Best Practices in Training Procurement, Part I - Defining the Need

This is the first of a 4-part series on Best Practices in Training Procurement.


Overview


Classroom training. E-learning. Blended learning. Synchronous vs. asynchronous distance learning. Self-study. The training world is becoming increasingly complex, with new products & services being created every day. How do we know we’re making the right purchase to meet our training need? In today’s economy, we need to be certain that our limited training budgets are being utilized with maximum benefit to the organization.


Every training organization in the world wants your money. Many will do whatever they have to do, and promise whatever they need to promise, in order to get your business, and some will claim capabilities that they do not yet have in order to win your business. Training vendors likely mail you catalogs every day, and send regular emails featuring the special of the week, or the latest and greatest curriculum. The trainer that deserves your business is the one that fully understands your need, and is interested in maximizing the benefit that your organization is looking for. How do you as the training buyer make sure that happens? Well, that’s a complicated question with a more complicated answer.


When you buy a physical product, you can take it out of the box right away, follow the instructions, and verify that it works. If it’s defective, you can return it for a new product or your money back. Training is much more ambiguous, since ROI won’t be fully realized until long after the training is completed and your dollars have been spent. If you follow a defined procurement plan, you will have much better odds of getting the training that exactly meets your organization’s needs.


Define the Need


How extensive is the training need? To what extent does it impact the organization as a whole? It’s critical to your success as a training manager to diagnose before you prescribe. In other words, you need to fully understand the problem before you implement a solution.


If John Smith in Finance needs to learn more effective pivot tables in Excel 2007 to produce a particular report, then your need is very well defined the moment you learn of it.


Say your IT department is adopting a formal Project Management methodology as a new practice. A little more exploration will ensure the correct training solution is implemented. What type of process are they moving over from? Why are they adopting a new methodology? Who in the IT department already has project management experience? To what extent does the entire department need training, and does anyone need to be certified? Is there a timeline for everyone to be trained? More exploration is required before you can fully understand the need.


However, if the entire Finance department is performing a major systems upgrade with customization to meet new government regulations such as Sarbanes Oxley, then you have quite a bit of homework to do. You’ll want to be involved with the people performing the upgrade. You’ll want to interview as many people as possible do determine the impact on their daily tasks. It’s important to understand the desired result from management, but it is equally important to understand the impact on the end-user, and what they would like to achieve as well. You’ll also want to understand the output of the changed processes, and how that may impact other parts of the company. What resources internal to the company already exist that could serve as training resources?


By fully defining the training need, you will be better equipped to begin searching for the proper solution.


In the next segment, "Learn What's Out There", we'll begin to explore the available resources, and how to qualify them.

Car Sales Tactics with Terry Bradshaw

Today’s post is a bit of a departure from the usual posts about technology training and best practices, to tell a story of an experience I had last week with a producer for a TV show called “Profile with Terry Bradshaw”.


I’ve been in the business of selling training for over 10 years. In that time, I’ve seen many different methodologies and sales tactics. There are two practices in particular that I feel are unethical, and should never be used by any legitimate salesperson: the Bait and Switch, and the Takeaway Close.


The Bait and Switch a tactic where the salesperson offers a particular product at a discount (or free) to get the prospect’s interest, and after assessing their level of interest, pulls the discount to offer a higher priced product. Personally, I also consider a salesperson to be pulling a “Bait and Switch” when they fail to disclose fees for goods or services up front. I’ve seen this personally with vacuum cleaner sales people when they send a college kid door to door offering a “free room cleaning” to demonstrate the features of a vacuum, only to have the salesperson walk into your home and try to intimidate you into buying a vacuum cleaner or they won’t leave. Oh, and they don’t clean an entire room, either.


The Takeaway Close is used when a prospect is not completely committed to the sale, and the act of “taking away” the product or service instills a fear of loss in the prospect, forcing them to make a decision. I’ve seen this at car dealerships when negotiating the price of a car, and in order to “meet your price” the salesperson removes a feature that you indicated you wanted.


More on these tactics later.


