Building an inclusive training system (part 8)

In the information age, the time to produce training will decline. Why? It becomes more of a pulling tougher via a DLM© system the information needed. There are three distinct types of training that exist today and few others that are emerging.

· ILT – lecture

· Self-guided

· OJT – on the job

Mentors fit into both self-guided and ILT. The impact of mentoring though has to be measured on the larger scale of solving the problem rather than the smaller scale of content and delivery. ILT is measured today wholly on content and delivery. OJT is measured on the longer term solving the problem. There are professions today, that have for many years, required a significant OJT portion. People will say yes, plumbers, contractors and so on. But that actually is only part of that story. Social Workers, Doctors and Nurses all have significant pre-license practice before they are allowed to offer services outside of a managed environment. Those professions (and others) measure the ability of the student to solve the problem before they are called a practitioner.

Building feedback loops within the training system also has to include separation of roles and functions. Technical training focused on building technical skills fast may quickly overwhelm a non-technical person attempting to add or improve skills. Based on that their entry point (knowledge 1 say) was too low for the course. So pre- course knowledge assessments are important. First off because it helps you determine where the person ends up

Training

Learning starting point

Learning mid-point

Learner end point

Feedback loops

Introductory topic

0 or 1

1

2

Information met initial needs (yes/no)

Further guidance needed

Training focused on practitioners

4 or 5

5

6

Training met needs (yes/no)

Further guidance needed (mentor or additional training)

Experienced person training

7 or 8

8

9

Creative experts. Two -way training (capture information from experienced person as well as deliver)

Now the more experienced the users that are being trained the less reliance on direct user quality of training feedback. Experts or those with significant expertise tend to have the most negative views of the actual trainer. So you have to discount the 1’s and 2; s given the trainer based on the seniority of the people being trained.

imageWhen considering the feedback delivered in the loop itself we can create a loop within the feedback loop. This is where we take feedback and apply additional loops. Is the feedback applicable (I.e. senior people when trained tend to be more negative)? The other side of the feedback before considering rebuilding the training is the reality of actionable. Can we act on the feedback given for the training? That ability to act or not act also

determines the applicably of the feedback. Cutting edge technology training that receives a feedback of more hands on may not be feasible. But an existing system that has been in operation that gets the feedback more hands on training, is more applicable. This is a common system today although very few training teams would acknowledge this. The problem is the reality of actionable. Frankly, actionable often runs head on into the greatest blocker to organizational improvement there has ever been. That, is not the way we do things.

.doc

Trainer, dreamer, inventor of The Syncverse