Slashdot Mirror
Are You Getting Enough Say In Your Training?
DrEducator asks: "Has your company ever contracted external instructors to train its programmers? Have you been satisfied with the lecturer's level of expertise? I think we all have a good grasp of how vital the role of training is to both a corporation and its employees, but given its importance should you have more of a say in selecting or evaluating instructors before they deliver training? I firmly believe in the tenet that 'geeks should train geeks'. Moreover, I think that the geeks themselves have to take a more active role in the whole process. So, I'm curious - do you think you have enough say in your training? Do you actively refer instructors that you've seen at conferences or previously taken courses from (university, college, or adult ed)? If not, have you had the opportunity to interview an instructor, or at least review their qualifications? Share your experience - how much input do you want/need/have?"
Who trains the trainers? I do the training for our end users, but for the other 2 geeks in the company, we just casually share knowledge. We don't have time to do a formal training for each other. However, a key for us is documenting what we do so we can look at eachother's notes in the event we want to learn about one another's projects.
Every year, I get a personal training budget. I can spend that money on whatever technical training I want, from whomever I want. Obviously, if I choose to take courses out of state, the money will go much less far due to travel expenses, so I mostly take them locally. It usually works out to about 4 weeks of training per year.
I guess you could say my company treats me like an adult - or maybe like a member of the family. It gives me the money I need to get good-quality training, then trusts me to decide what training I need, where I should take it, etc.
It's a really good situation, and one of the reasons I've been working at the same company for nearly 10 years now.
-Joe
In the past 4 years working for Company X, I've had 4 hours of company-paid-for-it training. Those 4 hours were for training as some massive quality control initiative (1984 Motorola Technology, now known as Six Sigma).
The training consisted of the instructor reading aloud overhead transparencies.
Every other request has been denied.
So, getting some training in the first place would be wonderful.
Perhaps I've been exposed to too many of those "intensive, hands on training" short courses that purport to teach everything about a topic in a few days. Generally, though, I've found such courses to be of little value. Personally, I'd rather learn by reading a book, interacting with peers and trying things out on my own. This style of learning is more incremental -- and I think it leads to better knowledge of the subject.
While I'm aware of the problem of using universities as a model, it's interesting that rather than two (or more) eight hour training sessions over a few days, universities will stretch the same amount of class time over several months, with practice time (homework) and discussion interspersed with the formal lectures. Practice, to me, is essential to really learning something. And "hands on, intensive" training just doesn't provide enough time for practice.
I have taught a few, very short courses myself. The approach I used was 2 or 3 two hour sessions spread over multiple days. There was plenty of time for practice during the training sessions. Students could also practice on their own between sessions. Some actually did. I also provided students with thoroughly documented examples that they could refer to back at their jobs. Finally, I made myself available for further consultation. My students indicated they found my approach quite helpful.
"Beer is proof God loves us and wants us to be happy." -- B. Franklin
Check out the official page here.
If you are in the Rochester NY area check them out. CSH is a very cool place that always has something going on (ping our soda machine!). Maybe you could give a seminar?
-Benjamin Meyer
Do you changes clothes while making the "chee-chee-cha-cha-choh" transformation sound?
On item #2 there in your list of mistakes, I'd venture to say that honestly - you're better off in the position your in.
The people complaining "I don't know how to do that!" who get sent off to training are still going to come back with less usable knowledge than you have by figuring it out, hands-on.
What I've started figuring out is that training is of relatively little value unless it earns you some type of certification upon its completion. Certifications help get you future jobs. The other stuff doesn't. I've been to all sorts of training on everything from MS Exchange Server to Dynamic HTML development - and without certs. from any of it, people don't seem to really care.
I doubt the people getting shipped off to training classes in response to the "I can't do it!" exclamations are earning certifications.
You assumed, I assumed programming.
Like I said the only training that "worked" as a new language course.
I have been around for a while. Until the knowledge is used, no training is worth the money spent.
It would be better spent throwing a party, to build moral. Have not seen those be very suceesful either.
Training is not a goal of a company. Dollars are. If you want to train yourself, then do it. It shows that you have more on the ball than the other around you.
The most successful training I have seen was the internal training program that TRW set up in its northern Virginia offices. I was there five years and found that it worked quite well.
First, we had a committee, chaired by Human Resources but staffed by employee volunteers. Second, we had a budget with which to furnish classrooms and pay instructors. Our classrooms had PCs, Mac, Linux, and various servers. We managed the classrooms, scheduled instruction, and picked instructors. The instructors were fellow employees.
