Theories Supporting Transfer of Training - Assignment Example

Training and development xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Name xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Course xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Lecturer xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date 1. Discuss reasons why Carlos training program did not transfer? Refer also to the barriers to transfer operating at school board. Generally, transfer of training/learning occurs when knowledge and skills that were initially learnt affect the way in which newly acquired knowledge and skills are performed and learnt (Saks et al 2010). Transfer is regarded positive or effective if performance and acquisition are facilitated and negative if these processes are impeded. In the context of specific transfer, following a period of learning about ones working place, transfer is deemed as the process of employing knowledge, attitudes and skills learned in a training program into the actual workplace environment. Principles, ideas and strategies of a training program set the pace for the transfer of knowledge and skills from the trainer to the trainees. Coates (2007) argues that in order for adult learners to develop professionally and personally and maximize the transfer of the training, a clear understanding of the factors that affect change and development is of essence. This, in addition to applying a range of learning approaches will enhance transfer of training. Carlos training program clearly does not portray key principles, ideas and strategies which is one of the major reasons which inhibited the transfer. Adults unlike children learn better in a learning context where they were involved in the planning and evaluation processes. Carlos solely organized the program without involving other teachers or even consulting with other parties. Besides that, adult learning is centered on experiential learning opportunities and is more problem-centered than content-centered. Carlos begins his training program by introducing his topic on communication rather than discussing with participants about the problem issue that was affecting the school board. His program focused on teaching about various aspects of communication and does not explicitly attack the problem at hand. Carlos ought to have modeled his training on content materials that contained immediate relevance. Trainers who act as facilitators are more likely to transfer the training content in comparison to those who act as lecturers. During the entire training program, Carlos acted as a lecturer; simply giving the notes he had researched and compiled. He ought to have created a co-operative learning climate where everyone actively participated. Another notable factor that hindered transfer in Carlos training is the learning approach he used. Simply training the participants on the identified period of time was not enough as they were bound to forget what they were taught. He ought to have incorporated other learning approaches such as experiential, action, collaborative, transformative and situated learning. These approaches emphasize that learning is a process and context based. This implies that it is continuous and can take place anywhere and at any time (Beard and Wilson 2002). In order to facilitate effective transfer, Carlos should have ensured that the participants are placed in a specific project where they will practice what they learnt in the training program. He should have taught the trainees on risk taking strategies so as to ensure their growth and motivation. Another notable barrier to effective transfer in the school board was under representation of participants in the program. Carlos selected teachers and parents for his training program and did not involve the school management team. As a matter of fact, the management are the main decision makers in the board hence the program would have been most applicable for them. Failure of involving then in the program translated to lack of transfer of training. 2. Describe some of the things that Carlos could have done before, during and after the training program to improve the transfer of training. There are several strategies that Carlos could have pursed in order to successfully transfer the training. First, he should have conducted a need analysis. This involves focusing on the needs and shortcomings of the organization through a proactive approach. The importance of the needs analysis is to ensure that the training program produces a positive impact towards the organizational results and corrects performance shortfalls that affect the business negatively (Cree and Macaulay 2000). Essentially, Carlos should have conducted a departmental analysis. Through this he would have identified the prevalence of the communication problem in the various departments including the management, teachers and parents departments. Interviews with representatives of these groups would enable him to answer questions such as which organizational results are not being met, which individual shortcomings are contributing to the failures and are the problems contributed by lack of skills and knowledge. The results of this survey will enable him design the training program. Involving learners in table discussions and structured practices is also imperative in reinforcing transfer of training. The second strategy that Carlos should have applied in ensuring effective training transfer is setting up or designing a training transfer program that would be relevant to adult learners. A training program that will support long-term ingraining of desired work habits and skills as well as reinforce follow up should be well articulated and systematic. Basically, it should begin by outlining the objectives of the project. The objectives should incorporate the expected behavior of participants in the workplace and should also be application oriented. The developmental program should also provide reason why the training program is being conducted in terms of the knowledge and skill gaps in the organization and the impacts of the training program towards the workplace performance and overall organizational results (Burke and Hutchins 2008). During the earlier stages of the program, Carlos should brainstorm with the trainees on the workplace challenges so as to make references to those scenarios in the course of the program. Carlos should also establish coordinated learning networks within the school to ensure a continuous learning process for the trainees. While managers are viewed as the main performance coaches in many setting, other interested parties can be used for instance program co-participants, co-workers, mentors and peers. The coaches are expected to give advice and encouragement to the trainees during an identified period of follow-up reinforcement (Richard 2004). Chiaburu et al (2010) suggests that the trainer can preferably create a system to support the learning networks and teach the participants and their coaches on how to use them. Some of the systems commonly used include roundtable discussions, telecommunications or webinars, online forums and action plan monitoring systems. The last step that Carlos ought to use is to evaluate results of the training. Developmental training programs should be preceded by evaluation and assessment. The purpose of evaluation is to determine if the training really worked. This would answer the question ‘Did people improve their performance?’ In addition, it will determine if the investment was worth the cost. Evaluation need not be done immediately after the program as participants are still struggling to undo their old behavior and adapt the new ones (Burker and Hutchins 2007). Therefore, measurements and results done at this time would be quite deceitful. 