which is not enough. You will feel short-changed.
To tell you the awful truth, good delivery by using different methodologies will not guarantee that "result in a change of behavior even much after the session" like what you said. If you are familiar with the Hawthorne Effect, you will know what I mean plus there are other factors to consider. Otherwise, a trainer (whether internal or external) who would say that his/her training program will result in a change of behavior is no good.
I am not trying to shoot myself in the foot here, but in my 16 years in training and development, I could say that I have not met a single person who would say that their behavior had changed because of training. Because if that were so, we would not meet any kind of resistance from the management. The bottom line is, a good training program cannot stand on its own or is not enough to bring about the needed change in an organization. Hence, there is something more of what is expected from a trainer as what I've written in my previous post.
To Hiren50:
Your post reminded me of my participants in my training classes in Effective Coaching. They always ask me the difference between training and coaching. Essentially, they are both the same but they are different in many ways. One, training is usually conducted in a formal classroom environment while coaching is not. Two, in training you can have a maximum of 20 participants from different departments while in coaching, you have to coach your own team or better, one or two individuals within your unit. Three, training can be conducted for no more than five days while a coaching program can run for a full year or until the coachee has satisfied the objectives of the program.
For the final point raised by Jeroo: "how do we 'educate' management to make the right choice when choosing external trainers and not relying on inadequate internal trainers?"
If management cannot rely on inadequate internal trainers to make the right choice when choosing external trainers, I can say sorry to that management since it is the responsibility of the internal trainer.
I started working here in a US company for about a year, and it is one of my responsibilities to find training institutions based on the needs of our company. There are training vendors that go directly to the line managers, but these managers rely on me to have the final word. But when I say no or yes, I need to justify it. I "educate" them by giving them a good picture of the situation based on the result of the TNA (organizational level) that I conducted vis-a-vis the program the training vendors are offering.
However, there is one important element that should be present before you can educate them -- trust.
From Saudi Arabia,
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
To Jeroo:
Thank you for the private message you sent. However, I'm sorry I have not come across any ebooks or posts that could help you hone your training skills.
To Kushisharma:
I cannot think of anything other than for you to attend a trainer's training if you want to update your skills, especially when it comes to effective delivery. But I would like you to know that effective delivery of training is not everything since you will be dealing only with one aspect.
If you are enrolling in a trainer's training program at one of the learning institutions there, I suggest checking first their course outline, the schedule or timing of the class, etc. The reason for this is that many learning organizations would throw in as many topics as they could to encourage you to enroll, but when the actual delivery comes, the speaker or trainer could only discuss a topic for 15-30 minutes which is not enough. You will feel short-changed.
To tell you the awful truth, good delivery by using different methodologies will not guarantee that "result in a change of behavior even much after the session" like what you said. If you are familiar with the Hawthorne Effect, you will know what I mean plus there are other factors to consider. Otherwise, a trainer (whether internal or external) who would say that his/her training program will result in a change of behavior is no good.
I am not trying to shoot myself in the foot here, but in my 16 years in training and development, I could say that I have not met a single person who would say that their behavior had changed because of training. Because if that were so, we would not meet any kind of resistance from the management. The bottom line is, a good training program cannot stand on its own or is not enough to bring about the needed change in an organization. Hence, there is something more of what is expected from a trainer as what I've written in my previous post.
To Hiren50:
Your post reminded me of my participants in my training classes in Effective Coaching. They always ask me the difference between training and coaching. Essentially, they are both the same but they are different in many ways. One, training is usually conducted in a formal classroom environment while coaching is not. Two, in training you can have a maximum of 20 participants from different departments while in coaching, you have to coach your own team or better, one or two individuals within your unit. Three, training can be conducted for no more than five days while a coaching program can run for a full year or until the coachee has satisfied the objectives of the program.
For the final point raised by Jeroo: "how do we 'educate' management to make the right choice when choosing external trainers and not relying on inadequate internal trainers?"
If management cannot rely on inadequate internal trainers to make the right choice when choosing external trainers, I can say sorry to that management since it is the responsibility of the internal trainer.
I started working here in a US company for about a year, and it is one of my responsibilities to find training institutions based on the needs of our company. There are training vendors that go directly to the line managers, but these managers rely on me to have the final word. But when I say no or yes, I need to justify it. I "educate" them by giving them a good picture of the situation based on the result of the TNA (organizational level) that I conducted vis-a-vis the program the training vendors are offering.
However, there is one important element that should be present before you can educate them -- trust.
