Langevin's Train-the-Trainer Blog

Every four years we are graced with the gift of being able to witness the “best of the best” athletes in the summer Olympics. I am always amazed, riveted, and spellbound by their abilities, whether they win the gold medal or not. Their performances are the result of years of planning, preparation, and practice. The process for developing our skills as trainers is similar in many ways.

I recently had an experience that made me think about the power that relevance plays in the instructional design and delivery of training programs, especially when the conditions are not optimal. As trainers, it’s not uncommon to work in conditions that are less than ideal. I’m sure we’ve all experienced rooms that are too hot, too cold, too small, and/or resources that are minimal or maybe even non-existent. I recently had one of these experiences, and what struck me the most was the participant’s reaction.

It continues to amaze me to hear about the number of companies and organizations who are still doing chalk and talks, data dumps, and death-by-power-point presentations, and calling them training. At Langevin, we teach that presentation alone is not training. A solid training program should contain a basic foundation of Presentation, Application, and Feedback, also known as PAF.

I’m sure we have all heard the cliché, “If you don’t use it, you lose it.” Learners attend training programs to gain knowledge and skill to improve their performance for their current job. However, what I often hear from many learners in my courses is a big “BUT!” The “but” is typically related to the challenges faced after training when they return to work. The most common challenges mentioned are a lack of time and a lack of management support to implement the new skills back on the job. These challenges don’t bode well for training transfer!

Most trainers are familiar with the term “Neurolinguistic Programming (NLP).” In its simplest form, this term identifies the three preferred learning styles most individuals have. They are as follows:

Visual—learners prefer to “See it.”
Auditory—learners prefer to “Hear it.”
Kinesthetic—learners prefer to “Do it.”

Many of you have likely had the great opportunity to attend a commencement ceremony. I had the wonderful privilege of attending my grandson’s college graduation. Occasions like this are always filled with so much joy. The cheers and excitement from family and friends are simply palpable as the graduates are being honored for their achievement. My eyes were filled with tears as my loved one walked across the stage to receive his degree; it’s an exhilarating moment to witness.

I was recently at the gym and overheard some complaints about one of the fitness instructors who is perceived as knowledgeable but cold. I felt the same way about her until I got to know her a little better. I discovered she is passionate about her job and sincerely cares about her clients. What she lacks is a smile. When she does smile she radiates warmth and kindness.

As trainers, it is important to communicate the expected behaviors we would like to see from our learners during the training program. The real question is, “Should we call them ground rules?” History has shown that people tend to want to break, bend, or challenge the rules. Rules are a natural part of our daily lives and yet there is often a negative connotation and reaction to the word. Therefore, in a training environment with adults, where it is important to create a climate that is conducive to learning, using the term “ground rules” could generate some resistance. So how do we communicate the expected behaviors we want to see?

I’ve often heard trainers complain that their courses are dry and they want to make them more interesting and fun. Bring on the creative instructional techniques! They want their courses to be livelier, however, in the same breath, they share their reluctance to take risks and try something new and creative.