Recently I was asked:

"Is it fair that trainers be held responsible for improving employee performance? Although training may be seen on the surface as a "cause and effect activity" i.e. you train an individual and their performance increases until they reach a certain standard - I think we all really know that a person's learning (and performance standard) is a result of a wider range of systemic influences."

Trainers are and should be accountable to the bottom line like everyone else in the organization. The reason why we struggle with this is because of our outdated notion that training is what happens in the classroom.

Training is a business solution and should be measured like any other business solution. If a company invest time and money to design, develop, and deliver training their should be demonstrated return for the effort.

Classroom training is an event that should only be undertaken because there was clearly identified business need (not training need). Before one dime is spent on the development side of training we should know exactly with the training should produce.

Much of the trouble can be linked to using the wrong training measures: number of people in the class, the number of training days...Our inability to say that we are going to spend $25,000 to train and the gain will be $50,000 -$100,000 is what diminishes our position in the organization.

The only reason to train anyone in an organization is so that they deliver more RESULTS. We have to know what we are hoping to improve, increase, or reduce before taking up the time and spending the money.

Training that is tested only in the classroom is of no benefit to the organization. Training that is delivered to gain behavioral changes that can be viewed in the classroom is of no benefit to the organization. The only training that matters is the training that closes the specified performance gap so that the business results improve. Before you can impact the bottom line you must define the bottom line.

There are two important questions that must be answered:

QUESTION #1 - What does the company need more or less of?

All companies are looking for the same things like faster processing times, fewer mistakes, less rework, more sales, or less waste. It doesn't matter what job title employees have, their jobs or operations are expected to return more to the company than it takes away.

QUESTION #2 - What do employees need to know and do differently in order for the company to realize their goals?

If the company needs more sales, teaching your customer service agents to say please and thank or smile while they dial is not enough. The skill that employees need is to listen and solve the customers problem more efficiently.

All training should be designed and delivered to transfer directly to the workplace because that is the only place that it counts.

Training will never add value if the focus remains on skill development instead of appropriate skill application. We have to stop teaching people about "communication" and teach them how to communicate differently to improve relationships and business results.

It's less important that customer service agents know about the role of customer service and don't know how to truly serve customers.

There is a chasm of difference between the two.

For more information you may want to read: "Easier to Predict the Weather than Training ROI." http://think6results.com/showarticle.php?article=easitopr#beginning

Valarie is CEO of Think 6 Results -- a knowledge broker passionate about learning and improving performance in organizations. She