Beware! Training Ahead!!

I have just got off the line after a conversation with a Procurement Manager at a very large, highly respected global corporation. I am still bemused at the contents of the conversation that was to do with a training workshop that I was asked to propose, for the company’s global sales force. Almost all the points made by the Procurement person were to do with how there are other trainers who will do it for less, and they cannot pay my fees because of budget constraints.

That got me thinking about whether Training, as a commodity, can actually be ‘procured’. I have been training managers for 28 years now, and I always thought that it was an investment that the company is making. If it is an investment, your focus, says my understanding of investments, should be on returns. Not a single word in the ‘procurement’ conversation that happened today was to do with returns. In fact, the person was good enough to concede that given my references and experience, the returns will probably exceed their expectations. Yet, being from procurement, the person was fixated on an end price, and the ‘best’ price among alternatives.

Pardon my being so silly, but these questions are buzzing around my head, and despite some vigorous shaking, they are refusing to go away:

1. What is the logic behind having Procurement decide on Training rates?
2. Is this a lack of faith on the HR folks?
3. The people being trained are from the business. Are the business folks okay with this arrangement?
4. What happens if all training in a company is ‘procured’ from the lowest bidders?
5. The manufacturers of ball bearings or typewriter ribbons do not outnumber the users of these items. What do you do when the number of trainers in town far exceeds the number of trainees?
6. How sure are we that the ‘budget’ we have is appropriate for the skills we want to impart?
7. A bad trainer will be exposed in the first session, and we will never go back to him/her. Is the risk in this trial and error method acceptable?
8. Is the lack of a proper method to choose the right trainer, behind the abdication of this decision (by both HR and business) to price and ‘procurement’?
9. Can the business heads and the HR heads imagine themselves standing in front of a classroom full of trainees, telling them that the trainer has been ‘procured’ at the best (read least) price?

It is a fallacy to believe that a trainer is a trainer is a trainer. There are trainers who will “cover” all topics as instructed, as ‘tick’ in boxes, and do a few un-threatening exercises – all towards doing just enough to be called again. I have heard participants tell me that they look forward to training programmes in their company as primary sources of entertainment, and as a well-earned break from work.

Good trainers are in demand because they challenge people in training, and can guarantee at least a half a dozen epiphanies per attendee. Good trainers are in the game for themselves. A good trainer will prefer a customer who can pay the price, or trainees with whom there can be higher levels of fulfilment. The best work with the best.

Our employees deserve better. Senior Managers owe it to themselves to come up with methods to assess training and trainers. Budgets are for expenses incurred by the company, and these are best managed by ‘procurement’. If you believe training is an investment, pay the price, and demand high returns.

If we continue to treat training as a ‘tick in the box’, the Chinese have a warning for us: “Be careful about what you wish for, because you may get it.”