2) Investigation
In order to achieve success Guardian Financial Services brings together the requirements of N2 in a business strategy.
What is meant by the term ‘strategy’? The Oxford English Dictionary defines the expression as ‘generalship; the art of war; the management of an army; the art of so moving or disposing troops or ships as to impose upon the enemy the place and time … for fighting preferred by oneself.’ There is no mention of business usage although Moorby (1996:35) offers an interpretation of ‘… so planning one’s business as to have an advantage over competitors.’ Harrison (2000:81) provides a more focused definition as ‘… the route that has been chosen for a period of time and from a range of options in order to achieve business goals.’
Significantly, Harrison adds (2000:81): ‘Because strategy unfolds as a pattern of decisions and activity through time, the term ‘strategic’ can only be meaningfully applied to activities in which the organisation wishes to invest now for some future return.’ The strategy in Guardian Financial Services is translated as the annual Business Plan and the 2001 document included the statement:
Ensure that all the requirements of the Financial Services Authority are met and adopted as ‘best practice’.
The key strategic aim for 2001 above would include members of the training and development team in working to meet this objective thus working in partnership with the business.
Moorby (1996:39) suggests that ‘conventional approaches to dvelopment and training have worked from assumptions about identifying training needs based on job specifications and job descriptions.’ Mayo (1999:20) adopts a more forceful line when he warns ‘… of the risks of Human Resource Development determining its own agenda – built from courses it has always run, from areas that are fashionable or enjoyable to trainers or from some kind of ‘training needs analysis’ that may be alittle more than a summary of appraisal outputs ….’ A more positive outlook is taken by the annual CIPD training survey, carried out in conjunction with the Centre for Labour Market Studies at the University of Leicester. The main trends from these surveys is a drive to link training to strategic business objectives and ‘… a shift towards a more strategic approach to training ….’, Harrison (2000:3)
Given the business strategy of implementing the requirements of the Financial Services Authority the issue remained as to exactly how the training and development team could support it. Mayo (1996) recommends an 8-step methodology to get from business to learning goals, including initially ‘What business goal are we trying to achieve?’ through to ‘Do we have time to make the capability changes?’ As Harrison (2000:91) puts it, ‘There should be a shared identification of the main strategic initiatives to which the organisation is committed, and agreement on the Human Resource Development goals, strategy and plans that will best support them.’
Reid and Barrington (1999:180) consider that ‘an organisation’s philosophy towards the training and development of employees is reflected in its policy: this governs the priorities, standards and scope of its training activities. All organisations have atraining and development policy; it may be explicit or implicit.’ I have included a copy of the Guardian Financial Services’ Training and Development Policy Statement as Appendix A which in Reid and Barrington’s (1999:180) terms ‘… defines the relationship between the organisation’s objectives and its commitment to the training and development function.’ As part of the Human Resource Development (HRD) plan to meet the business strategy the training and development team drew up a programme of training events (see Appendix B).
Whilst it will be a matter of years before the full implications of N2 are known Guardian Financial Services has made a firm commitment in its business plan to achieve success and senior management will seek confirmation from the business of this success. As Brookes (1995:35) affirms, ‘as the purpose of a training or development intervention is usually to benefit the organisation that is financing it, as well as the individuals participating, we need to be able to assess and evaluate the results obtained.’
Bramley (1999:4) defines evaluation as ‘.. a process of establishing the worth of something’ and with specific regard to training: ‘Evaluation of training is a process of gathering information with which to make decisions about training activities.’
Harrison (2000:309) identifies a range of possible reasons why a particular learning event or programme should be evaluated including, ‘…cost … , or effects on learners, or impact on job peformance, or outcomes relevant to the profitability, performance, flexibility or survival of the organisation as a whole.’ According to Bee (1999:176) there are four levels of evaluation, ‘reaction level … , … immediate level … ,intermediate level … , ultimate level …’. The levels range from learners’ feelings about the training, their learning and the effect on job performance through to the effect on the organisation.
Wade (1999:4) has developed this four-part model further and has adapted it into into the ‘Response, Action, Results and Impact’ model which stresses the need to put learning into practice at an earlier stage and draws the point that: ‘Historically, evaluation stops at the RESPONSE level, where you discover how participants felt about the training and what they learned. But that’s not enough for today’s organisation. Training is being scrutinized to discover its worth.’
