Capterra Training Technology Blog

Learn what LMS, eLearning, and courseware systems can do for your organization

3 Signs Your Corporate Training Course is Failing its Objectives

Share This Article

The worst thing that can happen at the beginning of a long drive is for your car to start making a weird noise.

Is that whining sound the drive belt? Does that thumping mean the flux capacitor is shot?

You know something’s wrong, but you don’t know what.

So you take the car to a mechanic, who opens it up, looks through the innards, and then charges you an arm and a leg to tell you what’s wrong with it.

Flux-Schematic

Unfortunately, there are few “corporate training mechanics” to look deep into your training program and diagnose exactly what’s wrong with it (though they’ll still charge you an arm and a leg).

But what if you could learn to listen for those telltale funny sounds—the whines and bumps of an off-kilter training course—and diagnose the issue yourself?

If you want to become your own training course mechanic, start by committing to memory these three signs that your course is failing its objectives:

1. You don’t have them!

Objectives, that is.

Do you even know what you’re trying to accomplish with your corporate training course? And I don’t mean something vague like, “onboard new hires” or, “improve employees’ customer service skills.”

Have you done a needs analysis to pin down problem areas and things that can be improved with training?

Do you have clear, well-defined, objective metrics you can use to gauge the effectiveness of your training?

Objectives should look something like, “improve an employee’s customer satisfaction scores as measured one week before training and one week after training” or, “ensure a new hire can pass the certification test for the machinery/software they’ll be operating.”

Ideally your training objectives should use the “SMART” criteria, and be decided well ahead of actually designing the course itself.

That “M” in SMART (“measurable”) brings us to the second sign that your course is failing its objectives.

2. You don’t actually evaluate what employees learned (or you do it only once)

Companies, says Dr. Eduardo Salas, Director of the Institute for Simulation and Training, don’t do nearly enough to evaluate how well employees have learned after a training course.

“Testing is an integral part of training. It is paramount for recognizing skills decay,” he says.

But most companies simply get reaction data from trainees, and don’t go any further. According to Dr. Salas, “the correlation is very weak between reaction to training and actual learning.”

Not only do you need to test actual skills learned during the training, but you need to do it on a continual basis.

According to a study in The Journal of Economic Education, annual rate of retention loss of learned material is anywhere from 13% to 23%, and Dr. Salas quotes even more dire statistics from the American Society for Training and Development claiming 90% of the skills learned in training are lost by the time trainees go back to the job.

This means it is imperative to not only test an employee immediately after training, but to do so multiple times over the course of a year or more to measure skills decay, and be able to apply remedial training as necessary.

You can’t manage what you’re not measuring.

3. Employees don’t have the opportunity to practice what they learned immediately after training

Measuring skills decay is one thing (and certainly important), but preventing it in the first place is something else entirely.

The forgetting curve posits that 79% of learned information is forgotten within a month, if nothing is done to reinforce it. This means certain activities can flatten the forgetting curve, and increase retention rates for learners.

Among these activities are repetition, practice, and application.

If your learners are not immediately putting the skills gained in training into practice, it’s unlikely they’ll retain them for long.

Does your training program extend past the classroom into activities aimed at reinforcing the learning while on the job? Does your skills testing include consistent opportunities for practice?  Do you follow up with trainees to ensure they’re actually using and applying what they learned?

If not, it’s just another sign your training course is failing its objectives.

More?

Have you noticed other similarities between unsuccessful training programs? Have you tried to implement continuous skills testing or learning application activities?  How did it go?

Add your thoughts in the comments!

Looking for Training software? Check out Capterra's list of the best Training software solutions.

Share This Article

About the Author

JP Medved

Follow on

J.P. currently works as a Content Editor at Capterra, a privately held technology and online media company focused on bringing together buyers and sellers of business software. He is a graduate of Georgetown University where he founded The Georgetown Federalist. Follow him on Twitter at @rizzleJPizzle.

Comments

The problems in developing training programs:
* Improper needs analysis
* Improper training objectives
* Absence of validation of the objectives
* Improper learning materials
* Improper training procedure
* Inadequate participation of the trainees
* Shortage of qualified and competent trainers
* Shortage of training resources and equipment
* Absence of feedback mechanism
* Deviations in the activities after training
* Mismatch between the training and shop floor resources
* Trainees are transferred after training
* Absence of mentors in the workplace
* Improper leadership
* Absence of goals
* Absence of learning aids, job aids, manuals, conducive environment, tools, and ergonomically designed work place.
* Absence of evaluation and feedback mechanism
* Improper culture at the work place
* Excessive rules and regulations
* Bad interpersonal relationships at the work place
* Absence of motivation in the employees
* Inadequate education to retain the knowledge and skills gained
* Poor health of the workers

Many more problems in planning, implementing, evaluating and absorbing the trained persons. There is need to evaluate the goals of the organizations, their vision and processes.
Training in isolation would not produce desired results.

Vedhathiri, that’s a great list.

It’s an okay list, a little long and ‘blamey’, with references to old shool ‘trainers’ and equipment….isn’t this about LMS?
Good blog though, and great e-book!

I agree with the points you have mentioned, but it also imperative that the courses training providers offer must also heavily involve the delegate/ teacher interaction so they feel involved, etc. We at LMC also use a very good technique where we use a different trainer everyday for the course so the delegates get a unique experience and feel of the course. I’m not sure if other companies do this like we do but it is proven and should be noted it does produce positive results!

Comment on this article:


Your privacy is important to us. Check out our Privacy Policy.