Is “Better Marketing” the Solution to Employer’s Apathy Toward Worker Training?

by Dean Prigelmeier, President of Proactive Technologies, Inc.

Sometimes taking marketing efforts and spending up a notch is the answer to sagging sales. Sometimes it is just more money spent proving the customer doesn’t want what you are selling. This could be a temporary or protracted limbo. Either way, it is a good time to take an introspective look at the products/services being marketed, the message, and the state of the target customer.

In the last few decades, marketing platforms were created with the sole purpose of positioning themselves and their platform’s clients, deeper into the consumer’s psyche and life. It seems, in many cases, marketers bombard consumers with personalized content in the hope that they will be worn down and pushed to a buy decision. It must be successful, since most consumers feel personal privacy is no longer a thing and complaining about isn’t worth the time while consumption continues at a relatively strong pace – even if purchases are on credit.

However, marketing efforts can over-do it and erode a brand’s credibility. How many people have gazed at the “fun size” candy bar that looks smaller than the last one bought? Or the “party size” bag of potato chips – smaller bag and half filled with air? Or felt inundated with reward offers from even the liquor store, or credit card offers of reward points which seem difficult to use and paid for with 28% interest rates on purchases? While still effective as choices seem to be shrinking, this hyper-marketing could be driving a cynical society even more so.

Do these types of marketing strategies work when it comes to workforce development services, worker training programs, continuous education courses and credentialling? Consumer marketing works on a principal of mass dissemination, relying on enough consumers who see their option is either between product or service providers if a choice is still available, or between the purchase and not and the possible “peer shaming” to follow. This can justify the enormous expenditures when a consumer’s choices are not good. Workforce development product/service decisions are more employer-specific and situational at a minimum, with buy/no-buy decision-making more complex and, often, random.

In the past, educational institutions have tried things to appear more relevant. Convening some retired local employer representatives as subject matter experts to sharpen focus and justify existing courses and create new curriculum, and to be able to claim the content is “industry ready.” It was found out later the subject matter expert’s level of relevant expertise had passed its expiration date. Other educational institutions happily received a local employer’s discontinued equipment to train students near graduation for jobs that the philanthropic employer, and perhaps industry, no longer recognize. That is why they parted with the equipment and took the tax write-off – they weren’t going to use it anymore and anyone who were trained on it would be obsolete when they graduated. Frustrating to instructors and educational institution administrators, employers pulled back but the need not only remained. Employers complained that education wasn’t preparing the workers they needed, and the nature of work became even more complicated.

Dr. William Edwards Deming, an American engineer, statistician, professor, author, lecturer, and management consultant, is credited for saying, “ A dissatisfied customer does not complain: he just switches.” If an employer has had a dissatisfying experience with a local educational institution or workforce development agency, flashier marketing efforts alone may not be enough to woo them back. That may take a herculean effort, and it better be a “best effort” with the most relevant products/services possible, or the employer might retreat to a hardened bunker further.

Will more and better marketing be the immediate solution educational institutions and learning providers hope for? There are several things to consider before piling money into a marketing strategy. Currently, the federal government is making grant funding available to institutions to bolster their marketing programs. It would be wise to consider all the factors before investing unwisely for never realizing the intended results.

Factors that effect a marketing strategy:

1. What are the current economic conditions? Are individual employers hiring, expanding or retrenching? What are the linkages between employers that make changing economic conditions more troublesome (e.g. are the employers concentrated in one sector, is the community dependent on suppliers, who are dependent on one major company for business?)
2. Is the employer currently targeted under private equity control? If they are, chances are good there will be no interest in worker training products or services.
3. What are the target market’s relevant needs? How well do those trying to market their goods and services to employer understand the current and future needs of local employers – individually and collectively?
4. How relevant are the products/services being marketed? Are you absolutely sure employers will see your products and services as not only relevant, but as having a potential positive impact on their worker capacity, productivity, work quality/quantity and compliance?
5. At a micro level, how likely will the target employer contact be able to cultivate a “buy” decision? Assuming you are positioned well relative to 1-4, selling to each employer requires a focused effort to reach a purchase decision.
   1. How far up the chain of command is the contact that is being cultivated?
   2. How long has the target contact been with the company? Do they have credibility within the organization?
   3. Does the employer’s culture view worker training as an “investment” or “cost?” Each requires a different approach.
   4. Does the target employer seem able to sustain a training strategy for at least the next 3 years, or will training be axed if cost-cutting takes front and center?
   5. What is the state of the employer’s workforce’s morale?
   6. Does the employer have a labor union? It may mean another layer of support cultivation may be necessary.

These are not the only challenges to marketing worker development product and services to local employers. But these are typical. The biggest advice one could give is to make sure your products and services are relevant and don’t be afraid to say your products are not what the employer needs if that is the case. It is better to leave the employer with the impression that you put their interests over credit for a sale. If you are able to sell them something that turns out not to be what they need, or it creates an internal controversy that harms the contact’s status within the company, you may never be asked to come back.

Check out Proactive Technologies’ structured on-the-job training system approach to see how it might work at your firm, your family of facilities or your region. Learn about Proactive Technologies’ partnerships with educational institutions and workforce development agencies that give employers a value-based reason to need related technical instruction for their employees. Contact a Proactive Technologies representative today to schedule a GoToMeeting videoconference briefing to your computer. This can be 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 get you started and to help you explain it to your staff. As always, onsite presentations are available.