What are common training misconceptions and how can you address them?

I prefer to create User Adoption Programs. An adoption program is a long term program scheduled over 6 months - 1 year. It include marketing and communications that go out well before the training and continue through the adoption program. It includes a full training blast with classes scheduled over several days/weeks. A collaboration space is created that includes training materials, QRGs, recordings, and any updates. Then ongoing training is scheduled throughout the time frame. This may include updates as we as remedial training. I also like to have Q&A sessions scheduled where individuals can "pop" in and ask questions. Last but not least an eLearnng course(s) for those who can't attend live. Training is a part of an adoption plan.

The training session cannot be repeated, because the quality and interaction of the attendees is not repeated, which creates a unique spirit of training within the session, and it can be invested in achieving great successes in the learning process.

Processes change, as do the way we present them. Versions of training morph based on need. Without consistent follow up and support once they do the work they’re trained for, individual knowledge can stagnate.

I think a big misconception about training is that it's the answer to everything. Some times when new issues arise it's easy to think that training is the answer, when in fact it might not be the answer at all. Training doesn't solve every issue of a knowledge gap. Sometimes it's a conversation, a communication piece, or a on-one-one coaching session. Other times a knowledge gap does require an elearning, a VILT or even a job aid.

A haiku on Misconception 1, Training is a one-time event: Learning's fleeting breeze, Continuous, echoes persist, Follow-up sustains.

The AI generated content is so general that it feels unworthy of the time it takes to read. One size usually fits most. To keep training relevant and valuable to the learner, consider providing levels of learning. For example, level one is a digital learning that is self paced. Level two is job aids to assist with using the skill. Level three is an optional facilitated session for learners to ask questions and get answers. Learners that get and can apply concepts at level one aren't required, or will seek going through another level of learning. They can move forward and expend their efforts as desired to grow their skills.

This misconception can also be well answered by a participants training needs analysis survey done prior to the training. The TNA will enable the trainer to understand the calibre of participants from age, literacy level, available time, and expectations. This will assist in planning for an effective training session

Because I usually work with very large groups and different companies, I don't always have the luxury of knowing learning styles. However I do run a needs analysis and a knowledge analysis. I then try to create training that meets all learning styles. I create live training that can be deliver virtually and recorded. I create learner guides and quick reference guides. Finally I usually create eLearning programs that can be stand alone or supportive all the other training. Creating and delivery several different style of training has become easier than ever and including as many types of learning will support your overall KPIs. With that in mind I focus on needs and wants.

Pour donner de l'appetence à la formation, il faut individualiser et personnaliser les parcours de formation notamment en prenant en compte le style d'apprentissage, les freins périphériques. La co-construction du parcours est primordiale, les entretiens d'étape permettent un ajustement permanent des besoins eu égard aux attentes des entreprises.

Knowing your audience is the recipe to success! If it is a mixed audience of learners, ensure the content “engages” everyone at each level of expertise. I sometimes teach to foundational training and will have a few students who’s level of expertise are at or above what I am teaching. I like to engage them in a way to gain feedback, their best practices, and for reinforcement when it can apply.

A common misconception is that “training” is synonymous with “development.” Training helps you with the job you have. Development helps you with the job you want.

In my experience, training is definitely more effective when it's a collaborative and learner-centric process. Involving learners in decision-making, designing, and evaluating their own learning experiences, addresses potential resistance and enhances the overall quality and impact of the training program. Management deciding something is a training issue based on zero data is actually significantly more common than most people care to admit. From the outset - organise a Needs Assessment to clarify specific learning needs, skills gaps, and employee preferences. Involve employees in the process of identifying the skills and knowledge areas that are most relevant to their roles and career development. Much more likely to succeed.

"Training" is often something that takes place because there is a need in an organization to close a gap on a knowledge, skill, or discipline area. Often times the request for training comes from the learners directly or their leadership. What you'll find is compliance, HR, or organizational training tends to be top down and tends to be "training". When you have requests coming from the bottom up, or at all different angles, now you have an opportunity to create a learning environment, which will span over the course of time, not just a check the box, one and done activity.

The success of any learning and development team in institutions is closely linked to their ability to create motivation for employees to learn on their own, provide a learning environment, share experiences within the institution, and encourage every behavior that leads to enhancing the flow of knowledge.

Integrating training content into your team's roles closes the learning-application gap and motivates the learners to be more engaged in the course. Training should apply to their job in some way, which should be evident from the start of the learning session. Learners should be told the Why behind the training and be provided situational examples and opportunities to practice throughout the course. Afterward, leaders should follow up with them to help monitor progress in applying the knowledge they gained in training. The trainer can also connect with the learner(s) to check in on their application of the material and offer an opportunity to answer questions they may have post-training.

NO! Training must occur as opportunities arise, as well as in a formal scheduled event. Ref. my response to Misconception #1. I'd reframe the issue as a fault at the Team Lead or equivalent level because today more than ever, if we're not training up our subordinates to replace us, we're not doing our jobs as supervisors, managers and leaders.

It can be added that some people mistakenly believe that training is a solution to all problems, and this holds more ground than training. Therefore, training must be a tool that drives growth, development, and retention, and not be the only tool.

One of the key features of a user adoption program that includes training, is the ability to deliver ongoing training. This allows you to update the training based on feedback and analysis but it also allows you to add in updates to software and technology. This allows those taking the training to receive updated information as the solutions evolve. It also allows the training team to stay engage with the learners and grow the ongoing training programs.

Training must be designed in a way based on a deep analysis of needs, because accurate diagnosis is what will determine the success of training in achieving its goals. The trainer may use his real-time observations and monitoring of the behavior of individuals within the framework of the need identification process, in addition to evaluation programs and other tools that are used to identify needs.

There is lots of training out there and the quality can differ enormously. When delivering training there is a lot to consider, many people that being an 'expert' means that you can teach others but developing training course is more complex than the subject knowledge. When choosing a training course you need to be clear what you want to get out of the training and make sure it the right one for you.

I think, a common training misconception is equating duration with effectiveness. Instead, prioritize outcome-focused training, like scenario-based learning. For example, short, targeted sessions on handling real customer issues yield better results than lengthy, generic programs, ensuring practical skill application.

The biggest misconception about training is that it cannot add value. The invitation for training may start with video of a past participant mentioning how the training helped him/her. May provide some statistics while inviting and also provide authenticated proof during training. Facts create strong belief and opinion.

🚨training is about timing. To engage a learner in the training it needs to fill a need. The intake is often the most vital - to know what the learner is investing in - matters to their success.