Every Work Task Is A Micro Unit

Everything About the Task Should Be Trained At Same Time For Maximum Efficiency and Effectiveness
by Dean Prigelmeier, President of Proactive Technologies, Inc.

In an article appearing in EHS Today entitled, “Microlearning’s Big Impact on Safety Training,” a case was made that providing safety training in “short bursts may help workers retain critical safety knowledge and procedures.” The assumption is that the content is relevant, well organized (“structured”) for delivery and delivered for comprehension.

Learning general safety concepts and techniques in an online or lecture format provides the basic knowledge and understanding of general safety. Unfortunately, in a lot of the cases with this type of microlearning, to which tasks of each worker’s job this information needs to be applied, and specifically how, is usually left up to the individual to sort out. This leaves an opportunity for the learner to recall some of the information incorrectly or decide the information does not apply to the task at hand. The greater the time-gap between learning this information and applying it to an applicable task, the greater the chance that the information will be forgotten or not remembered correctly.

This isn’t a criticism of micro-learning as applied to safety learning, it is about micro-learning of knowledge that is intended to improve performance but is not incorporated directly into all applicable tasks of a job that a worker is responsible to perform. Training on a task procedure, as opposed to transferring knowledge about an aspect of a task, requires all relevant task information, a demonstration of the best practice and repetitive practice that reinforces the knowledge while incorporating it into consistent task performance. This is what every employer likes to believe happens anyway, but rarely seeks confirmation to ensure it.

The worker is inundated with training all day, every day. It comes randomly (e.g. here is how to setup this machine, here is how to fill out this report, here is how you order tools, here is how to operate this machine for this part, etc.). Typically there is no structure to this, and every person asked to be an ad hoc or reluctant trainer has a different style, different level of competence and social skills. Every trainee is different; introverted, extroverted, quick learner, slow learner, self-starter, non-starter. Add to this the random, unstructured, disjointed training process and it can be a recipe for failure…everyone’s!

The task and everything about the task, including engineering specifications (or where to find them), quality specifications, safe performance requirements, proper tools and reference documents, are all necessary for quick mastery and accurate performance. De-emphasis or omission of any one of the critical criteria will undermine mastery achievement. Task training should be logically structured (for comprehension) and delivered in one, consistent on-the-job training transaction. If not, the chances of trainee underperformance, malperformance, noncompliance and/or a safety incident increase dramatically.

Some may want to consider randomly presented bits of information delivered in the workplace as “microlearning,” but it is not. Microlearning implies at least structured content for a small unit. The accelerated transfer of expertise™ can only be achieved by structuring the usually informal, unstructured and piecemeal on-the-job training that most employers pin their hopes on. Without structure and measures, the mastery outcome is uncertain, worker performance is less repeatable and measuring and improving performance difficult. With a little effort to create consistency and repeatability, training can be accelerated, worker capacity quickly increased, work quality and quantity improved and compliance with standards and policies better assured. And providing this training consistency across all job classifications improves all worker’s ability to master new tasks.

Surprisingly, many employers neglect this step and continue to struggle through, unnecessarily, the symptoms such as misdirected financial costs and avoidable opportunity costs, malperformance, under-capacity and under-performance, poor work quality, high turnover, hampered adaptation to new technology and products, and organizational risk. Many in upper-management prefer to remain detached from this drag on growth, adaptation and continuous process improvements and innovation unaware – deferring the issue to others – until a costly adverse incident occurs.

The reason? Perhaps it is due to an incorrect conclusion that creating a worker training infrastructure (a system like all of the other organization’s systems) will take more money than doing nothing or continuing to do what is being done. But in reality, money and opportunity are drained from the organization every day this condition is allowed to stand.

Perhaps it is because of aggressive marketers from education that have oversold the promise of learning as the same as training, leaving the client unimpressed, confused and disillusioned. This has also entrenched the client’s accountant’s and upper management’s view that learning is a repetitive and optional cost, and that training is like learning so it must be repetitive and optional, as well. Learning is a repetitive cost, only effective if selected accurately for its relevance, its content, delivery method and timing. Learning shores up the core skills needed for mastering a task through training. If selected for content and relevance, the cost of learning may be viewed more as a “repetitive investment.”

Structured on-the-job training, on the other hand, if setup and implemented right, is not a cost, it is purely an investment and should be viewed as such. Here is why. If an employer buys a new machine, that is a called a “capital investment.” If an employer hires a worker to run that machine, is that not an investment as well? If an employer hires that worker but fails to train him/her properly to perform each required task in an accurate, consistent, efficient, repetitive and safe manner, can that not be considered a failure to maximize an investment in both the employee and machine?

If setup and implemented right, not only is structured on-the-job training an investment, but an investment that decreases for each additional worker trained. One investment to set up the training infrastructure that can train as many new-hires, incumbents and cross-trainees as needed. Another sign that structured on-the-job training is truly an investment, not a recurring cost.

The process of  structured on-the-job training effectively drives new-hires and incumbents both to full job mastery. When supported with the PROTECH© software providing documentation, reporting and offering easy change control, managing the development of hundreds of individual workers concurrently can be done with no extra staff, no burden on existing staff and no burden on already existing work schedules. In effect, this form of microlearning micro-manages each worker’s development in a world of chaos and change – the natural order of things today.

The author of the article had it right that microlearning is a good delivery method for safety information, but missed the bigger context that guarantees any micro-learning is an investment, not a cost. If the concept of microlearning is good for safety training, why isn’t it good for a complete process training? Documenting mastery of a task and everything about it expedites the troubleshooting of performance errors, since many of the usual contributing variables are isolated and controlled.

If you would like to know how this approach might work at your firm, and how a pilot project may be the best way to introduce this approach to your organization and prove its effectiveness in your environment before expansion, contact a Proactive Technologies representative today to schedule a GoToMeeting videoconference briefing to your computer. This can followed up with an onsite presentation for you and your colleagues. A 13-minute promo briefing  is available at the Proactive Technologies website and provides an overview to explain the philosophy, get you started and to help you explain it to your staff.