Communication Series: Is it really training...?

Leading a training organization in a global software company has been fascinating.  Hiring seasoned sales people, they have already been through training at numerous companies.  Their shared experiences range from training programs that mail technical product documents to their remote offices to on-site training in lavish hotels which include great food and integrate team building sessions.  Without exception they come to my training room in Naples and are skeptical that the week or two weeks we will share together will be any different.  Why is it then that at the end of our time together participants consistently remark that of all the trainings they have attended, this was the best?

It certainly isn't because they are having a ton of fun.  I am a serious and focused facilitator with a background in public school administration.  My principal hat is always on and I don't hesitate to jump in to manage time or to pull in a participant that seems less than engaged.  Naples is a beautiful city but the training is rigorous - 8 - 5 everyday with little exception and homework in the evening.  We do laugh and there is a great deal of camaraderie built over the weeks in Naples but I would insist that the success of our time together isn't based on the any of those experiences.

What is it then?  Why is it that they feel that the time away from their families is well spent and that they are prepared to take on the daunting task of selling in the competitive software market with our products?

Our program provides Training... real training with all of its complex components. That may sound arrogant but I will take that risk.  I am often amazed when people will create a recorded presentation or engage an audience in an hour semi-interactive webex session and boast that they have provided training.  They may have offered information, they may have engaged in a dialogue and they may have even transferred some knowledge. but I would question whether that it is training...

The next several posts will define and develop our collective understanding of not only real Training - but also other terms that we use with training such as coaching, mentoring, shadowing and even apprenticeships.  These are all knowledge transfer strategies but to be effective we need to not only understand what each of them are and how to execute their unique components...but also which strategy to use dependent on the audience and the situation.  You can effectively use each during the same session or course, but purposeful use of these strategies is powerful - and results in successful learning.

So how do we define each of these different knowledge transfer strategies and what are the components of each that make them independently or collectively successful?  I will begin that exploration with you with the following simple descriptors - and I look forward to any comments/questions/concerns that you might post as you ponder the differentiation of the terms:

• Training is required when there is new information for the audience.  Training has multiple components that minimally/simply  include content, activities that require the learner to interact with that content and  an assessment that demonstrates that the learner understands and can apply that content. 
• Coaching assumes that the person being coached doesn't require new information or content- and that he or she has the understanding but is not successful in applying it.  Coaching is a questioning technique that helps the person being coached discover within themselves what they need to know/have/do to be successful.  
• Mentoring is a training strategy that is executed one-on-one- or in a small group.  Minimally the mentor needs to be an expert in their craft- with an understanding of what makes them an expert.  The mentoring relationship requires learning objectives, authentic experiences for the learner to observe and interact with the mentor and performance assessments that demonstrate that the learner understand and can apply the content.
• Shadowing is effective when the learner has a fundamental understanding of the content but struggles to apply it in authentic interactions.  Shadowing requires less structure than mentoring and the responsibility for the learning is on the learner rather than the person being shadowed.
• Apprenticeship is an effective training strategy but rarely used due to its high cost.  Traditional apprentice relationships are intimate and facilitate a deep understanding of a specific craft - with the relationship ending only when the apprentice can independently apply the understanding.

These definitions are my interpretations of the different terms and are a result of both my research and experiences.  The next several posts will break down each term - incorporating definitions from additional experts as well as exploring scenarios and examples of each.

Although this blog is new and my audience is just growing, I hope to engage you in candid conversation about this content...Looking forward to your thoughts!