Discussions are going on whether we should run after international certification when Indian ones could do the job. In training and development India's ISTD is the sole institution for awarding certificate in training and development. This establishment has been largely managed by Government and Public sector officials. For a country as large as India to meet the demands of a growing economy , Certification of domestic or international recognition is a necessity. So having a certification does make sense.
Training in India has evolved today. Most trainers follow pedagogy as a core principle. Since education in India has been more heads up than hands on (engineering colleges exist where labs are non-existent), it is not difficult to imagine the dismissal of applied knowledge or skill development training for the same fundamental indoctrination.Hence, discussions about certification usually range about the IQ aspect. A Wharton study had indicated that Indian managers scored the least internationally on managerial effectiveness. The score was 2.65 on a scale of 5.0, the benchmark was at 3.1.Most training and development leadership professionals are not qualified , unlike the west , where qualification and certification is considered important to step into the role.
While India has exported life changing transformational skills like yoga,and spiritualism , without any certification criteria, why should we be wanting certification now? I would think, the principal reason would be to go back to our roots and gurukul. This system of education recognised proficiency - look at music, dance where levels of proficiency is linked to experience and expertise. The ultimate being the acknowledgement of Pandit title. Since , we had it , let us regain it. Let us not be blind to the contribution of the western world on training and development. To play one against the other is like living in a fool's paradise. Opportunity lies in collaborating and blending both the streams for overcoming weaknesses in an exponential age.
Training in India has evolved today. Most trainers follow pedagogy as a core principle. Since education in India has been more heads up than hands on (engineering colleges exist where labs are non-existent), it is not difficult to imagine the dismissal of applied knowledge or skill development training for the same fundamental indoctrination.Hence, discussions about certification usually range about the IQ aspect. A Wharton study had indicated that Indian managers scored the least internationally on managerial effectiveness. The score was 2.65 on a scale of 5.0, the benchmark was at 3.1.Most training and development leadership professionals are not qualified , unlike the west , where qualification and certification is considered important to step into the role.
While India has exported life changing transformational skills like yoga,and spiritualism , without any certification criteria, why should we be wanting certification now? I would think, the principal reason would be to go back to our roots and gurukul. This system of education recognised proficiency - look at music, dance where levels of proficiency is linked to experience and expertise. The ultimate being the acknowledgement of Pandit title. Since , we had it , let us regain it. Let us not be blind to the contribution of the western world on training and development. To play one against the other is like living in a fool's paradise. Opportunity lies in collaborating and blending both the streams for overcoming weaknesses in an exponential age.
