UK 
United States
Research by The Training Foundation suggests that two common misconceptions are negatively impacting the quality and effectiveness of training in many organisations.
Belief; “All you need to train other people is subject matter knowledge and expertise!”
It’s the case that around 4 out of 5 trainers transition from a technical, subject matter background which is a catalyst for their change of role. Regrettably, many are assigned a training role with little recognition that their ability to transfer technical knowledge effectively requires development of training skills. A recent research project revealed that 86% of subject matter experts with part-time training responsibilities had received no formal skills-training; they relied entirely on subject matter expertise.
Fact; Training skills are at least as important as subject expertise
Think back to your own school days. Every teacher had subject knowledge and while some had more than others, was that the key determinant of your learning? Likely it was not. Not all teachers are actually suited to the role, some lack the emotional intelligence and skills to engage with and bring out the best in their students, some even don’t particularly like children! As a result, you learned enthusiastically with some but not others, right? Could that also be true of some of your employees’ learning experiences in their formal training courses?
Belief; “Once a trainer, always a trainer!”
It’s commonly thought that as long as a trainer’s CV shows they have completed some form of training certificate it doesn’t really matter what that is, they are all much of a muchness. What’s more, there’s no need for an experienced trainer to continue with further skills-based qualifications; they will pick up all the additional skills they need from experience!
Fact; In a fast-moving L&D world, continuous skills development is vital
Research shows than more than half of practising trainers today have not attended a skills-development event themselves within the last 3 years. That is a sad reflection of the low priority given to ensuring the effectiveness of the L&D profession. When one considers the overall cost of running training events, including the lost opportunity cost of taking people out of the workplace, it is hugely counter-productive and wasteful not to ensure that trainers are equipped with the vital skills. This includes any subject matter experts that may be seconded to a training role. It might shock you to see the real cost of employing a trainer!
The skills-based nature of the Training Accreditation Programme, TAP, is the main reason why it has become so popular across all strands of the public and private sectors. TAP has assisted more than 1,400 employers to develop their L&D capabilities and more than 25,000 practitioners to develop their professional skills – which should, as for all professionals, be a continuous process.
You might well be asking; ‘Does TAP really make a difference over other training qualifications?’
One senior L&D executive, Sandra Penfold, knows that it does. Sandra has held key L&D roles (Global Head of Learning, Risk and Compliance) in two major high-street Banks, both of which employ substantial numbers of trainers who are either TAP-qualified or holders of alternative certifications.
Keen to establish the objective reality Sandra led an internal project to identify the learning effectiveness of training events facilitated by TAP-qualified trainers compared with non-TAP trainers.
Reviewing the project’s analysis, Sandra commented;
“Having held senior L&D roles in two major Banks with more than 400 TAP-qualified trainers between them, I’d say that applying TAP methodology resulted in a 30-40%improvement in strategic design, learning governance and effective delivery producing highly commercial performance outcomes every time and clear ROI”
For more information about the Training Accreditation Programme and to review Sandra Penfold’s quote, visit www.tap.training or call Foundation House, 024 7641 1288
