You are here:  DOL Web Site Business Train-the-Trainer Project Evaluation Report

Small businesses often do not have the time or the staff to provide existing or new employees with the training needed to keep pace with change. Outside training vendors may not understand the specific needs of the business and their packaged training programs can be expensive and difficult to schedule. Companies recognize the need for developing staff to perform in-house training but do not necessarily have the required resources to properly train experienced workers in the skills and knowledge to train co-workers. In response to this problem, the Connecticut Department of Labor requested a grant from the National Governors' Association and the United States Department of Labor/Employment and Training Administration to test the value of a train-the-trainer program to five small manufacturing companies. The goal of this project was to determine if the Train-the-Trainer Program, with an emphasis on planning and technical assistance, had a positive impact on small businesses in developing their own in-house training capacity that would meet a broad range of training needs.

Table of Contents

The Train-the-Trainer project consisted of three principle stages:

1. Selection of companies
2. Delivery of the Train-the-Trainer course
3. Support and follow-up

• Identify a contact person for the duration of the project
• Form a company management team
• Select employees to be trained as trainers
• Perform a company needs assessment
• Participate in the evaluation throughout the project

During Stage Two, the selected employees attended 32 hours of  Train-the-Trainer instruction provided by IIET. This training addressed issues related to learning styles, adult learning theory, developing lesson plans, instructional techniques, materials design, video presentation and practice training sessions. Participants were encouraged to develop training materials and lesson plans that they could use in their day-to-day training tasks. The evaluation team observed many of the training sessions. At the end of the formal training program participants were asked to complete a four-page written evaluation of their training experience.

In Stage Three, companies were offered 16 hours of additional technical support by the IIET staff. If for example, a company felt that its workers needed additional support or if a trainer wanted advice from IIET staff, that additional support and advice would be provided. The Connecticut Department of Labor provided funding for 40 hours of relevant in-house training performed by the program participants. This ensured that each participant would have sufficient opportunity to practice what they had learned during the Train-the-Trainer course.

The evaluation team observed the training, conducted an evaluation survey post-course, and group interviews with all the participants at each company. All training participants were also invited to a meeting with the participants from the other companies where they could share ideas and impressions. A similar meeting for management was held to gather management ideas and to foster business-to-business networking.

Table of Contents

The five companies represented a range of different manufacturing settings. Lacey is the by far the largest with 300 employees at the training site and an additional 80-90 at a second site. Radiall was the smallest but proved to be one of the most active in the post-training period when implementation took place.
 
 

Table of Contents

The mean age of participants was 35.5 years old. The youngest participant was 24 and the oldest was 59 years old. Eighteen of the participants were male and nineteen were female (one person did not respond). All participants had a high school diploma or GED; the mean number of years of education was 13.5. Three participants reported at least one year of post-baccalaureate study.

The participants had been working for their companies an average of 4 years. The shortest tenure was 2 months; the longest was 20 years. This range of tenure possibly indicates that the participating companies used this workshop to upgrade the skills of long-term workers as well as train relatively new hires. No meaningful relationship was found between length of tenure and perception of the workshop.

Table of Contents

It should be noted that each company had been asked to send only about 4-5 people to participate in the program. Instead of sending the requested number, all but one sent many more (see Table above). This suggests there was considerable pent-up demand in these organizations. At the end of the project, one of those companies' human resource manager said he would send as many again if the program were offered.

Table of Contents

Most studies report that training is usually provided to managerial and technical people. Yet, a plurality, 40 percent, of the participants in this training were front-line production workers. Because these national studies are often conducted among large corporations, the trend toward involving more front-line workers may be characteristic of smaller companies.
 

Table of Contents

Companies were told they would receive the following:

• Consultation to examine and improve current training practices
  (28 hours)
  
• Train-the-trainer instruction for select company employees
  (32 hours)

• Reimbursement to deliver relevant training on-the-job
  (40 hours/trainer)

• Establish and/or improve internal training capacity.
• Have a pool of skilled trainers to keep their employees' skills up-to-date.
• Increase the effectiveness of training they provided to their employees.

Participants were generally positive in their evaluation of the program. They liked the program and felt that it had a positive impact both on their company and on the quality of the training performed. In addition, many participants reported that they felt the training had a positive impact on their work duties outside of training. Comments from participants and supervisors included the following:

