When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

LoveLearning,

"When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail."

Do you have something to offer to this discussion besides a cliche that a factory worker in a developing foreign economy wouldn't understand? Or would you rather discuss a simple, yet powerful concept that anyone can grasp? Perhaps we could write a book on the topic, overcomplicating it to such a degree that the topic becomes absolutely unbearable and justifiably avoidable, like trying to drink a glass of sand?

The point is this: people in industry want good training. Despite all of the theories we expound and books written on the topic, do you know what the number one complaint I hear out on the shop floor? Lack of training, followed by a lack of communication. While we are busy in the board room putting together self-important, strategic plans for training, the people doing the work would prefer to do it themselves if only us professionals, with rolls of red tape and "accountability" would just get out of the way. Instead of building up a bureaucracy around training, I prefer to transfer the skills in as simple a method as possible to the people that will actually use it effectively.

I trust you will forgive me for realizing and recognizing the merits of a proven program that I have personally used in manufacturing, finance, IT, HR, and oh yes, in the home. I've also used in China, Malaysia and the Phillipines and believe it or not, the United States. And there are hundreds of other people using the program around the world to success, despite the elite attitude of training professionals to such an outdated and primitive program. Just because you are unable to see the flexibility of such an already presumed to be outdated and unsophisticated program doesn't mean that it isn't a universal skill without merit. In fact, I would hold up the TWI programs against almost any learning program anyday of the week.

Again, I would ask long time Matsusheta, Toshiba, Mitsubishi, Subaru and Toyota execs what they think of your cliched response to TWI.

Lundbird,

Despite our small differences in definitions around the buddy type OJT (which is always bad), SOJT, and JIT, etc., we both strongly believe in the general methodology of SOJT and JIT, its usefulness, and its applicability to every type of training out there.

Your middle paragraph is EXCELLENT and should be read by every single person in the training industry, and every single CEO! You couldn't have stated it better!

I feel your pain at trying to further the use of such a simple, yet effective and efficient system to train ALL employees (and YES, ALL CULTURES) - not just factory workers. I have come to the conlusion that most training professionals are so busy trying to figure out the latest thing thrown at them from ASTD and all the other training outfits, that they do not even have the time to learn the basics. And without the basics, you have nothing. I have not run into a single training situation here on these forums, or anywhere else, that cannot successfully be addressed with SOJT of JIT.

This statement of yours is so, so true:

[QUOTE]While we are busy in the board room putting together self-important, strategic plans for training, the people doing the work would prefer to do it themselves if only us professionals, with rolls of red tape and "accountability" would just get out of the way. Instead of building up a bureaucracy around training, I prefer to transfer the skills in as simple a method as possible to the people that will actually use it effectively.[QUOTE]

I have often thought about spending the bulk of my career educating CEOs and company Presidents about just how wasteful their entire training departments are because they are NOT providing the correct type of training for today's workers, but are instead, as Shakesphere said, "strutting and fretting their hour upon the stage, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." Or like you said, "putting together self-important, strategic plans for training."

Also, like you said so well, employees want trainers to get OUT of their way so they can take care of their own training! They know how. Just give them the simple, simple tools.

LoveLearning,

Given the context of the discussion, I don't know what on earth your comment is supposed to mean. However, if I do understand it somewhat correctly, you have it backwards. Seems you might not even have a hammer.

quote:

Originally posted by KaliKo:
... the buddy type OJT (which is always bad)

Can you please explain what you see as the differences between the "buddy type OJT" and apprenticeships and one-on-one coaching? I have found the latter two pretty effective and, I guess, have not encountered the first (which may be fortunate given your comment!).