This essay explores the benefits of training to an organisation and the individual and reasons why firms neglect training to their disadvantage with individuals responding by simply filling the gap.

Training is also as beneficial to the organisation as it is to the individual. The following benefits for the firm may be anticipated. A greater volume of work is expected from trained staff; training increases employees’ versatility and flexibility in the workplace by extending their range of activities; it safeguards productivity by preparing employers for future jobs and segregates firms from shortage of skills. It also allows firms to adapt to the changing business environment and reduces helps to eliminate costs resulting from correction of errors (Kennedy and Reid, 1986). However, while there are positive impacts of training on productivity and reduction of skill shortages, its link to profit and quality of production are hard to quantify (Redman and Wilkinson, 2009), a problem mostly blamed on the lack of evaluating training by the companies, seeing that its returns rarely justify the reasons they carried out (Berge, 2008).

The advantages mentioned above can only be of interest to an employer if measured also in cost-benefit terms in relation to resources needed to achieve them. For an employer, at the level of the firm, it is believed that there should be a link between training, performance and profitability of an organisation Grabber et al., n.d., however, argues, in Berge’s (2008) study, that training has no inherent value, its worth is determined by the performance gains and gaps it catalyses and addresses and the opportunities it can help to create in a given environment. Alternatively, training should be accountable like other investments by an organisation in order for it to be considered an investment, and its contributions to organisation’s results should be ascertained (Pineda 2010).

This conflict of evaluating the costs of training and the pressures to reduce training spend tend to lead organisations into treating training costs as an operating expense resulting in a neglect of training (Finegold and Soskice, 1988), a problem Longenecker and Fink (2005), in their study, found that the performance of the firm suffers, creating organisational problems in the short and long run. Longenecker and Fink (2005) gave evidence in their study of 278 managers operating in 16 different functional businesses from top organisations. They reported 33% of the managers confirmed a reluctance to spend money on training needs which eventually creates problems more expensive than training costs. Also, according to Dumas and Hanchane (2010), there are likelihoods of the individual leaving for another firm; thereby leading to a loss of investment by the employer, this ‘poaching’ risk dissuades firms from training. This further leads to some other reasons for neglecting training which will be discussed broadly in the sections that follow.

In a general manager’s view, according to Longenecker and Fink’s (2005) study, ‘when organisations are serious to improve, they make it a priority resulting to good things... but there are always reasons for failing to properly train which eventually leads to trouble’. Considering the present status in the UK, for instance, the skills system, driven by the needs of the employers and individuals, is crying out for a reform. Employers are concerned about skill shortages with about half of companies concerned with the overall literacy of the workforce leaving only one-fifth of employers providing remedial training for school leavers. Gilbert (2010). Ben Wilmot, senior policy adviser at the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, said: “With the economic challenges faced by this country over the next few years, boosting employment and productivity will be crucial - something that will only be achieved if the UK's people management skills deficit is tackled.” If employers and employees benefit from training, it is therefore important to understand why few organisations invest in training with individuals following the trend as well. The sections that follow will outline how most related organisational structures and practices have combined to discourage training.

In some organisations, they place an over-reliance on on-the-job training, also known as ‘trial-and-error learning and in the process of trying to improve skills needed on the job to lead the operation forward, they tend to ‘shoot-in-the-dark’ (Longenecker and Fink, 2005). Longenecker and Fink (2005) described this sort of training as being handled in a ‘piece-meal’ or ‘ad-hoc’ manner, preventing firms from developing a first-rate process through a formal/systematic training process. They also identified, in their study that this usually leads to more costly and unpredictable problems when errors are made and an individual learning through such process tends to develop bad habits with a lack of efficiency in ways to deal with issues.

Secondly, in terms of management training, there are interesting points to note for reasons organisations are reluctant to train. Firstly, based on Longenecker and Fink’s (2005) study, training is not viewed as ‘top management priority’ but rather as a ‘nuisance’ or a ‘distraction’ where there are more important needs to attend to; secondly, organisations are not willing to take time out to train, an opportunity, according to their study, managers are willing to embrace if encouraged to do so, provided the activity is perceived to improve career success and get work done easily. According to their study, they found that this could result in negative consequences in the long-run which might not be recognised initially until serious problems arise, and if realised, efforts to train will be too rushed to be effective.