• "From here we can go on and teach our associates and help them understand what goes on here."
• "When we have to put together information for monthly quality review meetings or anything else where you have to sit in a room with a bunch of other people some of the tools we got out of the classes, we can apply there: how should I set this up; what type of overheads should be used; how should I phrase it; how much information should I put on the page - all that trickled into the work environment from the classroom."
• "It's a great idea to have line associates participate in this training - it brought their confidence up, gave them additional responsibility; these are people who actually work on the floor and it's been helpful for all these people to see what's going on the floor. They see the need for training which is really important. Sometimes we get lost in the shuffle upstairs and we really don't know what is going on the floor; getting our line associates involved in training has really helped us to recognize areas where we can train."
• "Well, it took a disorganized way of training and made it organized. Now I track people. I know the progression of their training and I know who I can move ahead and who needs more time."
• "I look forward to training instead of dreading it. I feel I have an esteemed position because of the training."
• The majority of the participants are conducting training in their companies. Most of this training is job-specific. The types of training include:
  • One-on-one, just-in-time training
  • Small group, informal training
    • Small group, formal training
    • Large group, formal training
• "We have seen development in the company - we have. I don't know, to me the company bonded more together and it's easier for us to deal with people downstairs."
• "What I've seen is more consistency in our training. That's very important to us."
• "There aren't as many questions and there aren't as many quality problems."
• "We were always doing newcomer orientation but nothing like it is now. We're taking someone who knows nothing about assembly and having them hit the ground running."
• However, it has been difficult for the evaluation team to schedule time to meet with the senior management at the participating companies. The difficulty in scheduling time with senior management may indicate that they have less interest in this project since the training has been completed. It may also be that senior management in such small companies are very difficult to access repeatedly.
• Two companies have reported reduction in scrap rates, which they attribute to improved training procedures. One company reported that they were particularly impressed because shortly after the training was completed, they encountered a specific production problem that in the past had caused a tremendous increase in the scrap rate. Although the post-training scrap rate did increase with the production problem, the increase was far less then in previous situations with similar production problems. The company reported that it is normal that training be effective when everything is running well, but it is rare that a training program have such a positive impact when things go wrong.
• "I've seen a decrease in our need to buy vendor training programs. We know our audience and we're equipped to train them better."
• "Now I document my training. I've actually created training packages that we're going to be able to use again."
• Participants felt that some parts of the training did not meet their company's specific needs and that some parts of the training were not appropriate for some of the participants.
  • "I would like to have seen it be more geared to my company and my company's problems."
  • "I train all day but I never do like classroom training. I wish we had talked a little more about spur of the moment, informal training."
  • "I need people who can do training at a moments notice. I'd love to send more people to this training but I want them to be able to do extemporaneous training."
• Some participants feel they do not have the needed time to prepare and use the knowledge and skills they gained from the program effectively.
  • "I would like to have seen more buy-in from management. We don't get the time to train like we should."
  • "The biggest obstacle to using this training is time. None of us have enough time the way our jobs are now."
• Most of the companies are using less of the post-training support than the full amount available to them.

These findings are significant in that many of the participants indicated during the first training sessions that they were fearful of becoming trainers, i.e., having to stand in front of people, having to prepare a lesson plan, having to be videotaped. These fears, which could have been serious barriers to training success, appear to have diminished. Participants generally felt at the end of the training that they had gained presentation skills and that they had the support of their supervisors and companies to use the skills they learned. The companies believe that the Train-the-Trainer Program has helped their businesses both quantitatively and qualitatively. They have all reported that they would recommend this program to other companies and would themselves like to participate further in other Train-the-Trainer Programs.

Table of Contents

Clearly the Train-the-Trainer Program had a positive effect on the participants and their companies. The program was successful because it addressed an immediate need of the companies: just-in-time training for their workforce. This training not only improved the quality of the participants and their trainee's work but also led to a reduction in turnover and an increase in the quality of production.

While the program was a great success there are problem areas. 1) Senior management needs to be much more aware and involved in the Train-the-Trainer Program. Those companies who had the least support from Senior Management also had the poorest results with the Program. 2) The Program needs to be better tailored to the needs of the individual companies both in the curriculum delivered and in the assessment of the company needs. The post-training phase of the project is very important to the transfer and application of the skills learned. Participating in the post-training evaluation process (focus groups) was a motivator for the participants and their supervisors to increase their training activities. Post-training support from facilitators was used minimally. Thus it is clear that the post-training activities of the program must be formalized in the revised curriculum to maximize the learning.

Table of Contents

This demonstration project appears to have potential for assisting small companies in developing significant in-house training capacity. Evidence from the survey of participants, the group interviews, and direct observations within the companies support the conclusion that people learned new training skills and were applying them to their assigned training activities. Several other benefits appeared that were not expected. The following areas were affected:

• Personal growth
• Ability to coach and help others to learn in one-on-one situations
• Planning and execution of group meetings regarding problem solving and other meeting situations

Many of the techniques covered in the training applied in one-on-one and group meetings as much as they did for formal training. Although unexpected, this turned out to be nearly as important as the application of these techniques in more formal training settings. It became evident that much of the learning occurred in informal settings when no explicit agenda or curriculum for learning was set but where people were either resolving a problem or conducting project reviews. This suggests that much more should be done with the curriculum and the structure of the Train-the-Trainer project to focus attention informal learning and its potential for small and medium sized businesses.

Table of Contents

Below are some unresolved questions. They were not explicitly asked by the evaluation, but arose from the details of any extensive evaluation that generate new questions to be answered:

1. What is the long-term effect of the Train-the-Trainer Program?
2. How does participation in this Program effect the individual participants over the long-term? Retention? Job satisfaction? Promotion?
3. How does participation in this program effect the company? Training costs? Product quality? Employee turnover?
4. What are useful activities to maintain interest and enthusiasm for the training?

• Disseminate information on the CTDOL web site
• Revise and improve curriculum
• Train CTDOL staff to market the program
• Share final report/products with participant companies
• Present project and results to regional, state, and local organizations; educational institutions, etc.
• Provide training to other CT companies
• Provide technical assistance to replicate program
• Recommend program replication in conjunction with other industries (service, tourism) and other programs (Welfare-to-Work, School-to-Work)

Published by the Connecticut Department of Labor, Project Management Office