After some recent discussions, I have begun to wonder what some training fundamentals are, and the importance of learning them. There are a lot we can agree on. There are some that apply to design but not delivery (for example). So I've been trying to think of some unusual things the would be good to know for new or relatively new members of the Learning and Performance profession.

That said, please understand that this is not intented to be an exhaustive list by any means. It is intended as a starting point for discussion. Most of these are things that have helped me, and that I wish I'd learned a bit earlier. Feel free to support, reject, or otherwise comment on these, as well as to add your own. Again, these are some things that have helped me personally.

• Accelerated learning techniques. I got jazzed about training like it was a new topic when I learned about this after a decade or so of "traditional methods". I've found design to be easier and teaching to be less work.
  
• Games. There is a whole gamut here. People seem to learn much better when they are engaged and games seem to do that well. Many topics lend themselves well to games (from PowerPoint quiz games to larger simulations). Thiagi and NASAGA really have encouraged this in me.
  
• Sales copywriting. Sounds strange, I know. Some topics really benefit from the writing style copywriters use. The idea of getting and keeping attention applies to readers and learners. Similarly, the techniques of fiction writers help too.
  
• Some help on image composition. Artists know about image design and how to draw a viewer's attention to a particular point in a painting or other image. Learning that helped me do better graphics in courses, but I have a very long way to go.
  
• Just because a book or article is by a major artist, does not mean the technique works for everyone. This was hard to learn. I tried techniques from some well known books because I was told, "this will help you with X". It did not always help and it sometimes made things worse. I had to lear to filter stuff for myself.
  

Any comments on this non-exhaustive list?

For me, a key point I think is essential... Most performance issues cannot be solved by training, and when they can, it's never a stand-alone solution. One must do analysis first to identify what the issue really is and what factors impact it.

What comes to mind when I think about training fundamentals are things like the following:

- working definitions of training and learning
- the purpose of training
- when training is appropriate and when it isn't
- how to question a person requesting training to make sure it's the appropriate solution; if it isn't, how to say "no" and sell them on something appropriate.
- knowledge of other interventions and when to suggest them
- understanding what gap analysis means and how to do one
- understanding the proper order of actions to take in the design process
- writing goal statements
- writing performance objectives
- determining what learning activities will best address the objectives
- understanding enough about the organization's business to be able to match goals and objectives to business needs
- understanding how adults learn - just the basics (don't go overboard here)
- being able to analyze audience readiness, motivation, and level of expertise
- basic level of understanding about e-learning; what it is, examples of good and bad; when it is appropriate and when it isn't
- basic understanding of EPSS; what it is; when it is appropriate and when it isn't
- basic understanding of job aids; what they are; examples of good and bad; when they are appropriate and when not
- basic understanding of structured OJT; what it is; examples of good and bad; when appropriate and when not
- basics of classroom instruction; examples of good and bad; when appropriate and when not
- basics of instructor-led courses; when appropriate and when not
- knowing what resources there are for finding information and how to use those resources to find the info

I'm sure I've left out a lot........Anyway, I would hope that organizations require at least the above before hiring anyone as a trainer. And to hire someone as an instructional designer should require much more beyond just training basics.

I found that as you try and train people as we try and work towards becoming a "learning organization", the real problem is that one person (or a group of small people) can't do it alone. Everyone must be teaching, observing problems, solving problems, and standardizing solutions through good instruction. Not everyone can learn the exhaustive list(s) or practically, the formal discipline of training and development. But, many people can learn the basics of instruction, problem solving, and standardization. Getting basic instruction down to a science for the everyday person is part of the solution to getting every person involved in learning and improving the processes we work in everyday. I find this to be one of the most important lessons I've learned so far in training people, whether on or off the job. The TWI Job Instruction program seems to be the way to get each and every person involved in better communication, better instruction, better ability to problem solve. I feel so strongly about this that I have created a content website about TWI, went to the national archives, copied as much TWI archive material I could and posted it in the public domain. My objective is to make the material available to the public so that we can learn from the past while we try to shape the future. TWI was identified by Swanson as the historical "watershed" human resource effort. By the way, Toyota uses the original sixty year old Job Instruction format to this day!

I want everyone to know how the TWI skills can help everyone, which helps address some of the problems in your lists on this thread. See TWI Service Websitefor all of the original TWI materials.

Lundbird,

I absolutely agree with you! Learning organizations will never be a reality until every single employee is empowered to take charge of their own training - and the only way to do that is to have them actively participate in designing the learning experience from start to finish. And you are right that TWI is still as applicable today as it was years ago. And not just for manufacturing people. It works just as well with management and leadership training. There is nothing magical or difficult about observing problems, solving problems and standardizing solutions as you suggest. Those of us in the training industry are in many ways creating a huge mess by unintentionally complicating what is a very simple matter. For example, there is nothing hard about task analysis - yet, somehow we've given the impression that it is something that must only be done by training professionals. I believe that if we could get organizaions on board with this approach, there would be no need for training organizations at all. Companies are wasting huge amounts of money every year on training that is no good. And they are totally ignoring the 90% of learning that is happening anyway.

My own TeamOJT methodology is based on the premise of having every employee involved in the analysis, design, development, implementation and evaluation of their training. People love it, and once the first team gets up and started it spreads like wildfire. And like you say, it solves many of the problems mentioned in these discussion boards.

Thanks for your post!