Do Not Send Your Employees to Training
During my career in Human Resources, I have designed, delivered and managed countless training programs. However, during that time, I also saw an incredible amount of time and money wasted because someone thought that training was the answer, when they didn’t ask the right questions up front. So, I humbly implore you, DO NOT send your employees to training, unless you have considered the following;
Ask if training is really necessary
Could your employee do the job without additional training? If so, then just inserting them into a class to refresh what they already know might not make much of a difference in their performance). Ask the employee if they need to learn new skills, or gain additional knowledge, and how that would enable them to do their job better. If your employee can’t give you a good answer, then maybe the “root cause” of whatever it is that is preventing them from doing their best is something other than training.
In his book, “Why Employees Don’t Do What They Are Supposed to Do and What to Do About it,” Ferdinand Fournies outlines 16 distinct reasons why employees do not perform. Maybe there is no perceived reward for doing better, or maybe they don’t have the physical tools to do the job, or maybe they don’t feel they will be supported by management when they get back to their workplace, etc. So until you are confident the training will help your employee’s performance, don’t send your employees to training.
Ask the employee how he or she will use the training back on the job
Asking the employee how he or she will use the training back on the job, prior to sending the employee to the training, is a step most managers fail to take. Consider the power of such a question. Clearly, by asking such a question, the manager is setting an expectation that the employee will not only learn something, but the employee will apply the newfound knowledge or skills when they return to their workplace. Yes, it adds a bit of pressure on the employee. It also puts the employee on notice that there is an expectation that once they return, they will do things differently (better, faster, new, etc.), given their new knowledge or skill. Do not send your employees to training if you cannot set clear expectations of how that individual will apply the training when they return to their work environment.
Support the employees, setting clear expectations when they return from training
Far too often employees return from training and their manager (or fellow employees) will say, “yes, I understand that’s what you learned in training, but let me tell you how we do things here in this department.” It’s criminal that a training experience can be completely undermined by a manager or others by not reinforcing the learning when the employee comes back to work. If the training provided does not help improve performance, at a minimum, the manager has a fiduciary responsibility to let the trainer know that something needs to be adjusted to make the training a more valued-added experience for both the organization and the employee. However, sadly, sometimes, putting the training into practice is not encouraged back in the workplace.
Many years ago I worked for an organization that was very excited about the use of Statistical Process Control (SPC). They wanted EVERYBODY trained in SPC. They even sent their administrative staff to SPC training. A few months after training had been provided, I saw one of the “admins” and asked her, “Did you ever get a chance to put any of that training to good use?” She replied, “Are you kidding me? I mean, the training was fun, it was a nice break from work, I enjoyed spending time with co-workers, but we’re never going to use any of that stuff, we have too much other work to do.” So, unless you are going to hold employees accountable for training back on the job, and can show them how they can actually apply the training, please, don’t send them to training.
Conclusion
There is certainly a time and place for training. When your organization can’t find the skilled recruits it needs to do the job, they will have to be trained them once they get on board. When technology changes or new work processes are introduced, your existing staff will need to be trained. And when a front line employee is promoted into the ranks of management, that individual will certainly need training. However, if they can already do the job without additional training, if you fail to set clear expectations up front regarding how the training will be used, and, if the training will not be reinforced back on the job, then please, don’t send your employees to training.
On a final note, I do want to emphasize the importance of training your employees, when it’s the right training, delivered at the right time, and reinforced back on the job. Once upon a time I had a very senior manager complain to me, “I don’t see why we even bother to train our employees! They are just going to leave us anyway.” This begs the question, “Would you rather have well trained staff who might leave, or untrained staff that will remain with you?” Clearly, you want employees who know how to do their job and do it well. Now, if they are leaving, if you are experiencing high levels of turnover, that is not a training issue…. It’s a management issue. And that is the subject of another article. I wish you well with your business.
Kevin Panet currently serves as the Director of Human Resources for a large hotel in Los Angeles. He has a master of science degree in Human Resources leader management, and a bachelor of science degree in Business Administration, both from Chapman University. Kevin holds a SPHR-CA (Senior Professional in Human Resources with California certification) and a SHRM-SCP (Society for Human Resources Management – Senior Certified Professional) designation. He has taught courses in Human Resources for the University of Redlands, Los Angeles Valley College, and has taught the PHR/SPHR exam prep course for over two years. He is also an active member of PIHRA (Professionals In Human Resources Association), serving as the Technology and Social Media chair on the board of directors for the Burbank/Glendale PIHRA district. Kevin is also a member of the Society for Human Resources Management (SHRM) and the Los Angeles Affiliate of the National Human Resources Association (NHRA). In his spare time, he enjoys hiking, backpacking, camping and photography. Kevin can be reached at Kevin@KevinPanet.com.
Seeker of purple unicorns, sharer of smiles, high-fiver of life!
9yIf training must occur, please ensure donuts are available. :)
Ecommerce | Marketing | Customer Services| Body Builder | Manage Properties
9yVery good and interesting point, I agree with it
Entrepreneur
9yGood points. In my opinion, training is attached to a career regardless of the managerial points of view. I understand the points from managerial side (to reduce the cost, lean thinking m, etc...); however, the "process of injection" (training) is the art of any employer to make the employee satisfy, confident, valuable, recognizable, motivated, and important to work. Now after few years of working for the Gov. and taking so so many unnecessary but expensive training courses which were paid by tax-payers, I also appreciate such articles, and agree with your concept somehow. Thanks for unveiling it and bringing up facts to the table.
Senior People Operations and Culture/Human Resources Professional
9yKevin good article overall and some very salient analysis points. I would add that one of the major additional factors i having employees going to training is that of employee goodwill. Very hard to quantity directly into dollars, but allowing or even encouring employees to go to training is invaluable in how the employee/s not only value/s the opportunity, but also the goodwill factor that the company cares enough to have the employee go to training for career growth and development