|
The most recent contribution was published only a few months ago: “Talk to any group of layman or professionals about what is broken in the current learning and development process, and most will tell you it’s the lack of serious post training follow-through.” The authors conclude that less than 5% of training and development funds are committed to what happens after training. Jack Zenger, Joe Folkman and Robert Sherwin, “The Promise of Phase 3,” T&D (January 2005), pp. 30-34.
How big is this problem? “There is a growing recognition of a ‘transfer problem’ in organizational training today. It is estimated that while American industries annually spend up to $100 billion on training and development, not more than 10% of these expenditures actually result in transfer to the job.” – Timothy T. Baldwin and Kevin J. Ford, “Transfer of Training: A Review and Directions for Future Research,” Personnel Psychology 41 (May 1982), pp. 63-105.
Ten years later: “Considering all types of training and low levels of transfer found by HRD researchers, a generous assumption is that perhaps 50% of all training content is still being applied a year after training delivery. Considering our rough estimate of $50 billion spent on formal training per year, that means a loss of $25 billion a year to organizations for training not fully used on the job.” – Mary L. Broad and John W. Newstrom, Transfer of Training, (New York: Addison-Wesley, 1992), p. 12.
This issue is not new. Almost 50 years ago, an expert presented “…mounting evidence that shows that very often the training makes little or no difference in job behavior.” The author concluded that ingraining a skill requires not just job-focused training, but “rewards and punishments, incentives and deterrents in the job situation,” all of which are controlled by management. – James N. Mosel, “Why Training Programs Fail to Carry Over,” Personnel 34 (1957), pp. 56-64.
One study surveyed trainers to identify and rank order the most serious barriers to transfer. The most significant barrier was “lack of reinforcement on the job.” The next most serious impediment was “interference by the immediate environment,” meaning work and time pressures, insufficient authority, ineffective work processes, inadequate equipment or facilities. – John W. Newstrom, “The Management of Unlearning: Exploding the ‘Clean Slate’ Fallacy,” Training and Development Journal (August 1983), pp. 36-39.
This study concluded that any form of follow-up is rare: L. M. Saari, T. R. Johnson, S. D. McLaughlin, and D. M. Zimmerle, “A Survey of Management Training and Education Practices in U.S. Companies,” Personnel Psychology 41 (April 1988), pp. 731-743.
“Training can only elaborate on that which already exists; it cannot create new behavior for an environment that will not support it.” – Alex Mironoff, “Teaching Johnny to Manage,” Training (March 1988), p. 53.
“To ensure that a training intervention for managers produces the payoff that is intended, strategies to transfer the learning must be carefully integrated into the instructional game plan.” – Michael J. Kruger and Gregory D. May, “Transfer of Learning in Management Training: Building the Payoff into the Instructional Design,” Performance and Instruction Journal (April 1986), pp. 3-6.
“A clearly defined system should be initiated which unites the trainer, trainee, and the manager, where possible in the transfer process.” – Melissa S. Leifer and John W. Newstrom, “Solving the Transfer of Training Problems,” Training and Development Journal (August 1980), pp. 42-46.
|