We were contacted last week by a representative from the TV show “Profiles With Terry Bradshaw”. I took a look at the website for the show, and found that it is a program that considers small business success to be vital to our nation’s growth, and that Terry Bradshaw profiles “Fascinating business stories to hear first-hand candid insights from entrepreneurs of various industries.” According to the person who contacted us, Terry Bradshaw was running a series on the importance of business training in the current economy, and their research team had thought that our company’s story would be interesting to profile on the show.


As a small business, that level of exposure certainly appealed to us. After all we have just launched the world’s most comprehensive and user-friendly training search engine, boasting over 140,000 scheduled courses across the U.S. and Canada, and it levels the playing field, portraying small local training companies side-by-side with technical training giants such as Global Knowledge and New Horizons. Our story certainly seemed compelling to us, and we were thrilled that Terry Bradshaw might want to interview us on TV!


We set up an appointment with an associate producer, who called me the next business day to interview, and gain more insight into our story to make sure we were a good fit. During this interview, he did quite a bit to pump up my ego with congratulatory statements, and we set an appointment with a “senior producer” to flesh out the details and make sure all of their questions were answered.


Then, after all of that was set up, the associate producer told me that there would be some fees involved. “OK”, I said guardedly, “What kinds of fees are we talking about?” This was news to me, as we hadn’t had ANY discussion of fees up to this point.


Turns out, the costs involved are for production and editing, to get the clip ready for airtime. The fee for this “service” would be $24,800. I asked how much air time the final interview would be, and he said it would be about 5 minutes.


Um, excuse me? You build up this experience, play off of our emotions and hopes as a small business looking for exposure, and then whack us with a $25k price tag? I said that there was no way we have that kind of budget for a single 5-minute TV spot with limited visibility, and thanks but no thanks. He asked if we should cancel the appointment with the senior producer, and I said “absolutely, please cancel.”


Now, after talking with our PR person, it turns out that this sort of TV arrangement is very common. The TV shows aren’t owned by a particular network, so to float the cost of the show, they charge the people appearing, and the show is shopped out to different networks, who are looking to fill airtime. They don’t make much money from the networks, so they need to charge the people appearing.


Fine, but disclose that up front! This is where the bait and switch comes in: offering a televised interview with a major media icon and sports figure, where he will voice over our story and tell it in a really compelling way, and the team will even shoot on location. We’re not in the TV business – we don’t know how the business works, so failing to disclose those fees up front DEFINITELY qualifies as a bait and switch in my mind.


As a last ditch effort, the associate producer used the “Takeaway Close”, asking if he should cancel the meeting with the executive producer. Sir, when I said “there’s no way we have the budget” I meant it.


Terry Bradshaw, by all accounts, is ridiculously successful and charismatic. He’s one of those people where everything he touches turns to gold. He’s had an incredible career as a sports figure, motivational speaker, TV analyst and announcer, actor, and author. We found it more than a little disappointing to find that a media organization with this amazing person at the front would use these kinds of sales tactics on the small businesses that are critical to our economy, and our nation’s growth. It’s a betrayal of the very reason the program exists.


Terry, you may want to reconsider your choice of business model and organizational structure.

Customization, De-Customization, and Training Requirements for a New Technology

In today’s more-with-less economy, it makes sense to leverage your existing technologies to automate processes as much as possible. With layoffs running rampant and vacated positions going unfilled, organizations that make the most of their technology investment will win out over those who do not.

However, this can be taken too far. Many organizations invest vast sums of money in a newer, more efficient system, only to hire an army of consultants to make it look and function just like the system they just replaced. Don’t get me wrong, a degree of customization for your unique business is absolutely appropriate, and necessary. However, if you made the decision to purchase the new system, presumably you did so because it could do something (hopefully, many things) that your old system couldn’t. Be sure that you’re not neglecting that new functionality for the sake of a little comfort. For example, if your organization has a unique customer reporting requirement, then it makes sense to automate that requirement. However, you shouldn’t have to redesign your entire interface around that requirement.

I’ve got news for you – when you implement new technology, you’re going to have to re-write work instructions. People are going to need training. You’re going to have to re-think some of your current processes and evaluate whether they still make sense. This is all part of the change management process.

