According to Arnold, Cooper et al. (1995), in developing the training intervention it is essential to define the aims and objectives. Blanchard and Thacker (1999) state that there are four different kinds of training objective:
· Trainee reaction objectives which describe the desired subjective and attitudinal evaluations of training (that is, the outcomes of the ‘happy sheets’ or the standard ‘tick the box’ evaluation form often used at the end of training sessions)
· Learning objectives describing the type of behaviour which would show that learning has occurred
· Transfer of training objectives outlining how behavior will be impacted upon by the training
· Organizational outcome objectives detailing which organizational outcomes will be affected by transfer of learning.
Having identified your learning objectives, the next stage of the systematic training process is to design your learning interventions. Reid (1994) outlines six different approaches but emphasizes that they are not mutually exclusive.
· Analytical approach – analogous to the systematic approach, training needs are carefully surveyed and analysed and performance gaps identified.
· Competency/competence approach – addresses and defines knowledge, skills, abilities which underlie performance.
· Problem-solving approach – focused at the organizational level, problems and issues facing employees are identified and interventions introduced to overcome them.
· Continuous development – requires self-direction and self-management to learn from everyday experience as well as more formal interventions.
· Learning organization – an approach which emphasizes the organization as a learning conduit.
· Strategic HRM – focus on employees as a resource for achieving organizational success, with training as one of the methods of investing in the human resources of the company.
Once a strategy has been chosen, the interventions themselves need to be designed
“What is to be learned?” Goldstein, Ford (2002) address this question.
They include work on identifying:
· Learning outcomes (Gagné, Briggs, & Wager, 1992, describe a set of categories of learning outcomes: intellectual skills, cognitive strategies, verbal information, attitudes, motor skills)
· Stages of learning (there’s the idea that lerning involves a series of stages and that different types of learning might be important during each stage)
· Expert-novice differences (Ford and Kraiger, 1995, note that the analysis of differences between experts and novices indicates that there are a number of specific mental characteristics demonstrated by experts that are not as well developed in novices: automized skills and procedural knowledge, mental models, metacognition and self-regulation).
The next step is putting learning theory into practice: transfer. Transfer is defined as the degree to which trainees apply the knowledge, skills, behaviours and attitudes gained in training to their jobs (Wexley & Latham, 1991). Georgenson (1982) estimated that only 10 per cent of training expenditures had been shown to result in behavioural changes back in the workplace.
When it comes to transfer the following three categories are generally used to indicate the degree of transfer which has occurred:
· Zero transfer, where learning in the training situation has no impact at all on job performance
· Positive transfer, where changes in behaviour, attitude or outcomes result from participation in the training. For example, levels of customer complaints decrease follow training in customer service
· Negative transfer, where changes in behaviour, attitude or outcomes are impacted upon negatively by the training. For example, levels of customer complaints increase following training in customer service
Wexley (1984) stated “the existing literature on transfer of training offers little of value to trainers concerned with maximising positive transfer.”
