The Importance of Training

In times of economic uncertainty, training is often one of the first costs within a business which is cut. It is seen as unnecessary when survival should be the companies' main priority, and when the resources allocated to training could be used elsewhere to what may superficially seem a better use. Whilst this viewpoint is common and in reality a basic human reaction, securing current assets when uncertain of the future, what neglecting training is really doing is neglecting the companies workforce, allowing them to grow stagnant and disillusioned whilst not working to their full potential. By allowing this the organisation is risking the future survival of the company even more so than any external threat the company may perceive in the present, just ensuring a slower and more painful death.

The main reason training is seen in a negative light by those responsible for ensuring their workforce is working to its full potential is usually the lack of tangible results from it. Whilst a Painting company can buy 3 tonnes worth of paint and see the results of being paid to apply this to a wall, they cannot see the tangible benefit of training their employees or themselves to use the paint correctly and so use fewer materials by being more efficient in their work. This attitude was revealed in a recent survey undertaken by the CBI (Confederation of British Industry), (2009), who found that 44% of firms have reduced their training expenditure in the recent economic downturn. These firms may not be allocating resources in terms of money spent and time taken, but they will be compromising productivity and so potentially risking the reputation and cost efficiency of the company, putting future revenue at risk significantly. The companies that are not reducing training expenditure may be investing more resources short term, but in the bigger picture they will be in a stronger position and more capable of obtaining bigger tenders and more work, ensuring larger profit margins.

Another significant benefit of training is the more multi-skilled an individual the more productive they become and so more beneficial to a company. Paying an employee to plaster a wall and then paint it is considerably more cost effective than paying an employee to plaster and then another employee to paint. An employee who can through training become "multi-skilled" in order to handle multiple responsibilities, whether in Construction, Manufacturing, Retail, Security or any other sector, is an employee who is flexible enough to react appropriately to the different scenarios the modern business may encounter. This employee can save the company money in wages and the avoiding of mistakes caused by confusion in transfer of responsibility, as well as the time taken to transfer responsibilities. Any related costs to training will be made back by the employee's increased productivity and skill portfolio.

A CIPD (Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development) survey (November 2006) found that 80% of Human Resource professionals believed Training and Development was more valuable to an organisation than they were able to demonstrate. This is a light in which training is not often looked upon except by the professionals who know the importance of training most. The intangible benefits in the employees output, attitude, self esteem, knowledge and ability to undertake their role is huge when the individuals have been properly trained, which is displayed by these professionals not even being able to express how valuable training is to organisations. A similar survey by the CIPD (November 2008) found that 92% of respondents who had undertaken training in the last 12 months believed that the training had been successful in helping them do their job better, and so in turn increasing efficiency and ensuring the work they undertook was more productive.

Another key reason training is often seen as unnecessary is when it becomes too "theory" based, and not enough practical skills are being learnt. A CIPD survey (November 2008) has found 46% of respondents prefer being shown the skill they are learning and then practising it, instead of being taught theory which they cannot transfer into their working life. It is important that when companies do look for training, for themselves or their employees, they do so with their specific aims and objectives in mind. The likeliness is they are looking to undertake training because they want to either learn how to undertake the trade in question more efficiently or learn it from scratch. Therefore, in these scenarios it is of paramount importance that they find a training provider who offers practical and hands on training in order to ensure that the training they do undertake is relevant and can be transferred into their working lives.

One of the key negatives for companies when considering training is the influx of generic training courses which seem to canter to a "one size fits all" framework. Instead of specialising the course to suit an individual's specific needs and requirements, and so enabling them to achieve their desired outcome, certain courses rigidly deny any flexibility in what is learnt and instead cling to industry norms and outdated learning techniques based around factors which are no longer relevant. For instance, a candidate may wish to learn modern door security techniques, which may have proven successful in the field, but then may be constricted by the course they are undertaking being unwilling to move from their set teaching framework and so teaching them techniques and standards which are no longer effective. By every candidate learning these generic skills, the course is in effect starving flexibility from the companies sending their candidates to them, as every employee is learning exactly the same thing and so cannot multi task within the organisation in order to maximise their efficiency. It is not a coincidence that training providers who are flexible within their framework, whilst obviously still ensuring the correct framework is met, are the most in demand within the market. Avoiding a "one size fits all" approach and instead specialising training around candidates specific requirements is essential in order to ensure needs are met and companies are getting the appropriate return on their investment. Training providers not providing these services have been detrimental to the reputation of training, but fortunately in recent years companies willing to flexibly arrange courses to candidates specific needs have gone a long way towards saving the training industries reputation.

The reasons for companies to train their employees sufficiently have been made, but this does not take away from the importance to employees as well of being fully and adequately trained. A CIPD survey (August 2009) revealed an estimation that by spring 2010 the unemployment rate will be at 3.2 million, a record high. Only 24% of employers within a CIPD survey (August 2009) said they were intending on employing any time soon, and 32% said they preferred employing migrant workers to British workers as they had trouble with British workers. This is bleak reading for any member of the British workforce who is not trained up to an appropriate level, but it is not too late to turn this around. The more trained an individual is, the more likely they are to retain employment or find new employment due to undertaking their work more efficiently and having qualifications on their C.V., and so placing themselves higher on the economic food chain above those who are not trained to the same level.

In conclusion the importance of training, whilst an often taboo subject in company budget meetings, should not really be in question at all. The statistics undertaken and the attitudes shown from the front line of organisations reveal a lack of training will drown company's capabilities, disengage their prospects and leave them unable to maintain their share of a marketplace which is bursting with competitors in pretty much every sector who have trained themselves and their employees properly and so can develop themselves beyond the capabilities of their less adequately trained competitors. The real return on investment for these companies is beyond measure, ensuring that in a competitive marketplace, only the strong and the well trained will survive.

"Education costs money, but then so does ignorance." - Claus Moser