Furthermore, most jobs are designed to be tightly controlled by the firms with a total absence of discretion, responsibility and skills on the part of the employee (Grugulis, 2007), better described by Redman and Wilkinson (2009), citing  Pye (1968) as ‘Workmanship of Certainty’ where all decisions are taken from the top and workers are simply required to follow instructions. When a job requires the individual’s arms and legs, according to an employer interviewed by Dench et al (1999) cited by Grugulis (2007), it is difficult to see how training is required. Training will depend upon an array of tasks they are asked to perform. The call centre is a good illustration, staffs are given a script and calls are tightly timed with intense monitoring and listening by the supervisors and individual performances displayed (Redman and Wilkinson, 2009). This sort of regulated job design is said to be ‘de-skilling’ for the employees. This in turn implies that workers are paid low wages, a term Finegold and Soskice (1988) describes as ‘low skill equilibrium’.

In addition, there have been huge structural changes over the past years, long term shifts in employment from manufacturing to low skill and low quality services (Finegold and Soskice, 1988). In the US, McDonalds accounts for more employees than the US Steel (Macdonald and Sirianni, 1996). Manufacturing accounts for less than one-third of British employment with a decline in its share in the labour market. The growing employment is in the part-time service sector with jobs that require little or no training Gapper, (1988). In the retail trade, for instance, Gadrey (2000) describes this kind of jobs as being equivalent to a personnel strategy based on zero competence, qualification, training and career which simply means that it constitutes poorly paid part-time workers with a flexible demand available at short notice.’ Although service work also include many of the most highly skilled and knowledgeable workers (medics, IT professionals and teachers), it also covers care workers and personal services far more numerous and outnumbering compared to those of the knowledgeable workers. (Grugulis, 2007).

More so, in a case of organisational restructuring due to increasing efficiency and effectiveness, individuals are assumed to take responsibility for their own learning thereby initiating training needs-especially advanced transferable skills- when a skill gap is detected, in a bid to survive the restructuring process and also to be employable elsewhere (Carbery and Garavan, 2005).The organisation in this case provide firm-specific skills only relevant to the business on ground. In order words, according to Carbery and Garavan, (2005), employability and self development is perceived to rest solely on the individual which is a source of motivation and willingness to train and learn. This reason and the others that follow explain why individuals themselves are also reluctant to invest in their own training.

In cases where firms assume that individuals are responsible for their own training, their reward system shapes an employee’s incentive to pursue training. Although education levels are necessary in deciding where an employee enters the job structure of a firm, incentives are low after they have taken up the job (George and Shorey, 1985). This aspect of work is particularly strong for the number of workers found in the peripheral sector of the labour market, particularly temporary workers (Mayhew, 1986). To back this up, Dumas and Hanchane (2010) highlights that individuals are unable to engage in training in cases of market failures. For a national minimum wage, it is quite difficult to pay training costs by taking wage cuts. In their study, in view of this risk, they showed that the solution proposed by the French government in July 1971 was state intervention, where firms that refused to train where made to pay a tax, in order to invest in firms that train.  

There are bound to be consequences of improper training programs which Longenecker and Fink (2005), in their study, pointed out to include a loss of team-work and communication break due to ‘negative people issues’ in the work place. It is therefore hard to achieve performance goals when they do not possess the required skills, leading to a reduction in employee productivity as a result of job dissatisfaction, staff absenteeism and reduced turnover. Human Capital (Becker, 1964) appears to be an important determinant of a firm’s performance, as Dumas and Hanchane (2010) highlights in citing Nelson and Phelps (1966), also an investment in Human Capital is known to increase productivity and innovation. An increase therefore, as they continue, in vocational training appears to be essential for firm development and survival. Gilbert (2010) reports a new skill strategy by the UK government which aims to address the current failings in skills training and to promote economic growth, by increasing the number of adult apprenticeships by 2014-15.As he continues, there are also targets to replace training for gain with an SME-focused programme encouraging employers to train low skilled workers and to help secure work, for individuals receiving benefits, through relevant training. This will help to remove disincentive around benefits as well as bureaucracy.

In conclusion, the importance and benefits of training to an organisation, as well as the individual was explored in considerable details followed by possible reasons to explain why some organisations and their employees choose not engage in effective training programs in an era where competitors are ready to take advantage of any ‘faltering’ (Longenecker and Fink, 2005). Training and skills are pivotal elements in the aspect of organisational competitiveness provided human capability is the key resource in the business (Keep, 1989). However, where training is treated as a ‘nuisance’ or operating costs or jobs are designed to minimise workers’ contribution, then employees are not likely to have the required skills for firm efficiency and effectiveness due to a drop in productivity. Adding also, although developments such as increasing levels of vocational education and training are welcome for reasons of gains hoped for in productivity and profitability and individuals having better life chances, little attention is paid to the demand side. What is of utmost concern, as Felstead et al (2002) observes, is that discretion is rapidly declining. It is therefore difficult to see how skills developed in the educational system can be put into practice in the workplace when individuals have no choice of what and how to do it. People are only likely to be stressed and frustrated when trapped in jobs that underutilise their skills (Green and Gallie, 2002; Rose, 2000).

