Why mandatory training is no longer fit for purpose

While mandatory training has become an increasing popular practice to use over the past decade, in my view it is no longer fit for purpose.

Take the example of an experienced teaching colleague who must complete three compulsory on-line training courses, including mandatory surveys, every January before he is allowed to teach.  I’d suggest adopting a training approach for such an outcome is not fit for purpose. Instead, a risk assessment process is occurring.

Why?

The goal of such mandatory training is so that when a difficult situation develops, the organisation can claim the employee was suitably trained and knew the consequences of their actions.  That is not training to improve skills and knowledge, that is a process to mitigate risk.

To prove my point, none of the 25 questions in my colleague’s “Mandatory All Staff Training Course” related to teaching.  Instead, they related to issues such as human rights, domestic violence, inclusion, health and wellness, and privacy.

The trouble is that mandatory training does not mitigate risk very well because organisations cannot just rely on such training as a defence when a difficult situation arises.  How the difficult situation is managed is of equal, if not more important.

When the current mandatory training approach that takes my colleague and each of his 70,000 peers two to three hours every year to complete and does not achieve the desired outcomes, I’d argue it is not fit for purpose.

Then what process is fit for purpose?

Start by realising that risk management requires identification, intervention, and successful management of a small number of individuals (say 2%). Therefore, any process should aim to make it simple and easy for the 98% while still identifying the 2%.

Now design a process that ensures: 

1.      Only choosing a single response from preset options is required.

2.      Assessment reports that incorporates all the admin including date/time, pass/fail, and (most importantly) the outcomes/next steps based on their individual response are generated automatically.

The outcomes of this approach are:

1.      For 98% of employees who get everything correct, it takes five minutes of their time, and they can remain focused on undertaking meaningful work and delivering value-adding outcomes.

2.      For the small percentage that need additional attention, (a) they are identified in real time and (b) whatever corrective action that is required, has already been reported to them and their manager, and (c) instant and appropriate intervention can occur.

3.      And for the organisation there is a justifiable system and process they can rely on to demonstrate the employee’s issues have been addressed and/or appropriate corrective action has taken place.

If you must manage such risks, keep it simple and meaningful by designing and implementing a more contemporary approach based on risk management principles that is also user friendly while meeting all legislative and risk mitigation requirements.