2

Here is a link to the published journal and article

Building Your Training House from the Ground Up
Courtney Pittman, M.Ed.

Pittman, C. (2017). Building your training house from the ground up. Journal of Training, Design, and Technology, 1(1), 7-8.

1.0  Do you Have a Foundation?

Training is a strategic and thoughtful practice. Part of this practice is analysis which is the foundation of your training program and ever present in many popular learning methodologies such as ADDIE and SAM. Unfortunately, an increased emphasis on training as an end-goal or a cure-all causes many organizations to bypass the initial analysis phase and subsequently, undermine their training foundation. I have been very fortunate to have not have seen this in my career. Developing a training program can be an intimidating endeavor. You don’t have to be an expert trainer by any means to create a program, you will not have all the answers and that’s ok. 

The key is to surround yourself with people who have the foresight to ask the correct questions and an understanding of the development process (or the building process). This entails asking important questions that are conducive to developing a solid training ground. Clear direction and clarification on what the ask is, from a project management perspective; can often result in a successfully executed training plan and a steadfast structure. Let’s look exactly what analysis in training and development entails. 

2.0 Building Your Structure: Clarifying the Ask Through Analysis

The word “analysis” in training and development can be misleading. Analysis is essentially a facet of planning not statistical compilations. Training often stems from a need of some sort. An organization must be able to identify and analyze what that need is. From the need, clearly-defined goals or SMART Goals (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic and Time-Bound) are formulated (please see example below). 

Example: Five percent increase in academic performance of all students in Grades 5-8 in mathematical problem solving as measured on the state-assessment test given at Grade 7 and on school-based performance tasks given at Grade 5-8. (Killion, 2008)

SMART Goals allow you to visualize what your training program will look like and provides consistent metrics. It’s difficult to measure what you can’t visualize (imagine how difficult it is to visualize what an unbuilt home looks like without a blueprint) and it’s also difficult to measure goals when they’re subject to change on a moment’s notice (or when the architect decides to change the blueprint numerous time). Here are questions to ask prior to developing any training program:

·        Why are we training?

·        Who is the training for?

·        What is the goal of the training?

·        What should the training look like?

·        What is the knowledge/skills gap between what the learner currently knows and what they need to know

·        How urgent is the need for training?

·        Does it make sense to execute a training program? (We’ll discuss this later)

·        Does training bring value to the organization?

·        How often should we evaluate the program, what are we evaluating, does the metrics make sense, what tools should be used to evaluate?

·        Are your deadlines feasible? (Proper time needs to be allocated for development. Some programs can take several weeks to several months depending upon the amount of stakeholders involved)

These questions may appear overwhelming, but having a strategic plan that is carefully executed is essential
.

3.0 Repairing Structural Damage: Cautionary Tale  

Earlier I referenced whether establishing a program makes sense (Think about it, is building a home the answer for an individual asking for transportation, of course not!). One must always be mindful that there are matters training can and cannot fix. A common misconception is that training or team-building exercises are always a viable solution to mitigating deeply embedded personnel/organizational issues (or structural damage). An idiosyncrasy of adult learning is that adults must have a reason to want engage in training. If the training does not impact the learner on a personal level, their behavior will remain consistent. Training alone cannot drastically alter a disengaged employee or leader, for example. If the employee or leader is unhappy with the work or feels disconnected from the organization, no amount of training is going to change that unfortunately; comparatively, if an employee or leader has poor communication skills, this is likely a behavior that has been permissible over an extended period and no amount of training can “fix” this either. I use these examples of communication and engagement as they are common training topics. What will eventually happen is those individuals will go through training or team-building and continue the same behavior that brought them into training in the first place. For this reason, it is essential that not only the need for training be analyzed, but whether training is an appropriate tool. Seeking training as a fix also reinforces the concept that training is a means to an end as oppose to a tool that supports continuous growth.

Hopefully, you have an idea and know what tools you need to start building your dream training program. Training, just as a house, is an investment requiring manpower, funding and planning. Always leave the offer to build on the table, plan strategically, allocate your resource effectively and, finally, know when to abandon a structure and seek alternate solutions. Happy building!

Citations

Killion, J. (2008). Assessing impact: Evaluating staff development (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Corwin Press.

Courtney Pittman is a Phoenix-based Instructional Designer and E-Learning Technologist. She has decade of experience in the educational sector and holds a Master’s in Education with a concentration in Adult Leaning from the Johns Hopkins University School of Education-Center for Technology in Education