You have seen it before – sending managers, leaders, employees to training courses only to see no changes in performance or their impact on the business itself. Training is supposed to somehow infuse both the motivation and skills to be applied back on the job. If that does not seem to happen, why did we do it? Is the training flawed? Did they not apply what they have learned? Was it poor training? Are they too busy with the problems of the day?
Maybe we should forget about training and save the budgeted funding.
Sound familiar? Let’s look at some leader mindsets commonly observed around training.
-We do not need to train our people – we hire only capable talent. “They learn on the job whatever they need to know.”-That it is a naturally good thing for an organization to offer training occasionally. “Training might sometimes be useful.”
-That employees are entitled to some cursory training every year. “We value our people – training shows them we care.”
-That if training is good, attendees will figure out how to apply it on the job. “If training can’t deliver that, why should we bother?”
-That training is the solution for identified poor performers. “We wait for performance to falter then we train to correct that.”
-That well-trained employees are a departure risk. “If we train them, they’ll take their skills somewhere else.”
-That we can just train everybody in things. “That’s the most cost-effective way to train – carpet-bombing” (i.e., Train everybody in Seven Habits…)
1) Training is not a luxury. The need for soft skills and job-specific skills has never been stronger. Management needs to seriously recognize development needs through focused inquiry.
2) Training is not a commodity to be offered when there is time. Training aligns the specific knowledge, skills, abilities necessary for performance to occur.
3) Training is not magic. The skills and abilities that need application must be cultivated, guided before and after the classroom.
4) Training is not a fallback for performance issues after the fact. If we send someone to training who was poorly equipped to begin with, was not communicated to clearly on expectations or who’s performance is substandard, we are really assigning them to a “Gulag” of punishment, often in place of effective managerial interaction.
5) Sr. leaders need active involvement if training is to work. Communicating learning expectations, working to guide back-on-the job application and feedback are required if training is to “Work.”
6) Training is only a part of the performance equation. Job-assessed performance requirements, employee assessments of defined skills, abilities, training that links these, on the job coaching and feedback and ongoing performance assessment are integral.
7) Training requires an investment of both time and funding. To assert “We don’t have time for training.” Really? Ever been too busy to stop for gas? Are you too busy winning games to coach players?
I. Build an inventory of jobs, positions which are priorities for their impact on organizational performance. Build a plan to target them accordingly.
II. Gain sharp clarity on the role expectations, knowledge, skills, abilities, mindsets (KSAs) required for performance. Do not assume “everybody knows those.”
III. Conduct a person-specific comparison of required KSAs versus actual. Though nobody will be in the same KSA “Location”
IV. Make a concerted effort to specify required performance, KSA learning expectations, support for such and how progress will be monitored.
V. For training courses, be very clear on specifically what is to be learned, how it will be applied upon return to the job and how performance thereafter will be supported and monitored. This comes from management.
VI. Develop and deploy managerial oversight processes that bring coaching and feedback to bear and ensure that learning, application, and performance rise to expectations for a position.
What About Behaviors and Attitudes?
Can attitudes be trained?
No, but required behavior and associated expectations can. The US Marine Corps is a shining example of “I don’t care what your attitude is” yet performance expectations are clearly communicated and adhered to consistently. That’s not to say the culture of the military is superior, rather that they have mastered the art of behavioral management.
The key is in clear communication of expectations, accountability for efforts to learn, apply, build performance and an observe and guide loop of developmental feedback by managers of performers.
Companies that make employee performance a priority have a clear focus on what management must do before and after training is engaged by employees. Training is a dynamic tool for performance improvement but only if it is managed properly and viewed as part of a development process rather than an event that comes and goes.
Employee, manager, and leader performance is a function of clear expectations, an integrated approach to build required capabilities, proper resourcing for training, coaching, feedback and engaging development as a priority part of organizational performance.
Managerial understanding of these is critical to any training strategy.
Leave A Comment