No training needs analysis is possible?

Have you ever felt like your training department is not being very favored? Or not consulted very often in corporate strategic decisions. In most businesses, the role of the training department does not make a difference or competitiveness for human resources.
Sometimes Training Manager only manages department including… themselves. They both directly lead lectures, plan training, measure training effectiveness, etc. This shows how small the "role" of training is in business.

It's not that management doesn't recognize the role of employee training and development. Before I talk to the management department, I want to look at the training department itself. Perhaps because they did not give any convincing evidence, practical solutions and demonstrated the impact of training on strategy or simply the business development of the company. Should not get the attention as well as being "appreciated" properly.

What are some of the problems that the training department has encountered?

Insufficient expertise or teaching requirements do not allow “to do more”.

Most Trainers have only expertise in Sales or Soft Skills, Leadership. And in-house Trainers mostly train on company knowledge (products, services, etc.) and soft skills, motivation, etc. The remaining topics need to invite experts (SME - Subject Matter Expert) to train. However, a specialist is not a Trainer. As a result, they lack effective instructional skills. Courses organized by SMEs lack a coherent structure in activities, tend to share knowledge and information rather than creating meaningful effects on learners.

And even when internal experts (managers, who have good expertise), after being trained with TTT (Train the Trainer) to be able to build courses for the company and instruct, it is effective. not really outstanding either. The reason may be that they are not really interested in training others, or do not have the time to invest in building a well-established course (using only instructional tricks like how to attract listeners, organize how it works, etc.). Therefore, the training is also ineffective.

The effect of most cases of SME inviting or self-trained managers is usually only at Reaction level (according to the 4-level training performance evaluation model - KirkPatrick). Maybe during the learning process, teachers share certain information that students are interested in. And just like that, the course also received a positive feedback right after the end. However, these responses are only emotional. In fact, if learners remember their knowledge, apply it or not, whether their behavior and quality of work have changed or not, ... only they know.

Training has no roadmap

I have seen many cases of applying for training topics or pathways from other companies to apply to my company. Or just search for a few days wandering the internet for topics to fit into the so-called "training path." The sources can be on topics such as “Essential soft skills for sales staff”, or you can also get from industry summary reports at O ​​* NET to learn job descriptions and job descriptions. Competency framework comes with and offers relevant training topics (of course, it is not suitable for the Vietnamese market because the positions are not "mature" enough as in developed countries).

Of course this approach will not work, because even if two companies in the same industry, the same size of personnel, the same product, it is not possible to apply the same training path. Because, they will never have the same personnel with personality traits, qualifications, etc.

Beneficiaries do not participate in training decisions

Business goals are very important, as they help guide the goals of each department and location. Having those goals, coupled with an analysis of the current situation, leads to a meaningful training path. If there is a training roadmap, then employees can see that they are invested in by the company, have development opportunities for themselves and for the whole company. Turnover rate will also decrease.

Despite knowing that, in reality, department heads and employees are not aware of the importance of staff training. And even the training department does not help communicate this problem to the departments effectively to coordinate with each other in staff training.

The training department is less likely to advise the department when it receives a training request. Can merely the departments submit the list of required training topics. And the training staff only synthesized and put into the year training plan (Annual Training Plan). Psychological at this time, maybe because the training department thinks that they are not competent enough to judge whether the topic is necessary or not (especially when it is related to the specialized knowledge of the department), so Nor do they question the correct analysis of these training requirements. And when looking for training partners, the training department does not often call for the management of the beneficiary departments to evaluate “offered” courses for appropriate choices.

In addition, for the most part, department heads with no training expertise will not be able to see the sunken parts of the ice that their department is facing. For example, they observe that employees are not excited, or push responsibilities, immediately request Teamwork Skills training, or organize Team Building, or motivation courses. However, those manifestations are only the tip of the problem. The downside may be that they are dissatisfied with the management, or the remuneration policy, etc.

