by Frank Gibson, Workforce Development Advisor, retired from The Ohio State University – Alber Enterprise Center
Community and technical colleges, career centers and joint vocational schools have always struggled with how to make a positive difference in workforce training. They often bear the brunt of criticism for the “skills gap” employers report when, in reality, employers share equally in the responsibility. Educational institutions have only the resources and capacity to provide core skill training upon which only employers can then provide on-the-job training to drive trainees to the job mastery needed.
Educational institutions are often tempted to assume more of the employer’s role in worker development but run into budget, feasibility and practicality limitations. This distracts them from their very important role of maintaining perpetually relevant core skill and related technical instruction that a high-quality technical education requires. Trying to provide all things to all employers never was the role of educational institutions so they should not take it too personally when good-intentioned efforts do not reach the expectations for them.
These institutions are often encouraged to use their limited resources to buy equipment or build facilities in order to support “customized, hands-on training.” The employer already has the facility and the latest technology in that community. The hard part has been convincing the employer that the school has a viable strategy that makes the employer want to imbed structured on-the-job training into the onsite natural order of learning the job. It would be even harder to convince them a training program, targeting a specific job of theirs, can be more effective offsite at a training facility than onsite.
Technology shifts so fast these days, and the focus of workforce training is so volatile, that it makes little sense for educational institutions to purchase equipment for training when only a few employers have similar equipment and the equipment may be obsolete before the school gets through the purchasing, installation and instructor training stages let alone before someone completes a 2-year training program. In addition, the company or companies that were targeted for this training might be acquired, closed or moved – leaving before any return on the investment of time, money and facilities are realized.
The Ohio State University – Alber Enterprise Center, where I was Program Manager, partnered with Proactive Technologies, Inc. on job-specific worker training projects since 1996 – 2016, until key staff retired the Center closed. Over the years, the “hybrid model” at the center of these projects focused resources very efficiently and effectively to provide the proper blend of structured on-the-job training and related technical instruction. Our Center provided a selection of remedial and related technical instruction (through our courses and those provided by our network of training providers) – selected from the thorough job/task analysis data collected and used by Proactive Technologies to set-up the onsite employer-specific structured on-the-job training programs. This helped us to provide the client- employer’s workers with core skill instruction that is “content relevant.
The structured on-the-job training setup and managed by Proactive Technologies provides task-by-task training so the related technical instruction the Alber Center coordinated for the client was quickly incorporated into the development of worker expertise the client needed. Each task training plan is designed to the “best practice” and in compliance with existing standard process documentation and standards. Each task training plan is designed using the exact tools and equipment the worker will be required to use while employed. Each worker’s development is reported monthly and completion of the structured on-the-job training is memorialized with a “Certificate of Job Mastery™” portfolio.
There is no need to build a training center, no need to purchase equipment. Each structured on-the-job training program is built around the employer’s equipment and processes, in the employer’s facility. If the employer anticipates a significant amount of hiring for a position and is willing to finance the building of a training center and outfit it with equipment they will be using, we could always accommodate them. But most of the small and midsize employers we work with couldn’t justify the investment. The approach we recommend typically is more than effective in meeting their needs.
If we were not working with the employer, that employer probably has some sort of unstructured and undocumented on-the-job training in practice anyway. Having Proactive Technologies provide structure and managed outcomes to what was once unstructured makes sense to the client and in most cases results in continued project expansion to other hourly and salary positions once the benefits of the approach are witnessed. This approach helps the client employer comply with ISO/AS/IATF type quality programs and supports LEAN improvements implementation. The client will realize an increase worker capacity, work quantity and quality, and a reduction the internal costs of training. The employer realizes a higher return on worker investment…faster. What is not to like?
Partnering with Proactive Technologies, also, allowed the Alber Center and its network of technical trainers to focus on what we did best. Some of these project clients kept the center engaged for two decades, with the employer-client continuing to rely on the partnership’s services and technical expertise to train their workforce in a world of constant change. As workers master their job, then we could bring in our performance improvement courses to drive outcomes higher.
There is no need to chase technology and spend scarce resources trying to simulate the employer’s work place. Simulation is only effective when there is a high level of “fidelity” (how accurately the simulation replicates the actual work being performed). Schools can focus their energy on accurately delivering the content-relevant related technical instruction piece of the hybrid model, and encourage employers to engage in structured on-the-job training that is recognized as more appropriately and effectively delivered onsite. But in order to be sustainable, the client has to see the value in the training proposed or they are less likely to be willing to invite the training provider inside and keep them engage for enough time to make a recognizable difference in their workforce development experience.
Find out more about Proactive Technologies, Inc. capabilities, including case studies. Use the Contact Us feature if you would like to discuss a project of your own.
Proactive Technologies, Inc.®; PROTECH; Human Resource Management for Tomorrow...Today!® and logo;