Training programs and fostering continuous learning in a manufacturing facility is a critical component in any organization and costly...but businesses don't always evaluate the effectiveness of that training.  How do we determine the Return on Investment for in-plant and external training?  Should this not be part of your internal tracking?

Some points to ponder...

2008 Survey of Canadian Attitudes toward Learning indicate that financial considerations remain a key obstacle to work-related training.  For those that participated in formal training, they indicated that they would be more encouraged to participate 60% of the time if paid while training (not surprising), 55% would like help to pay for training costs, 45% want more relevant training available and 43% want more information available for training...interesting!

Did you know that less than 30% of adult workers in Canada participate in job-related training? This is significantly lower than the UK at 35% and 45% in USA!

Employers tend to invest more in learning programs for those who are already highly skilled then they do for less-skilled workers! Yet evidence suggests that when less-skilled workers are provided formal training, they benefit greatly, esp. when it leads to recognized credentials.

Some employers take the attitude that if the job is not being done well, they can replace the worker rather than provide training to improve their skills.  Is this the best use of your resources, financial and labour?

Source: http://www.ccl-cca.ca/CCL/Reports/Other+Reports/20080403RoundtableRptEmployerInvestmentinWorkplaceLearning.htm 

We considered in our discussion:

• What matrices are used to quanitify the effectiveness of your training efforts?
• How have you been able to develop a knowledge network to prepare for job shifting, lay-offs, downsizing, retirement, etc.?
• What software has been used to assist in tracking yoru training?

What resulted in our discussion is that some facilities measure training effectiveness by 'on the job results'.  If the task is completed efficiently then the thought was that training was effective. What wasn't occurring in all cases was a followup to the training to get a sense of retention of information.  If we use classroom work as an example, should we not be surveying the trainees immediately after the training, within 3 months after and again 6 months after, so that we understand whether we are getting true value or R.O.I.?

Challenges that manufacturing has is that while 'skills and performance' should dictate who will take over a new task (job posting), it is not always the case, as often facilities have agreements in place that seniority will be the mandate for who takes over a vacant position.  Are the companies best interest being served here?  How do you then qualify that this person is adequately trained and if you have a qualified trained person ready to step in, is this person then being held back?  How does that affect morale?

  Tracking programs:

• some use an in-house intranet program that the lead hands/supervisors use to track skill development
• use of PeopleTrack or TrainTrack software to manage who is trained in what jobs, and who needs redevelopment
• One member uses a 'Passport' book that each employee carries that they record job skills among other things
• Evaluation form offered by the Centre for Skills Development and Training was given as a useful means to organize your training effectiveness  ( see Burlington/Oakville Consortium page)

Sessions just like this one are great opportunities to improve what you are already doing well, accept assistance from your peers on your challenges and learn new ways of doing what you do without "re-inventing the wheel"!  If you haven't been out to an event to network with your peers yet...you are missing the boat.  These are excellent learning opportunities!!

See you next time.

Tim