Training: A Function, Profession, Calling, What?

Training & Development, April, 2001 by David Zahn

In the past few years, the training field, perhaps more than any other, has been undergoing tremendous transition and evolution--from a warm-and-fuzzy function housed in an office all the way down the hail to a strategically aligned business unit to...what? First, let's review why training unequivocally has arrived as a profession.

There are qualities that separate a professional from an employee and from someone who feels a calling to perform a role without necessarily any skills, background, or education in that role. Professionals share certain similarities. Mast have impressive credentials and a body of knowledge with a language known only to other practitioners in the same profession. Accountants quote IRS guidelines and tax codes, attorneys spout legal precedents and Constitutional interpretations, physicians refer to lab studies and clinical evidence, and so on.

I asked, a bit rhetorically, Ed Schneider, director of training and organization development for Bergen Brunswig Corporation, based in Orange, California, whether training could be classified as a profession. He pointed out that the Merriam Webster dictionary on his desk defines profession as "a calling requiring specialized knowledge and often long and intensive academic preparation." He also reflected on how the training function has evolved: "It has the requisite organizations, processes, resources, and activities required Reality check. of a profession."

Frank Rose, VP of corporate training and dean of Symbol University for Symbol Technologies in Holtsville, New York, says, "As with all professions, training is evolving. As the body of work becomes more refined, the function must adapt. For instance, the focus within Symbol now is not on 'training' but on providing 'educational opportunities' for all employees. We mandate that every employee is to receive a minimum of 40 hours a year of training. Some of that is selected by the needs of the organization, and some of it is at the discretion of the employee and his or her direct supervisor. We must be prepared to provide opportunities in facilitated sessions, self-study, and electronic formats to accommodate the needs of the business."

After 22 years in the training function working for internal groups as well as external vendors, Vahan Janjigian, vice president of corporate learning for Chicago-based Information Resources, recognizes that one of the shifts he has seen is "a greater reliance on the critical function of employee development." No longer shunted to a junior executive, training is now the responsibility of chief learning officers, VP-level people, and people who report to senior line management.

A shift such as that doesn't occur without challenges. It's no longer sufficient just to be a people person or someone who likes to help people. With trainers' new reporting relationships come a host of responsibilities that this new breed of professionals is being asked to address. Schneider sees trainers' new role as one of "getting away from programming training events and migrating to an ongoing process of enhancement and development that is directly measurable in performance.

"Bergen Brunswig is focused on providing the expertise required to complete tasks at the point at which it is most needed, and not nearly as concerned with offering every detail and background fact to prove what the subject matter expert knows. If it isn't moving our business ahead, it's not right," says Schneider.

Rose takes a broader perspective on that issue: "We're in a dogfight to select and retain the best employees. If we aren't offering them the chance to expand beyond their current job tasks, we run the risk of losing them to other firms. Our role as professionals is to develop the person and not be satisfied with training the task."

Janjigian concurs: "Lifelong learning isn't just a buzz phrase at Information Resources. We're committed to recognizing that our employees have, in essence, a learning portfolio that they're responsible for maintaining as they [make the] transition between jobs within the company and even as they move from company to company. And we, as facilitators of the learning environment, need to recognize that training done elsewhere isn't necessarily bad. Let's not put previously trained people through our courses [just] for the sake of administrative ease."

The measurement standards for what professionals offer must also change to reflect their contributions. Traditionally, trainers were content to pass out smile sheets at the end of a workshop and capture how people felt about the food, the room, the instructor, and the materials. Now, Frank Rose must deliver an ROI based on the success of both external and internal efforts.

"In years gone by, I could get away with a splash of product news and a dash of cultural orientation and call it training," says Rose. "Now I have to demonstrate to all of the constituents of the training that there is a benefit. If a single student asks, So what? at the end of one of our training events, it's cause for us to examine the training and seek opportunities to deconstruct and rebuild it....If my people or a trainee's manager can't discern a difference in performance within three to nine months from the training, the reasons are explored with me, the manager, the trainee, and senior management. As part of my group, we have career counselors to address competencies, career goals, necessary skill enhancements, opportunities for career progression, and ways to meet personal goals. In addition, Symbol's senior managers are active, participating deans in Symbol University and, as such, have line responsibility as well as overall educational responsibility for the organization."