The impact of training on the company's business and development cannot be assessed

If the input standard is not there, there will be no rating for the output. So, as mentioned above, the Reaction level is not enough to speak of the effectiveness of the training as it is emotional. The remaining levels need information about development goals, business, broader statistics from beneficiaries to see the big picture of training effectiveness. Above all, the management's "investment" language is money. The money you spend will get what value, it is better to ... money. It could be a cost savings in the long run or more revenue. Either way, it should aim to measure the ROI (Return on Investment) of training activities.

The 4 shortcomings listed above are just from the perspective of "accepting mistakes" first for the training department and not to mention the level of responsibility of other departments and individuals in the business. ensure effective training. However, regarding the above 4 shortcomings, most of them derive from the training needs analysis (TNA) from the beginning.

Some of the benefits of implementing TNA include:

Is identifying the human resource problem solved by training or should it be in some other way? (In the example of staff who are not excited or well coordinated, can training on team-building or teamwork if they don't have these skills.But if personal motivation, HR policy, or workload is too much leading to burnout fatigue, then it should be resolved by other means)

Identifying training problem is really essential "Need" is required (ASK - Behavior, Skills, Knowledge) for the position to be trained. It is not the "Want" needs of individuals or groups of employees, but has no direct effect on their work performance.

If the solution is through training, what activities should be included in the training plan. Is just one course going to solve the problem?

Identify what the post-training goals should be.And what do these goals mean for your business?

What are the options for training that can be applied to solve the training problem? (e-learning, blended learning, ILT - Instructor-led Training, micro learning, v.v)

Helping measure and measure between training solutions based on specific evaluation criteria. Criteria that can be used to evaluate include cost, time, human resources, investment technology, influence and effectiveness of each method on training issues, etc.

Help guide the training content for learners to have the right choice of content, partners and lecturers.

The basic questions that TNA should answer include:

> How big is the current Performance Gap of an employee compared to the expected performance level. Is it because of the lack of Behavioral - Knowledge - Skills factors?

> Is the feasibility of the training solution (Feasibility Analysis), the answer to the investment cost issue worthy of the results received?

> The problem of being asked for training is the desire / suggestion of the individual or the group, or the requirement for the business (Needs vs Wants Analysis)?

> Specifical goals Analysis after training

> To complete a certain job well, what things employees must do (subtasks) and whether they are able to do it well?(Job/Task Analysis).

> The training issue is only applicable to a specific group of employees, or can the beneficiaries / training be extended to other departments or ranks.(Target Population Analysis)?

> Contextual analysishas effect on training that can affect?

At this point, we can see how great the impact of TNA on training is.

"TNA is the source and the reason for the effective implementation of training activities."

Knowing that, but it can be said that "no one does a TNA". Some of the reasons given by training departments or corporate clients for not implementing a TNA include:

1. Employees do not work effectively, probably due to inability. Training should always be identified as the only solution to problem solving. - Certainly the problem is never that simple, it is necessary to find out the root cause and choose the right solution whether in any industry or any problem in the business.

2. There was no time to do TNA. At the beginning of the month of issuing training requirements, the end of the month had to organize the completed teaching. - The training department should find a way to shorten the TNA process or distribute the work in a long-term perspective, focus on real-time data collection or periodically monthly / quarterly. For when analytical information is needed, there is already some data available to use.

3. The TNA process is too complicated to implement . - The training department can focus on middle managers - Middle Managers or direct management - Line Managers to analyze problems encountered and identify sources of information that can be quickly gathered to support. TNA process.

4. TNA is too costly . - There are many TNA methods, please research and choose the one that suits the company's budget.

5. Training department has no "voice" with managers . - Do research about your own company and increase the understanding of the work of the departments. At the same time, change the language of communication with the management department from "training language" to "business language", that is to talk about Costs - How benefits for them.

6. There are training plans available, no need to implement TNA . - If you have "missed" holding the lights to run in front of the car, you should still perform TNA during training implementation to collect data for future training decisions.

To sum ip, no training needs analysis is not allowed.

Kimmie Phan - Training Content Development Specialist at MVV - Instructionaldesign-vietnam.com