Improve Training - By Teaching Employees To Learn

Monday 11 February, 2008

(Author Credits)

Corporate training usually teaches information and material, instead of teaching employees how to learn and then how best to apply what they've learned. So what should businesses do?

Corporate training today teaches employees what to learn, not how to learn. Minimal attention is paid to how the brain and mind work to create learning.
If something is not working in a company, training specialists are brought in to improve or upgrade the courses. New programs are sought, written and bought in hopes that this will improve the quality of training for the employees.
Most corporate training programs try to cover a wide variety of topics related to a major theme. There are actually two approaches trainers take:

1. Broad and shallow training - The most popular one seems to be to cover a lot of topics in a single training session. This results in barely scratching the surface for each topic.
   
   
2. Narrow and deep training - This is where you cover only up to three topics during a training session and go into depth on those three. Attendees will learn more, have more chance to apply what they learn, and be better able to transfer what they learned.
   
   

As you can guess, businesses will get more "bang for their buck" using narrow and deep training techniques than the "hit and run" tactics of broad and shallow training. This is the real secret to successful corporate training.
To get the most out of your training dollars:

1. While the CEO may know what has to be learned, ask the employees what and how they want to learn. They will be more motivated to learn if you do this.
   
   Has anyone taken into consideration the best ways for the employees to acquire, absorb and retain the material? More often than not, the answer is a resounding NO!
   
   
2. Consider observation tests after each training session to determine if the information was absorbed and transferred to a real-world situation.
   
   Take a look at the tests used after a training program. The implication is that passing these tests indicates the employees possess a certain level of intellectual competency and should be able to implement what they were taught back on the job.
   
   
3. Job specific skills training may not always be what is required for more productivity. Sometimes, soft skills are more important.
   
   The company may decide that employees need training in job‑specific skills, management skills, finance, customer service, quality improvement, leadership, and the like. Actually, these are the educational areas the company needs, not necessarily the people.
   
   
4. Teaching of primarily facts, figures and information will not always lead to performance improvements.
   
   For many people, there's little or no real world application to these facts, figures and information, even if the program includes experiential activities. Furthermore, unless people have been taught how to learn, the material or skills learned during the training session may not be absorbed or transferable. 
    
   Source:ceoonline.com