Most organisations cut training expenses, whenever cost reduction is an imperative. During the recession, training expenses, manpower and associated costs bore the brunt. Now, when economic revival is visible, are companies spending on training? It appears that many organisations are following a cautious approach and training budgets are assigned after high degree of scrutiny and diligence. Decisions are now being taken at an executive level, even for a minor expense. Consider this paradox; most training expenses are booked as a measure of employee welfare rather than skill development solution. These days, several international training companies are doing good business, while the Indian ones are struggling to keep afloat. It appears that the certificate brand as perceived by the employee, as opposed to actual operation effectiveness and business impact is a key decision consideration. Often, training vendors are requested to submit a proposal to impart 1 day training as a part of a business meeting. No ADDIE here, period.
How did we get to this state of affairs?
In the earlier times, management trainee scheme was employed as an investment for developing the employee – using on the job exposure and classroom training, with a graduation like ceremony for successful completion and final placement. This was practiced in segments like Banking, FMCG and diversified groups like Tata’s. The businesses valued knowledge and skill in their command and control based organisation. With emergence of IT and OA in the early 80’s, Customer interactive skills like selling and client handling gained ground as a trend setting strategy used to educate the market- picked up from the pharmaceuticals. In the 90’s, when Indian economy opened its door, operations training through compliance requirements like ISO, six-sigma, CMMI, led corporate training as a measure to improve business competitiveness. As India moved ahead in this millennium, and information management driven through technology acquired high importance, measurement of performance got the focus. Since most business processes got automated (by-product of ISO and business process management) with better metrics management, training as a performance enabler got detached from the business performance. The metrics captured the outcome, but failed to capture the in process measures e.g. ., if “x” no of calls led to 1 order, (this got captured) but definition of a call standard was not. Since training enables better performance through modified behaviour (skill development), the enabling measure was missing. In the earlier days, this was well aligned. Take for example a repair technicians performance measure when post training intervention could impact repair at first call performance based on an acceptable standard. We now have a situation, that what get’s measured reflects the results but no further drill down is possible, because some of the process steps are missing. For training related intervention, many CEO’s fail to see the connection between training and performance due to absence of credible analytics.
How does the future hold?
Training will continue to be viewed as a dispensable performance enabler. Given the global business trends, the IBM CEO Study of 2010 indicates that people skills have reduced its importance from 2nd most to 4th position. It appears that training and development needs to redefine in the changing scheme of things. Focus , will shift from how well you do something to how well you know something, given, that further technological advancements may trigger solutions requiring little or low skills.
My two cents?
L&D must make the first move by talking metrics and talking performance. Vendors and training departments must collaborate to ensure that a feel good employee welfare workshop is not labelled training. Every Rupee spent in training must be measured for returns like any other investment. The function must necessarily help create and or facilitate measures that can accurately convey the impact of the training intervention by aligning skills to the business process. Take for example a measurement of a business meeting. The end outcome of this meeting could track participation index, decisions arrived, post meeting actions executed on time. If all of this is developed into a work process, a training intervention will reflect results. The important thing here is to get to this stage so that measures are aligned to the work process.
How did we get to this state of affairs?
In the earlier times, management trainee scheme was employed as an investment for developing the employee – using on the job exposure and classroom training, with a graduation like ceremony for successful completion and final placement. This was practiced in segments like Banking, FMCG and diversified groups like Tata’s. The businesses valued knowledge and skill in their command and control based organisation. With emergence of IT and OA in the early 80’s, Customer interactive skills like selling and client handling gained ground as a trend setting strategy used to educate the market- picked up from the pharmaceuticals. In the 90’s, when Indian economy opened its door, operations training through compliance requirements like ISO, six-sigma, CMMI, led corporate training as a measure to improve business competitiveness. As India moved ahead in this millennium, and information management driven through technology acquired high importance, measurement of performance got the focus. Since most business processes got automated (by-product of ISO and business process management) with better metrics management, training as a performance enabler got detached from the business performance. The metrics captured the outcome, but failed to capture the in process measures e.g. ., if “x” no of calls led to 1 order, (this got captured) but definition of a call standard was not. Since training enables better performance through modified behaviour (skill development), the enabling measure was missing. In the earlier days, this was well aligned. Take for example a repair technicians performance measure when post training intervention could impact repair at first call performance based on an acceptable standard. We now have a situation, that what get’s measured reflects the results but no further drill down is possible, because some of the process steps are missing. For training related intervention, many CEO’s fail to see the connection between training and performance due to absence of credible analytics.
How does the future hold?
Training will continue to be viewed as a dispensable performance enabler. Given the global business trends, the IBM CEO Study of 2010 indicates that people skills have reduced its importance from 2nd most to 4th position. It appears that training and development needs to redefine in the changing scheme of things. Focus , will shift from how well you do something to how well you know something, given, that further technological advancements may trigger solutions requiring little or low skills.
My two cents?
L&D must make the first move by talking metrics and talking performance. Vendors and training departments must collaborate to ensure that a feel good employee welfare workshop is not labelled training. Every Rupee spent in training must be measured for returns like any other investment. The function must necessarily help create and or facilitate measures that can accurately convey the impact of the training intervention by aligning skills to the business process. Take for example a measurement of a business meeting. The end outcome of this meeting could track participation index, decisions arrived, post meeting actions executed on time. If all of this is developed into a work process, a training intervention will reflect results. The important thing here is to get to this stage so that measures are aligned to the work process.