Is evaluation an issue for post-training only? Bramley (1999:134) points out that ‘most trainers when advising others on how to evaluate training, use some form of setting objectives …. This is not surprising: deciding what the training is intended to achieve, pre-setting objectives … evaluating whether they have been achieved is a sound way to ensure effective training.’
However, Reay (1994:25) adds that ‘the first and most crucial feature of an evaluation is validity, which means it must do what it says it will do.’ Bee (1999:187) in fact goes further and introduces ‘internal’ and ‘external’ validity; the former ‘… is concerned with how well the study measures what we want or are aiming to find out’ and the latter, ‘… with the extent that the findings can be applied beyond the group involved in the study.’
Look at different effect of evaluation – Bee 4 methods, immediate to ultimate
FPC 90% satisfied training successful mock exams to 95% FPC 2 reults compared 65% IFA have to pass…..FPC business plan for some time effect on organisation
Yet reid and barrington (1999:258) talk about multi-causal may not be effect of training but also say earlier training involvement more likely training effect
Within the development plan a training event was delivered to a group of Support Managers on 21 November; the following observations and analysis relate to my experience with that group of learners when dealing with the requirements of the new Training and Competence regime.
Immediate effect of group who knew each other well compared to earlier group therefore whilst elements of tuckman’s forming etc were still present effect was different.…no significant change…..changes & perception were viewed more confiedntly by experienced group…..follett leder no longer necessary…brown (P4) behviour uniform , no all comfortable each other own position….assumption that all OK (p72…..Jacques)..’Further assumptions may include believing that we know…same way’. Not true as 1 in particular had problems with 1 issue, I learned a lesson ….norms or rules know me….p168 ‘often there is also a norm against expressing …presentation.’
Summary ….page 13 FinAdvr….(regulation) ‘the changes will …..Big Brother’. Clear that no of cos (check bibliography for exact words) adopting a confrontational approach, GFS workig with rules as best praticet to embody in business proceses …..t& d have key role to play which successful to-date will feature in Bplan 2002 & become part of way of life in GFS
Include summary – impact of n2, significance, quote from Fin Advr
Bibliography:
Bee F. & R.(1999) Training Needs Analysis and Evaluation, London: CIPD
Bramley P.(1999) Evaluating Training, London: CIPD
Brookes J.(1995) Training and Development Competence, London: Kogan Page Limited
Brummer A.(2001), ‘City Comment’, Daily Mail, 4 December, p.67
DfEE (2000) Employers Skill Survey: Case Study Banking, Finance and Insurance Sector, London: DfEE
DfEE (2000) Employers Skill Survey : Statistical Report, London :DfEE
Fin Advr ……
Harrison R.(2000) Employee Development, London: CIPD
Holcomb J.(1998) Training Evaluation Made Easy, London: Kogan Page Limited
Jaques D.(2000) Learning in Groups, London: Kogan Page Limited
John D.(2001), ‘Round Table Debate’, Financial Adviser, 29 November, pp.40/1
Maund L.(1999) Understanding People and Organisations, Cheltenham: Stanley Thornes
Mayo A.(1999) Creating a Training and Development Strategy, London: CIPD
Moorby E.(1996) How to Succeed in Employee Development, Berkshire: McGraw-Hill Publishing Company
Mumford A.(2000) Management Development, Strategies for Action, London: CIPD
Reay D. G.(1994) Evaluating Training, London: Kogan Page Limited
Reid M. A. & Barrington H.(1999) Training Interventions, Promoting Learning Opportunities, London: CIPD
Stewart J. (1997) Managing Change Through Training and Development, London: Kogan Page Limited
Tessmer M.(1998) Planning and Conducting Formative Evaluations, London: Kogan Page Limited
Wade.P. A.(1995) Measuring the Impact of Training, London: Kogan Page Limited
Wood S. (Ed), (1994) Continuous Development, the Path to Improved Performance, London: CIPD
Appendix B
Staff Development Plan – ‘N2’ 2001
