Selling training to the Big Boss

As most HR managers will tell you, in times of trouble or uncertainty, the first budget to be cut is the training budget. Training is often seen as an "expense" and not as an investment. And this expense is the easiest to justify taking out of the budget. But could HR managers change that perception and make the decision a little more of a struggle?

More often than not when a Training Needs Analysis or TNA is completed, it is as a result of seeking the guidance of the section heads and department managers as to what they "feel" needs to happen in the following year in terms of training. Then a list of training courses and seminars is submitted for budgetary consideration. It is then that you discover that the proposed three-day training course for 10 of your engineers will only be attended by only two of them, and that they have to come back and conduct an "echo" training session with the remaining eight who were not approved to attend. As we all know, this "echo" training is totally ineffective. Statistics show that people retain only 30 percent of what they learn during the first session. That is why we are encouraged to take down notes to hopefully increase this retention rate. If the two attendees retain and transfer only 30 percent of the materials, then simple mathematics would tell us that the "echo" training would result in the remaining eight only retaining nine percent of the materials.

So how can we be sure that our proposed Training Needs Analysis (TNA) will be taken more seriously. Firstly, we need to understand what motivates those making the decisions, i.e. the boss. The boss’ only or main concern is increasing profit. This is achieved by reducing expenditure and increasing sales. And what you are proposing, no matter how much the benefit is, is still an expense – the very thing they are trying to reduce. You need to make a balanced case that will show how the training you propose will maximize the company profit overall. Having inputs from the department managers and section heads is, of course, invaluable, but there also needs to be some kind of justification behind their recommendations.

Here are some examples:

• Computer training

To dramatically reduce IT emergency calls to the IT department or help desk, increase software skills, reduce downtime and the need for additional labor and the amount of time spent on routine tasks.

• Quality

Reduction of defects in products, delays in delivery, savings on wasting materials, improved productivity and increased customer satisfaction

• Safety

Reduce accidents, compensation claims, medical bills and time away from work.

These, of course, need to be justified with figures that illustrate where the training specifically needs to take place. Taking the examples again:

In terms of the computer training, how many calls were made to the help desk? And in what areas? How much does each call translate into in terms of money? Are they currently logged and if not, is this something you need the IT department to do or do we need to hire an extra person just to do this? Are the calls similar in nature so that you know what the employees need to be trained in?

What were the numbers in terms of defects or customer returns? How did they compare to previous years? What were the attrition rates and have they affected this area? Was there any training conducted in the past year and if not, was there an adverse affect?

How many accidents were there in the previous year? In what areas? Is there a common thread here? How much did the company pay out in sick leave pay and compensation?

Sometimes the training suggested has no basis and can relate more to a personal desire to travel or increase personal career opportunities than to actually learn anything. Most bosses will tell you that they wholeheartedly believe in the positive effects of training and support any and all training initiatives, right up to the point where they have to pay for them. It is really up to us to make sure that we fully support our convictions, follow through all the way and even make our bosses understand, accept and embrace our ideas. Otherwise, we will be forever at the end of the queue when the budgets are being handed out.

* * *

Arlene Yap Tan is the chief executive officer of Yapster e-Learning Inc., which has been providing e-learning and classroom training services for five years to more than 80,000 learners around the world. With more than 1,500 subject titles, Yapster e-Learning is accredited by local and international institutions. For more information, visit www.2studyit.com. For comments, e-mail at [email protected]