1) One of the facts of life that we have to live with is to be compared with other consultants by our clients. These days, the comparisons have increased as there are more consultants around.
2) I take this fact positively because clients need to have choices in order to get the most effective consultation and training possible for their needs. But the big question is this; if they give the same set of training outline to different consultants, then who is the best person to train?
3) My word for in-house trainers – consider yourselves fortunate that you are not screened from head to heel, and have 100 queries thrown at you for trying to prove to the HR person in front of you that you are the right consultant for the training assignment. As long as you are not on our side of the fence, you probably have more self-esteem being on payroll than fee-based.
4) One of the few sacred truths of training that many clients are aware of is, if you throw the same outline to different trainers, the outcome is usually different. Many seek the answer to this seeming myth silently. Allow me to offer a simple but logical explanation.
5) The 1st point is, everyone can come up with a training outline. Some outlines are so wonderfully worded and “decorated” that we are fools not to take that trainer in. Some good examples are public programs - off the shelves and ready to train.
6) The 2nd point is it really depends what we are training on – soft skills, work-related skills, technical skills or specialized skills.
7) Let us consider the law of 72 in financial planning, which says the number of years it takes to double your investment is to divide the number 72 by the prevalent interest rate. For an interest rate of 6%, it takes 12 years (72/6) to double your investment. No rocket science!!
8) No matter who teaches the law of 72, the answer is the same. Unless a trainer asks the participants to read it upside down or execute some fanfare to make it exciting. No matter who the trainer is, the law of 72 is the same because it is FACTUAL. This is technical.
9) On the other hand, if one trainer teaches business communication in a certain way, another trainer may use another method. You can compare workplace learning with classroom role plays. It is because this is SOFT SKILL, which is variable.
10) This brings me to my 3rd and most important point – with the same outline in soft skills, the difference lies in the APPROACH and WHO the TRAINER is.
11) I hope this explains why some in-house trainers struggle to deliver soft skills training. It is because soft skills are about PERSONAL VALUES, CHARACTER and BEHAVIORAL TRAITS.
12) If your colleagues see your true self at the office daily, it may be an uphill task to impart soft skill values to them. That is why an “external” influence may help. No offense, this is reality check.
13) The next time you wish to organize soft skill training, be it emotional intelligence, grooming, attitude-building, team-building etc., take a good look at who your trainer is and what approach is being used. It is more than academic qualification, it is personal.
14) For the in-house trainer, you have an important role – to develop core and functional skills.
15) And my prayer to all the clients out there – I hope you have a proper training and trainer evaluation system handy, as the list of consultants continue to grow.
Albert CH Lee
First Impressions Group
.jpg)
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment