Things that can go wrong in employee training programmes

The workers were busy typing away in their cubicles as I made my way along the narrow aisle that cut the open-plan office in half. None of them looked up to register my presence, and some seemed so immersed in what they were doing they might not have noticed me if I’d been wearing a gorilla costume. I walked on, having some business of my own to take care of. The sign on the door at the end of the aisle read 12A.

I entered and swore under my breath as I looked around. There wasn’t much to see. For starters, there were no windows, and it was clear that we would be cramped for space once these empty chairs were filled. It wasn’t so much a meeting room as a pantry. I could even picture row upon row of jars of pickles or jam. Seven grown-ups with their personal space not invaded? Not so much. How were they supposed to learn anything in a setting like this? And in a foreign language at that. The first two participants showed up and surveyed the surroundings. I wondered if they were thinking the same things that I was.

Now, it may not be much of a story, but it’s true all the same. It happened to me while I taught corporate English courses at one of Austria’s biggest telcos. I can no longer remember how that particular session went, but to this day I haven’t forgotten going “What the fuck?” as soon as I stepped inside. The feeling of incredulity that someone had actually thought a room like that was suitable for classroom use has stayed with me. And for some reason I remembered this incident the other day. It got me thinking: why do so many employee training programmes fail?

Companies pride themselves on caring about “the development and growth of our employees” and yet the training they offer is often below par. Why is that? To be fair, there’s a lot of things that can go wrong. Not creating the adequate infrastructure - I’m looking at you, one of Austria’s biggest telcos - is just one of them. Here’s the rest of my personal top five.

No defined needs

It’s hard to design a training programme if you don’t know what needs it should meet. Duh, I know, which makes it even more shocking how often you see this happen. Just by taking a close look at employees’ roles and skills, you can tell that “Our team members need to improve their English” can’t be considered a specific need. It’s way too generic. And the more diverse the group the bigger the problem. Some participants will find the content irrelevant, repetitive, easy, hard.... Don’t expect any smileys on the feedback forms at the end of the course.

Effectiveness not measured

Suppose you’ve identified the needs and set clear goals for the course. The participants are keen, the trainer is great, everyone’s raring to go. Way to go! This is how you make sure a programme is a success. What, you’re not going to assess the outcomes once the course ends?! That’s like baking a chocolate stout cake and then not eating it. It’s all been a waste of time and money. (And chocolate and stout.) Clearly, you’re not planning any follow-up either, are you?

Lack of time

Or money, but let’s assume that your company’s coffers are filled to the brim. When to do the sessions? Can so many people find the time at the same time? It’s tough and even if you can make it happen, you’ll always have participants who fail to show up for some reason, like not being able to take time out for the training. So sessions get fragmented and ineffective. And ‘lack of time’ also refers to duration: often, courses end before you can tell if they’re working.

Nobody cares

I’ve saved the worst for last. It’s that nightmare scenario when no one wants to be doing the course in the first place. Their English is fine. The methods they’re using are fine. Everything’s hunky-dory. It’s not, of course, but participants keep telling themselves it is. A classic example of trying to maintain the status quo, even though in their heart of hearts at least some of them know a change is long overdue.

And now we’re back to the need to identify needs so employees realise that doing the programme is for their own good. It should never be a chore that some mean manager is forcing the team to do just because the manager is, er, mean. Speaking of managers, their opt-in is essential. They must see that it’s in their interest that the programme becomes a success and so they must get involved. With careful planning, there’s no need to sort out any of the problems I’ve listed above since they won’t occur. Managers ought to take responsibility because that’s what managers do. No more employee development in pantries, please.