Critical process

1 March, 2010

When training budgets are tight, every employer must make sure they are spending each penny wisely to get the best return from their investment in each employee.

The most effective way to achieve this is to carry out a full training needs analysis linked to role descriptions, personal appraisal results and both current and future organisation objectives, and then to prioritise the results.

This allows a training programme to be developed which concentrates on specific learning outcomes to effect real change and achieve business objectives, while living within limited means. This approach also ensures that the material used and exercises developed are relevant to the working lives and aspirations of the individuals involved.

Must, Need, Want
The priority for training intervention must address competency needs that are preventing the achievement of day-to-day job requirements. These might include critical issues like health, safety and environmental compliance or key technical skills affecting basic service delivery. No manager can afford to ignore such failings.

Every organisation has expectations of the facilities function that go beyond mere compliance. A successful FM team delivers against important business goals linked to financial, service or quality challenges. FMs need their people to be capable of achieving these targets.

Developing every member of the facilities team to fulfil their individual potential is what every facilities manager wants to do. Investing in the future to create succession plans and reduce recruitment costs delivers medium- to long-term returns, but musts and needs should always take precedence over wants.

Once training requirements have been logically identified and carefully prioritised, the manager can plan how these needs will be met. Analysis will show where the most common failings occur and a team-wide solution may provide the best value for money intervention. This could be simply delivered through a carefully crafted communications exercise, by a managers’ ‘roadshow’ or a simultaneous ‘workplace talks’ programme.

Where common issues exist in specific roles, the most cost-effective solution is likely to be the delivery of an in-house training course. This is a highly efficient approach that enables tailoring of the content to address specific needs, as well as reducing travel costs, time and carbon impact, and providing very low costs per trainee compared with sending them on public courses.

The competency gaps of individuals are likely to be the most expensive to address. Alternatives to public training courses should be explored, including coaching, self-study or peer-to-peer training. At a time when training spend is restricted, it is vitally important that each manager understands the strengths and weaknesses of their people. By identifying their musts, needs and wants, a programme can be developed that will ensure performance is maintained.