3. Discuss the role of the training transfer climate and the transfer system. How might they have contributed to the transfer problem at the school board? Training transfer climate and the transfer system play a major role in the outcome of the program. Of importance, when designing the training framework is the fact that the participants in the program are adults and not children. The theory of adult learning clearly distinguishes adult learning from children learning (Yamnill and McLean 2001). According to this theory, children are teacher-directed while adults are self-directed. Relative to children, who place less attention on their past learning experiences, prior learning experience of the adults, is a rich resource during the training. Besides that, children are guided by standardized, stepwise set of instructions during a training program as compared to adults whose training program is prompted by the need to solve real life problems. Notably, children’s learning is discipline or subject oriented while adult learning is performance centered. Adults will engage in a training program for the sole purpose of enhancing their current performance (Leberman et al 2006). In that case therefore, the training transfer climate should be geared at creating a collaborative environment where participant have a significant share in the process (Weissbein et al 2011). In order to achieve this, they should be involved in the planning process of the training program. Essentially, the trainer can select a representative committee to foresee the implementation of the program. In addition he should play the role of a facilitator and not a lecturer. He should create an atmosphere of discussion where participants get to ask questions and give personal opinions. The training should be problem oriented instead of content oriented. The purpose of the program should be to find ways of correcting or filling knowledge and skill gaps or deficiencies in the organization. Training programs that are content oriented mostly end up with negative transfer. Action learning form of transfer system is appropriate in reinforcing training transfer. In this kind of learning, the trainees refer back to their past experiences and mistakes and build on them to gain the desired results of the training program. The features of action learning are that it is question based, seeks to solve current problems and is basically a social process that enhances societal development. Situated learning is another form of learning that is effective in ensuring training transfer. The approach stresses on reflective learning and application of the training knowledge and skills to everyday work. According to the approach, learning and doing are two interdependent variables. This implies that one should learn from everyday experiences. Therefore, training should focus on empowering participants with tools of dealing with challenges they face on their daily activities (Calhoun 2006). By creating a collaborative training transfer climate, Carlos will ensured a long-term effect of his training. This will bestowed a feeling of belongingness in the participants and due to this they would feel obliged to act in accordance to what was taught in the training. In addition, they are likely to recommend the training to others in the organization and they anticipate for future programs. Engaging trainees in the discussion will also be useful as new ideas, besides what Carlos presents, will be aired out and probably be of much help. 4. Describe how Carlos should evaluate the outcomes from any future training course that he delivers Carlos can evaluate his training programs based on the four evaluation levels that were established by Kirkpatrick in 1959. The first level is the reaction level which basically seeks to measure the extent to which the participants were satisfied with the training program. Other areas that can be measured include the trainee’s perception of the quality of the program, perception of its usefulness and whether others can be interested in a similar training in future. The most appropriate data collection method in this level is the use of a single-posttest self report. Although the response rates in this kind of evaluation are high, it does not brings out a clear association of the knowledge gained with the behavior change after the program (Eckert 2000). The second level of evaluation is the learning level where the trainer evaluates the degree to which the participants absorbed and understood the training concepts. A single-subject pre/posttest design can be utilized. Areas that can be assessed in this level include the indicators of miscommunication, cultural influences on communication, and gender differences with regard to communication among others. The third kind of evaluation that Carlos can use is the behavior level. This evaluation seeks to determine if the individual trainees actually utilize the skills and knowledge acquired during the training in their work places. The Two-Group and Single-Group designs are most appropriate methods of gathering information about the behavior change of participants (Nikandrou et al 2009). The last evaluation level is the organizational level evaluation. This evaluation helps to assess the impact of the training program on organizational effectiveness and whether the task is cost effective. This can be achieved by reviewing and evaluating departmental results, financial statements, quality of standards and the organization’s overall image or reputation (Jellema et al 2006). References Beard, C, and Wilson, J 2002, The Power of Experiential Learning – A Handbook for Trainers and Educators, London: Kogan Page. Burke, L and Hutchins, M 2008, A study of best practice in training transfer and proposed model of transfer. Human resource development quarterly, volume 19, no. 2, p. 107-127. Burker, L, and Hutchins, M 2007, Training transfer: an integrated literature review. Human resource development review, Volume 6, issue 263. Calhoun, W 2006, The six disciplines of breakthrough learning: How to turn training and development into business results. San Francisco: Pfeiffer. Chiaburu, D, Dam, K, and Hutchins, H 2010, Social support in the workplace and training transfer: A longitudinal analysis. International journal of selection and assessment, Volume 18, No. 2. Coates, D 2007. Enhancing the transfer of training. Alexandria: ASTD press. Cree, V, and Macaulay, C 2000, Transfer of Learning in Professional and Vocational Education, London: Routledge. Eckert, W 2000, Situational enhancement of design validity: The case of training evaluation at the World Bank Institute. American Journal of Evaluation, Volume 21, p. 185-193. Jellema, F, Visscher, A, and Scheerens, J 2006, Measuring change in work behavior by multisource feedback. International Journal of Training and Development, Volume 10, no. 2, p. 121–139. Leberman, S, McDonald, L, and Doyles, 2006, S The transfer of learning: participants perspective of adult education and training. Hampshire: Gower publishing limited. Nikandrou, I, Brinia, V, and Bereri, E 2009, Trainee perception of training transfer: an empirical analysis. Journal of Europe industrial training, Volume 33, no. 3, p. 255-270. Richard, L 2004, Coaching and mentoring: How to develop top talent and achieve stronger performance. Boston: Harvard Business school. Saks, A, Haccoun, R, and Belcourt, M 2010. Managing performance through training and development. Toronto: Nelson education. Weissbein, D, Huang, J, Ford, K, and Scmidt, A 2011. Influencing learning states to enahanve trainee motivation and improve training transfer. Journal of business psychology, Volume 26, p. 423-435. Yamnill, S, and McLean, G 2001, Theories supporting transfer of training. Human Resource Development Quarterly, Volume 12, no.2, p. 195–208. Read More