Someone does not measure up to your expectations? What do you do? Fire them? Fire yourself for not hiring them properly in the first place?
Well, the time-honoured HR solution to the capability problem is to train them.
Nothing wrong with that at all, I hear you say? No, except there are some faulty assumptions built into the antidote. Firstly, that training will actually make them more capable. Secondly, that they actually want and have the capacity to learn.
Training is also a highly political issue, especially in public services, where it is sometimes used as a sop for poor performance, with thousands of people who don’t wish to learn anything sent for mandatory training, just to keep corporate scoreboards straight.
Finally, the training itself can be of such poor quality that the probability of learning anything is zero. In the words of Ian Dury "What a waste!"
So, what is the great leap forward to make learning worthwhile? It’s very straightforward and needs to be done in this order:
- Identify what needs to be learned – in other words, start with the diagnosis rather than the prescription.
- Identify and navigate obstacles to learning – factors within the person such as their preferred learning style, opportunities to practise at work, support from the boss and so on.
- Identify the best learning method – like Heinz foods there are at least 57 ways to learn – Peter Honey would say 101. A training course is just one approach – not always the best.
- Just do it – deliver learning using the best method, addressing particular obstacles, targeting specific needs and providing opportunities to practice and apply the learning.
That said, some people start at step 4 – they send someone on a training course, when they are unclear what they are expected to learn, there may be obstacles to learning and a course is not the best solution. This is quite simply a waste of time and money.
In the words of post-punk disco and crooning phenomenon George Michael ‘If you’re gonna do it, do it right’ (from the great song ‘Freedom’).
I grant you that the antidotes to this problem are common sense, yet they are not commonly applied. These issues are multiplied many times over when we are considering becoming a learning company rather than a bunch of learning individuals. Collective learning is much harder.
Revisit classic ideas by looking at the work of Peter Senge and Tom Peters in this area.
In Punk Rock People Management I ask you to snap ourselves out of the trance that says training is inherently good and offer you three chords on training:
- Decide whether training is needed in the first place by getting to grips with the learning needs. Recognise that there are many ways to learn and training is just one. Fit the method to the need – not the reverse.
- If training is the answer, do it well, by: lining up expectations; adjust the approach to meet learning styles and; ensure follow-up opportunities to practise what has been learned.
- Avoid the ‘premature evaluation’ trap in training and evaluate what has been learned and how it has been applied more than the typical ‘how was it for you?’ approach.
This is the first installment my new book “Punk Rock People Management – a no-nonsense guide to hiring, inspiring and firing staff”. If you are in a hurry to read the whole thing, simply contact me with PUNK in the title and I’ll send you the whole book in one go for free.
If you prefer an experiential approach to learning, we’re offering a showcase event with Bernie Torme, leader of punk band Skid Row via the Open University Business School on June 19.
Peter Cook is managing director of business and organisational performance consultancies, Human Dynamics and The Academy of Rock.
We really welcome any and all contributions from the community, so please feel free to share your views and opinions with us, your colleagues and peers via our blogs section.