Using your own employees has several advantages. First, you know this guy or gal. You can look at their work and see that they know their stuff. Next, the person knows you and they can tailor the instruction accordingly--like match it to current or future projects. Finally, the person is available during the work day for questions should they arise. For example, I became Joe-X-Windows and, as a result, had my pick of projects
Classes were mostly held after work hours, starting at 5pm. Instructors were paid (8 years ago) $25/hr for preparation (negotiated ahead of time with the training committee) and $30/hr instruction time. Slots went first come first serve or, occassionally, to projects/employees where a need was seen.
Everyone got a lot out of this: The student got a good class. The instructor got some extra money, the chance to look good to his/her peers, and the learning experience of teaching. And the company got off cheap! Not that we didn't send people outside when necessary, but looking inside worked very well.
"Love is a familiar; Love is a devil: there is no evil angel but Love." --William Shakespeare ('Love's Labors Lost')
Disclaimer: I am a trainer. I teach C++/Java/Oracle and related stuff to geeks.
As noted elsewhere in this discussion, there are two very large problems in the training industry.
1. People who know the material, and therefore think they can explain it...without lots of communication skills.
2. People who are excellent trainers who are not subject matter experts as well...so they can't actually answer the questions.
I have a relatively simple test for High Quality training. Ask them to skip the slides. If someone can give a coherent explanation and answer questions without the slides...they are usually worth listening to.
At the same time...the high-end geeks are usually not the target audience for management-created-training. I find as a trainer that management tends to expect me to make sure that the least technical of my students get up to speed on whatever I am teaching. My guess is that if you read slashdot, and you read O'Reilly books, then you could get a lot of what I teach without me there. However, that is not the normals state for people learning. Training classes exist so the people who don't read O'Reilly and slashdot can learn new technologies (well, that's why the worthwhile training courses exist).
It is very rare to find a trainer who can answer the really hard questions. Why? Because mostly, the really hard questions don't come up in training gigs...so it is not useful to know.
If someone were to want a serious training, try finding a trainer to start a project with a team. Bring someone in for 2-3 weeks, and sign them up as project manager/mentor for a technology that the group doesn't have. That's a serious training...that no one seems to want.
One last thing...from inside the industry
A lot of the training firms have gone under, and a lot of them have slimmed down. What I have most noticed though (being there myself) is that the industry is heavily populated by independents, almost all of whom have left. Only the ones who have the rep. (and skills) are left. If you get a contract trainer now, very good odds that they are good at what they do.
--K
Disclaimer: I'm a Washtech member.
As a member-run union of tech workers, we found out what our members wanted. Training was one of those things that are members wanted and that we could accomplish in the near-term.
So we do have geeks training geeks. Classes happen if folks want them and if we can find a qualified teacher. Qualified has come to mean, 'knows his/her stuff and can communicate it'. We have hired some non-members on occasion, too. They're damn cheap, and unemployed members can delay payment for 6 months.
But really - contrast the fate of most geeks to a union construction worker, like an electrician.
Geeks (most) pay for college. Union construction worker - employer paid apprenticeship program of class-room instruction and OJT.
So how many geeks start out their work careers paying off debt? How many construction workers have debt starting out?
Geeks have to continually upgrade skills to avoid being obsolete. You can check out the responses to this story as to what are chances are. Construction workers have to upgrade their skills as well - whether mandated safety programs or for new tech. Union construction workers have zero out of pocket costs for this, paid from dues and from employer contributions.
oh yeah, us geeks are sooooo smart.
. This sig unintentionally left blank. I meant to put something here, but I'm busy.
Another industry with short-term projects is construction. These guys work themselves out of a job just like we do.
But there are some big differences on training!
Really - contrast the fate of most geeks to a union construction worker, like an electrician.
Geeks (most) pay for college. Union construction worker - employer paid apprenticeship program of class-room instruction and OJT.
So how many geeks start out their work careers paying off debt? How many construction workers have debt starting out?
Geeks have to continually upgrade skills to avoid being obsolete. You can check out the responses to this story as to what are chances are.
Construction workers have to upgrade their skills as well - whether mandated safety programs or for new tech. Union construction workers have zero out of pocket costs for this, paid from dues and from employer contributions.
That's why I'm a washtech member. Here's our training program - geeks training geeks.
. This sig unintentionally left blank. I meant to put something here, but I'm busy.