Many organizations book custom training with us years after they’ve implemented a technology. Oftentimes, we find that after the course, students leave the class saying things like, “Wow, I had no idea it could do that”, and, ”we spent a fortune to do that very same thing a different way.” This often leads to “de-customization” projects, returning the environment to its intended state. De-customization efforts come with their own pain, however; habits that have become ingrained over the course of 2 generations of technology must now be un-learned. Expectations need to be managed so that users understand the full reasons for redoing something that was just redone. Again, it’s all part of the change management process.

The bottom line is that customization should be carefully tailored to suit your business need, and should maximize the company’s intent for implementing the technology in the first place. Training will be required either way, and can be adapted to any situation. Just make sure that you’re training on the right features, that have been implemented for the right reasons.

Comments posted on this blog are read and responded to; please feel free to share your thoughts!

Training Industry Trends in the Current Economy

Officially, the unemployment rate as of December 2009 was hovering around 10%. In reality, it’s closer to 20%. At Training Intelligence, we’ve seen IT workers and end-users alike let go by their companies as they streamline, outsource, and make do with less in general.



The reality is that we are in a jobless recovery, and those jobs may never come back. The companies that are going to prosper in the next decade are those that are able to make this jobless recovery work in their favor, those that don’t will fail. Many top companies have contracted us to come up with training solutions that allow existing working to become more efficient at their jobs, doing the work of two or three employees without working additional hours. How? By leveraging technologies... most of the time, technology the company has already invested in! You’d be surprised at how many technologies are either not utilized at all or are severely underutilized. It isn’t always complex systems like the SAP training we’ve done for major companies, but also something as seemingly simple as Microsoft Office products.


Productivity-focused training is the trend; gone are the days of sending employees out to public training courses so they can come back to the office and apply 10% or less of the knowledge they gained. Top companies are moving towards focused training methods that address their specific, real-world problems now.


The bottom line is that companies that invest in training have a distinct competitive advantage over those companies who follow the old model of “buy it and hope employees figure it out”. Shareholders shouldn’t just recommend, but instead demand that the companies they own increase productivity and thereby profits by training staff to use these technologies.


Comments posted on this blog are read and responded to; please feel free to share your thoughts!

Training Retention and Follow Up

One of the more common concerns students and training managers have is the question of how to make sure students can retain the information they learn in the classroom. There have been various articles and reports claiming that 10% of classroom training is transferred to a person’s actual job (a completely arbitrary figure, by the way, and not based on any facts). Whether this comes close to being accurate or not, retention is still a concern for many organizations.


Example: an IT developer takes a 5-day, 40-hour course on C#.NET, and returns to his desk to find a week’s backlog of emails, projects, and help desk tickets. He retains the most important topics that he originally went to class to learn, but by the time he slogs through all of this plus ongoing work, 2 weeks have passed, and he has to crack open his courseware book to search in vain for the “one thing” he hopes to use on the next project. 3 months later, he is involved in another project requiring another tool he learned in the course, but has since forgotten.


Or, in another example, a team of ABAP developers take a course on SAP Production Planning, but in order to practice the topics they learned in class, they need to re-create the classroom exercises within their own test environment, a time-prohibitive venture. At the same time, working in their production environment to apply principles learned in class is not the preferred method, since they’re still learning, and potentially manipulating live data at the same time.


Or, a finance dept. employee takes an advanced Excel course, and 4 months later, has to employ a trend analysis feature they learned in the class, and is now completely re-learning how.


So, what to do?


Some organizations adopt a blended approach – supplementing the classroom training with an e-learning resource to help refresh their classroom instruction. This works pretty well assuming 2 things:


1) The learner has the discipline to use the e-learning course (most e-learning providers consider a 15% usage rate to be outstanding)
2) The e-learning course exists, which for many high level IT topics or soft skills courses as well as custom courses, it does not.


Most training companies offer refresher training (in fact, Microsoft requires it for vendors delivering their courses), but that requires the learner to sit through the entire course again, something they have neither the time nor the inclination to do.


Many professionals belong to regional user groups, where they can turn to other members of the group for their experience with a particular technology or topic.


Another option is social networking. We’re not talking about using Facebook for your company’s training environment (although that’s an option). Using internal resources such as SharePoint, or third party resources if you prefer not to host it internally, you can have your own mini social network, discussion forum, message boards, etc. up and running in no time flat.


