The battle is on...
I was originally intending to name the HR Guide to Staff Learning & Development as the HR Guide to Staff Training and Development, but decided 'L&D' was a better fit. Why? In HR circles, at least, the meaning of ‘training’ has rapidly drifted away from its original intended definition. In the olden days, aka: not that many years ago, the word ‘training’ used to embody everything that was good about HR. It would frequently involve SWOT analysis which—the first time I heard of it—I had, rather excitedly, expected SAS style HR leaders to be dropping in on ropes through the windows of the training room. To my disappointment, this wasn’t the case and it actually involved looking at the needs of staff and the company as a whole, analysing strengths and weaknesses that existed within the company and then rolling out carefully designed training programmes to help bridge the gaps that existed.
And all the time the answer was staring me right in the face: training tended to be about catering to the needs of the organisation and plugging the gaps therein, rather than those of the individual. As a trainer, I frequently had discussions with HR revolving around HR managers starting the conversation with, “So, if we have this many staff being trained this topic, the bottom line is...how much will it cost per head?” That was normal—and in the majority of cases it still is. Under this regime, training was often viewed by staff as something that ‘had to be done’, rather than something to look forward to. Scenes from the British TV comedy, The Office, spring to mind with staff half, or in some cases totally, asleep and feeling completely disenfranchised in T&D sessions with an overly enthusiastic external trainer who knew little, if anything, about the corporate culture and politics surrounding them. That said, just because HR has labelled staff development programmes as ‘T&D’ does not mean that they are exclusively led by trainers and course-orientated. In reality, many include tailor-made solutions delivered via various learning methods, substantial ‘friendly advice’ and as such are extremely effective.
E-learning; coaching; experiential and action learning techniques; are all commonly deployed in T&D programmes. Courses still remain one of the more popular group based methods of delivery.
Although the term ‘L&D’ has recently come into vogue—it is more than just another ‘new label’ for stuff we’ve been doing in HR all along. The concept, rather than the name, of ‘L&D’ embodies the positive shift in HR towards a much stronger emphasis on learning—which the learner does, as opposed to training—which the trainer does. Learning, in contrast to training, focuses HR’s attention back on each individual staff member. Focus is put on their skills as a person—both in and out of the workplace—instead of training them up as part of a team within the organisation. When learning is ‘done’ in the right way, staff will respond not because they have to but because they want to. This is the key to successful staff development programmes, and it doesn’t really matter if you label them T&D, L&D or any other buzzword of the day. What matters is that as a HR leader you design development programmes so that they benefit staff in helping them unearth, develop and realise their natural abilities and potentials. A lot of time staff can, and will, do this themselves—sometimes in their own time and at their own expense. If you get it right, you’ll not only garner staff who can achieve more, but also facilitate them thinking for themselves much more. Staff will also be more engaged as they see the relevance of skills they are developing and feel valued for what they can achieve with their own, very individual, skill sets.
In short, rightly or wrongly, the term ‘training’ is now frequently viewed as an increasingly antiquated ‘injection’ of ideas by trainers in the workplace. ‘Learning’ is something that staff can pursue by choice, and happens both inside and outside the office. Progressive HR leaders should be doing all they can to help facilitate this.
Paul Arkwright
Publisher
