Most organizations have mandatory classes. They are required for many reasons. These reasons can include government requirements, new policy or procedures, or perhaps they are a part of identified core requirements for a job. Regardless of the reason, learners can enter these sessions with a “little attitude.” Some learners feel a loss of autonomy by being forced to attend courses because someone told them that they must attend. This attitude can create a barrier that makes training more difficult. Let’s look at three tips that have worked for me to deal more successfully with this training challenge.
Tip # 1
Allow learners to test out of the course if they already know the content or the skill. If we can develop a meaningful test that reflects the learners’ knowledge or skill, could the passing of this test satisfy the training requirement? I do want to stress that sometimes this is impossible. However, if we can arrange an acceptable testing option, we may be able to reduce the attendance of those who already have the required skill level. As I listen to clients talking about their tightening training budgets and looking to be as efficient as possible, this option is becoming more and more attractive.
Tip # 2
Reduce the course content to the absolute minimum. Get rid of the “nice to know” and cover the highest priority information only, making the course as short as possible. These learners don’t want to be in training, so the more efficient the class is, the quicker they can get back to the job. However, by shortening the session, be careful that we keep application exercises. Without meaningful practice of the skills taught, we cannot measure the learners’ skill improvement. Also, without application exercises, transferring skills back to the job can be minimized.
Tip # 3
Deal with the resistance at the beginning of the session. I have found that if I don’t discuss this resistance, it seems to remain an undercurrent that surfaces frequently during the session. By facilitating these concerns, learners are able to move beyond them and are open to learn. What I have found helpful is an exercise I call the “Elephant in the Room.” I request that each group discuss the Concerns and the Benefits of the course. During that 7 to 8 minute discussion, I ask them to record their thoughts on a flipchart. I find that this time is well spent as it allows the learners to voice their concerns in a systematic process. At the end of this time, we take an additional 5 minutes to debrief the activity. At the end of this activity, I inform them that we will come back and review this information at the end of the session. I post these flipcharts in the back of the classroom for the rest of the session. At the end of the session, I go back to these flipcharts and identify any remaining issues not resolved and ask the group for ideas how to work with them as they return to the jobs. We then close the session.
Mandatory training is a part of our training world. It can be difficult, because learners lose their right to make their own choices about training. It is up to us to do whatever we can to help them successfully navigate these required training courses so they can concentrate on learning.
Langevin Team
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Comments RSS
I am fine with the tips but Langevin teaches that before we design training, we need to determine if training is required. Training is only required if the procedure/process has changed or it’s a new process.
I am in higher education, so the training process is just a little different. I have used TIP #1 that “forced” our self-taught users to dig into the content posted online and study in order to score the % necessary to pass. However, I wonder now if they will remember or actually use what they had to look up.
I like TIP #3 and will try that the next time our administration wants a mandatory training and I hear all the grumbling. This may work for some of them, yet sadly not all.
Useful TIPS for me. Thanks.
Hi ladies.
Sandra,
Thanks so much for your comment. I agree that a thorough training needs analysis can answer the question if the lack of knowledge and skill is a missing component to the expected performance on the job. However, even with this process, there can be learners in the projected audience that already have some of the required skills. These tips are meant to offer options for the training that is offered.
And Karen,
I agree with the concern surrounding the recall of this content. My grandfather used to say, “You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink.” To help with the support of transfer of knowledge or skills, perhaps we can also implement a performance support activity. In Blended Learning, a Performance Support Activity is an additional tool we might consider to re-enforce the identified knowledge or skill.
I want to state that I wouldn’t necessarily eliminate the resistance, but lower it using Tip number 3. Good luck with this exercise, and hopefully the resistance will be lowered to a level that the majority can and will learn.
Thanks again ladies for your comments.
Great suggestions! One more: don’t call it “mandated”. That in itself sends a message that the training won’t be useful or enjoyable. Make it useful, meaningfufl, and enjoyable regardless.
Thank you for these suggestions! As a Certified Master Trainer and Instructional Designer through Langevin, I greatly appreciate ‘my ongoing’ learning from Langevin.
I deliver annual, mandatory training for pharma, biotech and medical device companies clinical research departments. So, developing and delivering ‘out of the box’-, mandatory training has become my passion and trademark with clients.
This out of the box training includes ‘what employees’ don’t have the time to read or ‘keep current on’ (e.g. US Congress and Senate investigations, hearings, industry blogs, articles, draft regulatory agency documents…reading and research!)
I develop a ‘theme’ and stick to this throughout the course development and during course delivery. This is the WIFFM for the course. My clients include this in their course announcements.
-1-Keeping current with the US Congress agenda and investigations, and state level legislation as well.
-2-Stream video from the US government websites. I use this in the beginning for the WIFFM…for my industry it is the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
-3-Group Exercise — ‘Why should we care’??? This now brings the WIFFM to the atttendees to analyze. Group debriefing with the entire class is then conducted.
-4-Regulatory topics for the course are ’short in nature’..max 1.0-1.5 hour per session, each with an activity.
-5-KEY TO SUCCESS:
(1) Division Heads involvement in setting the agenda and course topics. I provide the proposed agenda a list of other topics, if needed.
(2) Division Heads review and approve the presentation and activities –this builds in the Management support for the course
-6-RESULTS
(1) Division Heads are happy —I have had them come up to me after the course and ’say great job!’..this is so much better than what we have had in year’s past
(2) Employee’s stay engaged throughout the day – topic is ‘relevant’ and ‘activities’ are ‘relevant’ –all for mandatory training!
(3) Department’s start ‘action planning’ for key topics during the course and determine the need for ‘next steps’ upon course conclusion.
This model can be replicated for any regulated industry!
This is good stuff and speaks to the fact that as some research is showing, what adults learn on their own initiative they learn better than what they learn by being taught. The key is to use these techniques and whatever else we can do to help them connect the dots between their own interests and what we need them to learn. Tip #3 especially caught my eye as a way to bridge that gap.
Thanks for the article.