First, plan ahead! If you’re going to use a social network, have it created, and all class members registered prior to class. Instructors should know that the network exists, and they should be a part of it, as a resource and to serve as a moderator for discussions, where appropriate. For this reason, we’d recommend using an external network so that any third-party instructors won’t have to access your company’s network in order to respond.


Second, make it exciting for students to participate. Even if the topic is interesting to them, giving an incentive will increase participation and the success of your program. For example, let students know you’re running a contest on the social network, so they must log in and participate in order to play, and make the contest prize meaningful ( I can recall one such contest where one of the prizes was a free soda from the company cafeteria – not the best motivator in the world).


Third, involve your training vendor ahead of time, and let them know this is part of how you conduct your training. Get it in the contract, and make sure the instructor is involved for a certain period after class.


Comments on this post are read and responded to, so please don’t be shy!

Common Questions About Virtual Training

What Is Virtual Training?



Before we get into the benefits and considerations for virtual training, let's define what virtual training is. It is training delivered over the internet, using technology to connect live instructors with live students remotely. The "classroom" is a technology such as Microsoft Office LiveMeeting, GotoMeeting, Adobe Connect, or Webex. The students can see the instructor's desktop and hear the instructor. Students will typically log into a remote environment to work hands-on with the technology and do lab exercises.


Is Virtual Training As Effective As live Classroom Training?


Pro: While I certainly can't speak for everyone, studies, surveys and student feedback indicate that the answer to this question is Yes. Some students report that they are actually forced to interact more in a virtual setting, and some instructors have said that students ask better, more focused questions in virtual classes than in a live classroom. The remote environment that students use to practice and do their lab exercises typically remains available around the clock, allowing students more time to work with the technology.


Con: Students are more directly responsible for the quality of their learning experience, and they must be more self-motivated in their desire to learn. In addition, the instructors cannot see the body language of the students to get a feel for how their message is being delivered.


Should I Expect to Pay More, Less, or the Same for Virtual Training as Opposed to a Live ILT Course?


Short answer: The same. Virtual courses use the same resources to deliver a class as a live setting would. The instructor's time is the same, courseware is the same, and while the vendor delivering the course isn't outfitting a full classroom with 12 or more computers, they are supplying the technology for the virtual lab environment and likely paying for licensing for the webinar software. Keep in mind, however, that you're saving on travel costs in a virtual class.


How Long Should a Virtual Training Class Be?


The course itself will ultimately be the same duration the equivalent ILT class. However, you should expect the virtual class to be broken up into shorter segments delivered over a longer period of time. For example, a five day ILT course might be scheduled from 9am to 12 noon, Mon-Wed-Fri, over 4 weeks. The reason for this is that the virtual setting does not lend itself to the intensive schedule of 5 consecutive 8-hour days.


Final Thoughts


- Keep in mind that the most important aspect of any training course is the quality of the instructor. A bad instructor won't get better in a virtual course.


- Do your homework. When you're shopping for the right training course for your needs, whether it's ILT or virtual, read reviews, review the prerequisites, and make sure that your real-world business issues will be addressed in the course.


- Leverage your volume. If you have multiple employees who need the same course, you may be able to run a private course. A private virtual classroom operates the same as a private live course; you can customize content, mix lessons from other courses, and add in custom content just as you would in a live class. A private virtual class allows students from different physical locations to attend the same event without travel, and you may be able to record the class and archive it on your network for reference.



Comments on this blog are read and responded to, so don't be shy!

The Real Cost of SAP Training

Having implemented SAP training for several large organizations it seemed pretty apparent to me that this training was vastly overpriced. Recently we were asked to roll out about 20 weeks of classes for a major defense contractor and we looked at few different options, of course the first option was to use official SAP. Having experienced that process first hand I knew we could do better. We partnered with a content provider who indeed provided proprietary content without the fancy hard cover books and rolled out the most comprehensive SAP training I’ve seen to date for a fraction of the cost. The client was thrilled and this alone has led to a # of different offerings that have nothing to do with SAP. The first being JD Edwards training which was delivered in the exact same manner and now a large SharePoint portal training is imminent.



It’s always a surprise to find clients out there who insist on using SAP for SAP training.