What does organizational trust have to do with training?
Trust; it’s easy to lose, and once lost, difficult to regain. Credibility is much like trust, you work hard to gain it and maintain it, but if you do something to lose it, it can be very difficult to get it back. So how do trust and credibility relate to training initiatives in the corporate world? Offering the latest and greatest training fad program may be wonderful for morale … for a while, but once the luster has worn off, and the support provided by the organization begins to wane, learners begin asking questions. If the organization isn’t committed to following through with training by implementing changes internally that reflect the principles being trained, then trust can fall by the wayside. If you begin to hear phrases like, “we did that course last year … see, there’s the binder on my shelf”, you can be rest assured that trust and credibility may be an issue in the organization.
So how do you overcome this easy to fall into trap of allowing people to take training programs, fill their shelves with binders, and point to them as if they were hunting trophies? Well, if an organization is contemplating a training program, it comes down to walking the talk. And that may mean training from the top down, not the bottom up as is frequently the case with many organizations. If you can picture an organization that follows the bottom up training philosophy, you may well be looking at an organization that’s struggles with internal trust and credibility issues.
“This is the training that we need” ~ The Boss
Let me paint a scenario that is unfortunately all too familiar in organizations around the world. The department lead or organizational “boss” sits you down and pontificates about what he or she believes the organization needs. You hear statements like, “we need to do this … or that”, and you are expected to politely nod or contribute to the conversation by agreeing and expanding on the points mentioned. Frequently this type of unfocused meandering leads to the conclusion that certain training interventions should to take place. For example, the conversation might lead to the conclusion that all front line managers require a time management training session because they seem to be having such a difficult time handling all of their work and completing assignments when required. So the decision is made to arrange for a time management course to be delivered to all front line managers.
When the course is completed and all those front line managers that were told they had to attend return to work, the “boss” can’t understand why the training intervention was so ineffective. Additionally, he or she can’t understand why the management team seems to have resented the opportunity to improve their time management skills so they could better handle the demands of their job in a more efficient manner and actually be able to get more done in less time.
I’m not suggesting that time management shouldn’t have been considered, but did anyone actually consider talking with the front line managers? How about stepping back and critically looking at the situation by examining work flow and work load issues and how they play out across the organization? The statement “can’t see the forest for the trees” is one way to explain this apparent disconnect. A true organizational leader must be willing to let some control go before getting caught up in thinking that he or she knows what’s best for “my people”.
Training gone bad
Misaligned learning objectives are frequently one of the key factors in company learning programs not being successful. Questions to ask include, “were the objectives miscommunicated?”, “was the wrong ‘course’ delivered?”, “did the learners tell you what they felt they needed?” And the list should go on. Frequently what the learner and what the facilitator, (or organization) intend to have happen are two different things. This can easily be the case if the needs of the learner are overlooked because someone in the organization felt that “what they need to learn is …”, and off they go to ensure that their vision of what’s required is what is indeed delivered.
Is there a way around this common problem? Of course there is. Listen to and match up the needs of learners with the needs of the organization. Ensure that there is congruence and a genuine desire on the part of both the organization and the learner to accomplish a clearly defined objective. Ok, I hear you asking, just how are you supposed to do that? Well, that discussion and many like it will be the focus of the PARTNER program. Shall we continue?