       References

• Anonymous, (2007), getting the Best out of Training: Value in Evaluation, Development and Learning in organisations, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 28-30.
• Berge Z. L. (2008), Why is it so hard to evaluate training in the workplace, Industrial and Commercial Training, Vol. 40, No. 7, pp. 390-395.
• Carberry R. and Garravan T.N. (2005), Organisational Restructuring and Downsizing: Issues related to learning, training and employability of survivors, Journal of European Industrial Training, Vol. 29, No. 6, pp. 448-508.
• Dench S., Perryman S. And Giles L. (1999), ‘Employers perception of key skills’, in IES Report. Sussex: Institute of Manpower Studies.
• Donovan P., Hannigan K. And Crowe D., [2001], the learning transfer system approach to estimating the benefits of training: empirical evidence, Journal of European Industrial Training, vol. 25, no. 2/3/4, pp. 221-228.
• Dumas A. and Hanchane S. (2010), How does job training increase firm performance? The case of Morocco, International Journal of Manpower, Vol.31, No.5, pp. 585-602.
• Felstead A., Ashton D. and Green F. (2002), Work Skills in Britain 1986-2002, Nottingham: DFES.
• Finegold  D. and Soskice D.(1988), The failure of training in Britain: analysis and prescription’, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 60-81.
• Gadrey J. (2000), Working time configurations: theory, methods and assumptions for an international comparism, in C. Baret, S.Lerndorff and L. Sparks (eds) Flexible Working in Food retailing: A Comparism between France, Germany, the UK and Japan, London and New York: Routledge.
• George, K. D. and Shorey, J. (1985), 'Manual Workers, Good Jobs and Structured Internal Labour Markets', British Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol.23, No. 3, pp. 425.
• Gilbert H. (2010). National skills Strategy backed by employers groups. URL: http://www.Xperthr .co.uk. [Assessed on 18/11/2010].
• Green F. and Gallie D., (2002), High skills and high anxiety: Skills, Hard work and mental wellbeing, SKOPE Research Paper. Universities of Oxford and Warwick.
• Grugulis I. (2007), Skills, Training and Human Resources Management:  A Critical text. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Heyes J.and Stuart M. (1996), ‘Does training matter? Employee experiences and attitudes’ Human Resources  Management Journal, Vol. 6, No. 3,pp. 7-21.
• Keep E. (1989), Corporate Training Strategies: the vital component? In J. Storey (ed.), New Perspective on Human Resources Management, London: Rout ledge.
• Kennedy J. and Reid M. (1986), Training Interventions, Bradford: Dotesios Press.
• Longenecker C.O. and Fink L.S. (2005), Management Training: Benefits and Lost opportunities (Parts 1&2), Industrial and Commercial Training, Vol. 37, No. 2, pp. 73-79.
• Longenecker, C.O. and Simonetti, J.A. (2001), Getting Results: Five Absolutes for High Performance, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
• MANPOWER SERVICES COMMISION (1985) .A new training initiative: an agenda for action. Sheffield: Manpower Services Commission.
• Martin H. J. (2010), Improving training impact through effective follow-up: techniques and their application. Journal of Management Development, Vol. 29, No. 6, pp. 520-534.
• Mayhew, K. (1986), "Reforming the Labour Market', Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Vol.1, No. 2, pp. 60-79.
• Mcdonald C. L. and Sirianni C., (1996), Working in the Service Society, Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
• Pineda P. (2010), Evaluation of training in Organisations: A proposal for an integrated model, Journal of European Industrial Training, Vol. 34, No. 7, pp. 673-693.
• Pye D. (1968), the Nature and Art of Workmanship, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Redman T. And Wilkinson A. (2009), Contemporary Human Resources Management, (3rd Edition), England: Prentice Hall.
• Rose M. (2000), Work Attitudes in the expanding occupations, in changing boundaries in Employment, in K. Purcell (eds). Bristol: Academic Press.
•  .com [Assessed on 14/12/2010].