From Saudi Arabia,
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Evan,
Some great suggestions from your end. I am sure you are a great mentor, and people who work with you are lucky! Well, another area that I believe is very important for trainers is to build a relationship of trust with the line managers.
Many times, line managers are reluctant to be involved in training efforts for their own teams, as they would rather focus on their sales or administrative work. They consider training to be the responsibility of the training division and want to stay away from it. Have you been through this? Moreover, if they have to report back the progress of the trainees, they are not very eager. They are reluctant and not accountable to the training division as they are not reporting to them.
Kushi
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Some great suggestions from your end. I am sure you are a great mentor, and people who work with you are lucky! Well, another area that I believe is very important for trainers is to build a relationship of trust with the line managers.
Many times, line managers are reluctant to be involved in training efforts for their own teams, as they would rather focus on their sales or administrative work. They consider training to be the responsibility of the training division and want to stay away from it. Have you been through this? Moreover, if they have to report back the progress of the trainees, they are not very eager. They are reluctant and not accountable to the training division as they are not reporting to them.
Kushi
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Great thoughts and sharing from my respected trainer friends on this topic. No doubt we had started from grass-root level, and now the discussion is at its peak.
Though some of my friends have international exposure on TA & DA and impart training in an international context, I am talking about the Indian context where most people are not aware of the powerful impact of training.
For real wonders, we have to inject awareness about the positive impact of training in our organization, and then we have to start the process.
As per my experience in the Indian context, you can deliver a powerful session and get expected results. How? Let me explain.
In India, people are very emotional in terms of relationships, and somehow they are emotionally engaged towards work and the organization.
But when it comes to training (as most companies are aware of its importance), employees feel the company thinks they are now incompetent for the job. This transforms their emotional engagement level into emotional disengagement, which affects productivity and attrition rates.
Here, it entirely depends on the trainer in which way the training process will move (referring to the "Training going cheap" article, as training is a new concept in India and in the stage of implementation).
So, being a trainer in the Indian context, you have to work on the following things for the implementation of learning and skills in the workplace:
1. YOU SHOULD BE SUBJECT MATTER SPECIFIC (AS MANY FRIENDS ARE SAYING IN THIS ARTICLE).
2. YOUR BODY LANGUAGE SHOULD REFLECT HOW POSITIVE YOU ARE ABOUT THIS PROCESS.
3. BEFORE THE TRAINING PROCESS, BUILD A POSITIVE REPO WITH EMPLOYEES WHOM YOU ARE GOING TO IMPART TRAINING.
4. YOUR PRESENTABILITY SHOULD BE SO HIGH THAT THEY WILL RELATE TO YOU WITH THEMSELVES. (YOU HAVE TO BE A ROLE MODEL FOR THEM FOR LONG-LASTING RESULTS).
5. Try to identify their mindset in the initial stage and speak with them at their level to make them comfortable.
6. Then hit their emotional engagement with your objective and relate it to their future growth (wrap up your objective according to their mindset rather than presenting it in a very formal manner).
7. ONCE THEY INTERACT WITH YOU, IT MEANS IT'S TIME TO START YOUR TRAINING PROCESS.
According to me, for a trainer, only one quality is enough, which is:
TO UNDERSTAND THE MINDSET OF THE PEOPLE BEFORE THE TRAINING PROCESS (SO THAT WE HAVE TN).
If you can identify the need, the rest is up to you. And a passionate trainer can only know the entire training process; others are just making training cheap.
Kushi: Dear, you are doing very well as you have written. I have only one thing to share for your enhancement in skills as a trainer, and that is, management never shows their willingness to upgrade in-house trainers as far as cost is concerned, as they do not know how vast the training area is. So, try to introduce new and creative ideas to make your people more productive and take management into confidence that your upgrade is very important if they want to make this training process continuous. I have done the same, and after that, they sponsored me for two courses related to training. At least you can try.
Whatever I have discussed is all about my experience, but I have never seen my training process incomplete. In my organization, people give real respect because I am using the relationship factor first and then all the technical things.
It's all about the Indian context of the training process, and I am enjoying my job as a training head because I am playing a coach role rather than a trainer role, and I will follow the same process again and again.
So, guys, it's all about your valuable sharing on this topic, and I am waiting for your response from my respected think tanks on the same.
Regards,
Rajeev Saini
Recently promoted to Training Head from Manager-Training
ARCHIES LTD
91-9911264568
Email: rajivs@archiesonline.com
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Though some of my friends have international exposure on TA & DA and impart training in an international context, I am talking about the Indian context where most people are not aware of the powerful impact of training.
