Compliance or competence

When preparing to deliver a training session, I found that the room I was allocated did not have the facilities needed. I spoke to another trainer, who suggested I cancel the session. I decided that, if I couldn’t get hold of the resources required, rescheduling the training would be the best thing to do. However, Learning and Development had a different perspective.

This presented me with another example where paper is prioritised over practice. If those on the training were rescheduled, they would be marked as being ‘non-compliant’ with training, which obviously has its impact on Learning and Development stats. From my perspective, the environment not being conducive to learning means substandard training. Luckily, the resources I needed were provided and I was able to start the session, albeit half an hour late. The group were very understanding, and it ended up being a really constructive session.

It did make me wonder though – how many trainers would feel pressured into carrying on regardless? I was told that it was preferable not to cancel or reschedule training sessions as it causes frustration among those who are affected; participants and their line managers. I had to point out that frustration fades, whereas incompetence just becomes embedded into practice. My priority is to give trainees high quality training, and I feel it is disrespectful to both trainer and trainee to expect them to ‘just manage’, to sign off that they’ve attended and call that compliance.

We all have our jobs to do, and I acknowledge that those jobs have different targets. However for me, it is one more example of paper trumping practice, and demonstrates the problems that this short-sightedness causes.