June 2007
Executive Summaries
Simulations: Slowly Proving Their Worth
By Michael Laff
With the emergence of simulation as a preferred tool to train employees to learn tactical or even intangible skills, there remain some holdouts who shudder at the cost of the design and development of simulations or blanch at the thought of allowing employees to play “games” at the office.
For many institutions, particularly the United States military and the medical field, simulations are standard methods of training. For more conservative employers, leaders still must overcome their resistance to the concept. T+D asked three simulation experts to weigh in on the progress of simulations and their rate of adoption in the workplace.
“Unfortunately most employers still fail to see the value of simulations,” says Brad Sugars, founder of ActionCOACH. “It’s not difficult to understand why. Simulations frequently take more time than conventional training, and they usually don’t seem to be directly related to the learning task at hand. If you’re using a high-rope exercise to teach people to take risks, for example, it’s a challenge for many people to see how that can contribute to increased sales, better ideas, and more effective employees.”
FREE PDF
Synergizing HR and Training
By Tim Sosbe
Recent research forecasts an ongoing convergence of training and human resources operations, all coalescing into a broader talent management function. It’s integration; it’s a holistic approach; it’s synergy.
ASTD and Brandon Hall Research recently conducted an online poll toexamine the relationship between the training and HR departments in today’s business world. Of the 340 respondents, 52 percent work for organizations where training is governed by HR, while 25 percent are in separate but equal departments.
For those supporting the move to broader people management, the news was good. Sixty percent of respondents believe training and HR operations are converging in their organizations with 90 percent predicting that trend will continue.
The survey also finds that many common talent management functions are owned by either the HR or training departments, or they are currently shared, but it also finds that some are managed differently, including at the department level by individual managers.
PURCHASE ARTICLE
PODCAST
Are You at Risk?
By John A. Sample
The latest legal nightmare for professionals in human resources and workplace learning is the liability associated with training.
According to the Third Annual Litigation Trends Survey by Fulbright and Jaworski, labor and employment law disputes increased dramatically from 26 percent in 2005 to 48 percent in 2006. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) reports that 75,768 discrimination complaints were filed in 2006, the highest increase since 2002. Complaints based on race continue to be the most common, followed by gender, retaliation, disability, age, and national origin. Additionally, a record-breaking 15 percent of harassment allegations were made by men in 2006.
Improving job performance is not the only goal for workforce learning programs. Effectively designed, implemented, and documented training has the potential to reduce or prevent liability for an employer. This translates into fewer workplace-related injuries and deaths attributed to negligent training and supervision, reduced worker’s compensation claims and litigation costs, fewer complaints alleging civil rights violations, and a reduction of unethical conduct and financial mismanagement claims, including prosecution of businesses and their senior managers for criminal activities.
Given the trend toward increasing litigation, employers should hire competent instructional designers, trainers, and program evaluators. It is not in the best interest of our profession to have state and federal lawmakers script content and instructor qualifications.
PURCHASE ARTICLE
PODCAST
Mass Customizing the Training Industry
By Stephen L. Cohen and B. Joseph Pine II
Mass customization surfaced more than a decade ago with the publication of several books and articles that extolled the virtues of treating all customers differently, and is now becoming endemic in industries as diverse as personal computers, shoes, apparel, eyewear, and information. It is not about market segmentation. It is about truly understanding the specific needs of each and every customer and then bringing together the right combination of training modules to provide the customers the solution that they really want and need.
Connecting on an individual customer level is no easy task in the world of training because our two customer sets, the buying organization and the learners, have different and sometimes conflicting needs. So how can we create learning programs that fit the individual needs of learners and simultaneously address the client organization’s challenges? Is it possible to cost-effectively produce customized programs exclusively for one-to-one learning? We believe so.
First, it is important to understand that the underlying motivation behind mass customization is scalability. It facilitates high-volume, efficient production and delivery of unique customer-driven solutions.
While the basic principles of mass customization apply to all mass-customized offerings, there are many different ways in which they can be implemented.
PURCHASE ARTICLE
Building a Talent Pipeline
By Barbara Goretsky and Deborah B. Pettry
When Jack Northrop started his airplane manufacturing business in 1939, he had no idea that it would become a global defense and technology company with more than 122,000 employees worldwide.
After a decade of mergers and acquisitions concluded in 2003, Northrop Grumman acquired 22 different companies and divided them into eight business sectors. Integrating the various cultures into one enterprise became a top strategic priority for the company.
As the company continued to shape its strategy, it confronted some of the same challenges its competitors did in finding, developing, and retaining talent. The company offers knowledge-intensive work that attracts scientists, engineers, computer scientists, and skilled production employees seeking opportunities to contribute to national security efforts.
However, it was apparent that future employees would be in short supply when many current employees retire in the near future. Northrop Grumman’s problem was further complicated by a talent pool that is smaller than in many other industries because most of the company’s work requires national security clearances, which require engineers and scientists to be United States citizens.
PURCHASE ARTICLE
Career Insecurity
By Anne Baber and Lynne Waymon
The constant fear of downsizing, mergers, and outsourcing debilitates and distresses the people you’re counting on to get the job done. If your organization has laid people off, employees fear that lightning will strike twice in the same place. If your organization has avoided a layoff, people worry that their workplace might be next.
Nearly everyone in America knows a family member, friend, or neighbor who has been “let go.” No industry seems immune to the epidemic. As the pundits argue about the details of economic forecasts, most employers concede that the promise of a gold watch has been replaced by the possibility of a pink slip.
So, how can you enable your employees to take charge of their own careers and prepare for an uncertain future? A shift in the business climate is forcing employees to focus all their energy on being ready to make a living no matter what organizational earthquakes erupt.
Your attitudes and actions will set the pace as people in your organization adjust their beliefs and behaviors to the realities of the new workplace. When you switch from defending the disappearance of job security to initiating dialog about what constitutes the new career security, you’ll be empowering people in your organization to be “eager to stay and prepared to go.”
PURCHASE ARTICLE
The Human Element of Successful Training
By Keith Ferrazzi and Lisa Gatti
Studies have shown that developing deep, genuine relationships—both internally among co-workers and externally with partners and customers—is one of the most important skills we can have.
However, over the years, the role of HR seems to place a priority on resource management and processes over people in the aggregate. If we understand the primacy of human relationships, then the “people as cattle” philosophy should change. Putting the “human” back into our HR role begins with us.
As vital as relationship building is to a company’s success, it remains the one skill most often overlooked in training curricula. While tomes have been written about how to teach skills to employees of all ranks, there is almost no training or professional development that teaches the important skill of how to build and manage strategic relationships both inside and outside the workplace.
In a corporate setting, the peer-to-peer learning model functions as a skills training ground where individuals practice these behaviors by learning how to communicate openly, trust one another, and challenge each other in a safe, constructive setting. This atmosphere of collective thinking elevates the level of discussion for all tasks, and training professionals can then use the model to deliver any type of instructional content or any learning that requires sustainable behavioral change.
PURCHASE ARTICLE
BACK TO JUNE 2007