For real wonders, we have to inject awareness about the positive impact of training in our organization, and then we have to start the process.
As per my experience in the Indian context, you can deliver a powerful session and get expected results. How? Let me explain.
In India, people are very emotional in terms of relationships, and somehow they are emotionally engaged towards work and the organization.
But when it comes to training (as most companies are aware of its importance), employees feel the company thinks they are now incompetent for the job. This transforms their emotional engagement level into emotional disengagement, which affects productivity and attrition rates.
Here, it entirely depends on the trainer in which way the training process will move (referring to the "Training going cheap" article, as training is a new concept in India and in the stage of implementation).
So, being a trainer in the Indian context, you have to work on the following things for the implementation of learning and skills in the workplace:
1. YOU SHOULD BE SUBJECT MATTER SPECIFIC (AS MANY FRIENDS ARE SAYING IN THIS ARTICLE).
2. YOUR BODY LANGUAGE SHOULD REFLECT HOW POSITIVE YOU ARE ABOUT THIS PROCESS.
3. BEFORE THE TRAINING PROCESS, BUILD A POSITIVE REPO WITH EMPLOYEES WHOM YOU ARE GOING TO IMPART TRAINING.
4. YOUR PRESENTABILITY SHOULD BE SO HIGH THAT THEY WILL RELATE TO YOU WITH THEMSELVES. (YOU HAVE TO BE A ROLE MODEL FOR THEM FOR LONG-LASTING RESULTS).
5. Try to identify their mindset in the initial stage and speak with them at their level to make them comfortable.
6. Then hit their emotional engagement with your objective and relate it to their future growth (wrap up your objective according to their mindset rather than presenting it in a very formal manner).
7. ONCE THEY INTERACT WITH YOU, IT MEANS IT'S TIME TO START YOUR TRAINING PROCESS.
According to me, for a trainer, only one quality is enough, which is:
TO UNDERSTAND THE MINDSET OF THE PEOPLE BEFORE THE TRAINING PROCESS (SO THAT WE HAVE TN).
If you can identify the need, the rest is up to you. And a passionate trainer can only know the entire training process; others are just making training cheap.
Kushi: Dear, you are doing very well as you have written. I have only one thing to share for your enhancement in skills as a trainer, and that is, management never shows their willingness to upgrade in-house trainers as far as cost is concerned, as they do not know how vast the training area is. So, try to introduce new and creative ideas to make your people more productive and take management into confidence that your upgrade is very important if they want to make this training process continuous. I have done the same, and after that, they sponsored me for two courses related to training. At least you can try.
Whatever I have discussed is all about my experience, but I have never seen my training process incomplete. In my organization, people give real respect because I am using the relationship factor first and then all the technical things.
It's all about the Indian context of the training process, and I am enjoying my job as a training head because I am playing a coach role rather than a trainer role, and I will follow the same process again and again.
So, guys, it's all about your valuable sharing on this topic, and I am waiting for your response from my respected think tanks on the same.
Regards,
Rajeev Saini
Recently promoted to Training Head from Manager-Training
ARCHIES LTD
91-9911264568
Email: rajivs@archiesonline.com
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Congratulations, Rajiv! 😊 It is great to hear about your promotion. I am sure it's a well-deserved one! So, how has your KRA changed in your new position? Would love to know how you plan to approach your new role.
Kushi 😊
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Kushi 😊
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Kushi,
Thanks!
Yes, responsibilities have increased but the flow is the same. Although I now have to delegate the work, it's not in my nature, so I will be working the same way I was working as Manager-Training.
While all the Key Result Areas (KRAs) are important to me, one is particularly crucial: handling all the location heads for the training process, including designing and delivering the training program, selecting the right trainers, and choosing the appropriate locations. Previously, I was responsible for delivering and managing the team of trainers for my region.
I am now feeling more energetic and putting in 200% effort into my new KRAs.
Once again, thank you for your wishes.
Regards,
Rajeev Saini
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thanks!
Yes, responsibilities have increased but the flow is the same. Although I now have to delegate the work, it's not in my nature, so I will be working the same way I was working as Manager-Training.
While all the Key Result Areas (KRAs) are important to me, one is particularly crucial: handling all the location heads for the training process, including designing and delivering the training program, selecting the right trainers, and choosing the appropriate locations. Previously, I was responsible for delivering and managing the team of trainers for my region.
I am now feeling more energetic and putting in 200% effort into my new KRAs.
Once again, thank you for your wishes.
Regards,
Rajeev Saini
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)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.
Training on effective Performance Management.pdf
Concepts of Effective Training Evaluation.ppt