Trickle Down Training Part 2

Last week I had a conversation with a global leader from the USA in the world of paramedic education to discuss what's wrong with staff attending " courses" ...

The truth - many 'courses' are not full of 'fact' they are full of 'opinion', and the larger the name of the course the further away from the 'original message' the content.  Global courses are often out of date - or difficult to control..

Trickle down training has been used for years - such systems involve training a small group who then pass on what they know to the rest of the workforce. But planning and preparation are crucial in avoiding failure. 

Trickle down training offers a lot of potential benefits to the training buyer. Using an external trainer to train your own trainers minimises the cost, as the bulk of the training will be done by your own staff. It shifts risk... "The external consultant designed the session.."  yet.. More importantly, it increases your ownership of the training, and is much more likely to embed the content in your organisation's culture, by having your staff deliver the message. Trickle offers the means to communicate the expertise of an individual or of a small group to a large group very efficiently, and it can be scaled up infinitely, simply by having more trainers and more levels of training. But there are of course significant pitfalls.

The first is dilution of the training material. Research suggests that training messages are never communicated 100% effectively. So, even where training is very well delivered, the people on the receiving end may only get 75% of the original message. From our experience it's probably less than that... 

At best they will then only pass on around 75% of that, so at each stage of the cascade, the key messages get diluted. If there are three levels of communication, and assuming a success rate of 75%, the people at the bottom of the cascade will only get 75% x 75% x 75% of the message, which works out to far less than half!

In an emergency or disaster context, it is likely to be unacceptable that people only get half ( or less) of what we originally intended.

Lost content

It is possible, indeed likely, that the people you choose to receive and pass on the training will not themselves be specialist trainers and specialists in the safety issue they will be communicating, so it is probable that the dilution rate will actually increase as the training is cascaded through the organisation.

Those tasked with passing on the training may feel quite nervous about taking something that has been put together by someone else and then standing up and delivering it to their colleagues. ( we have seen people resign their role of supervisors, because once they begin teaching - their skills deficiencies are both highlighted and challenged by their peers.) 

They may also struggle to deal with questions and challenges that arise as the training is cascaded.

 This is likely to undermine both the individual and the whole process. 

So - if you are using the trickle method - Think ahead -

So how can these pitfalls be avoided? Firstly, the project must be designed from the start for cascade delivery. This means that a lot of the original trainer's work will be not just to put the course together but to prepare the tools, aids and techniques that the second-stage trainers will employ.

 This will tend to increase the time and cost of the programme development phase.

If you are sending staff on courses - the content may not match your local protocol - be ready for that...

Since the messages delivered will be diluted at each stage, minimise the number of levels through which the training is passed - ideally, you should keep it to two: the initial training and the secondary training. This means ensuring that the group of secondary trainers is big enough, and that they all attend the initial training.

Global and national EMS courses are rarely delivered by the first or second or even third or fourth level trainers - so the messages are often a mix of slides and learner outcomes - of assessment and ego - but rarely of Fact or new Knowledge.!

The training messages must be kept as simple as possible. Complex messages are the ones most likely to get corrupted or even left out altogether. As with any other type of training planning, focus on the end before the means, defining the knowledge, skills and behaviour you want as a result of the training. And if you want to get a simple message across to a large number of people, is there another method, that would work even better? 

be visual, be practical be creative

Think about culture - think about language... Take time to get it right! 

Building confidence

Choosing the right employees to deliver the second-stage training is absolutely critical. Enthusiasm is probably more important than technical knowledge. Certainly, the ability to analyse and assimilate a large amount of information is crucial.

Watch out for EGO - encourage challenges to your content during the first level training so that the final message has agreed status.

The initial training should include some training skills tuition for those who will actually deliver the material. Not much... but please think about explaining how and why you have designed a specific project to be delivered in a particular way.

Ideally this should include practising presentation of the modules or whatever it is they are actually going to be delivering. That way, the initial trainer can give support and coaching and can also build up the confidence and knowledge of the second-stage trainers. Any mistakes can be made in a closed, "safe" environment and before the second-stage training actually goes live.

The programme should include an audit element. This will let you evaluate the eventual training delivery to end-users, so you can monitor and minimise the dilution factor.

The key thing is that the delivery is consistent, regardless of who does it. Feedback can then be given to the trainers and programme deliverers as appropriate.

Trickle down training can be a very powerful and cost-effective way of delivering a training intervention, but the organisers need to go into it with their eyes open so they don't fall into the various traps that lie waiting for the unwary.

Just because a trainer is good in one context it does not mean they will be in all contexts!

Dave Halliwell is an advisor to NHS Trusts and government teams in the Middle East, and is redesigning education processes for many UK and USA organisations to maximise transmission of the 'Original' message..