“To develop is to go through a process of natural growth, differentiation, or evolution by successive changes. To cause to unfold gradually; to move from the original position to one providing more opportunity...”—Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary
I admit I’m guilty. Guilty of lumping together employee training and development. My reasoning is clear: training programs can benefit from applying some of the fundamental principles of employee development, and employee development goes nowhere without a solid base of training to build on.
In our January/February 2020 issue, we discussed the differences between training and education. Training, we said, is skills-based and designed to help employees acquire what one trainer calls “useful competencies.” The goal of education, on the other hand, is to deliver knowledge or information, particularly to employees who might not otherwise have access to it. In terms of methodologies, education is more theoretical and abstract while training focuses on the practical and “hands-on.” What they share in common is that both are discrete activities with limited applications, aimed at accomplishing short-term goals. And both tend to be one-sided: from management to employee.
Employee development programs, on the other hand, are long-running and seek to meld an employee’s personal career objectives with corporate business goals to the benefit of both. In the best of all possible worlds, this is accomplished via collaborative planning that effectively achieves a win-win for both parties. The objective is straightforward but can be labor-intensive: to prepare employees for future challenges and opportunities and, in the process, enhance corporate growth and prosperity.
Although employee development relies on its own set of methodologies, from seminars to mentoring to cross-department assignments, there may be slop-overs. Sending an employee to a one-time supplier-produced seminar, for example, might typically be thought of as training. But if such an activity is undertaken as part of an employer-employee sanctioned plan, it would qualify as development.
I know it sounds like splitting hairs, but what it ultimately boils down to is purpose. Given an individual’s talent and capabilities, he or she may already be occupying their optimum position in an organization. Attendance at a product-related seminar would be an opportunity to expand their job-related skills. Conversely, management might send an employee it’s considering for promotion to the same seminar as part of a development plan to acquaint them with the scope of their upcoming responsibilities.
All this being said, David Hassell (co-founder and CEO of 15Five, producers of continuous performance management software) reminds us that training and development are not a priori antithetical to each other. In addition to meshing mutual long-term corporate and employee goals, a solidly constructed and well-implemented employee development program can produce short-term gains in the manner of increased company loyalty and enhanced employee engagement.
“When people are given the tools to do their jobs well and advance in their careers,” says Hassell, “they feel supported and happy. Not only are they likely to stay longer, but they will also perform better and contribute to overall company growth.” Embedded in Hassell’s remarks is another underlying principle of employee development—a holistic view of employees as unique individuals with their own particular set of experiences, interests, and life challenges.
What does it take to assemble an employee development program that’s worth its salt? Opinions vary and tend to be both industry-specific and a function of corporate size and reach. That established, it’s possible to generalize some principles.
Number 1. Employers avoid employee development at their peril. More than one human resource expert reminds us that an organization is only as good as the people it employs. Adequately designed and implemented employee development programs are a hedge against the cost of recruiting, onboarding, and training new employees. Statistics estimate that on average, a lost employee costs some six to nine months of his or her salary, not including indirect costs and lost productivity. Given that today’s employees may be prepared to make their way, as long as they receive assistance defining a career path, employers should recognize that modeling opportunities for advancement and promotion in their organization are an effective strategy for retaining top talent.
Number 2. Employee development programs depend on management’s understanding of corporate and individual growth as gradual processes where each stage builds on the one prior.
Number 3. Employee development programs are collaborative. This means that both employer and employee must come to the table with goals that will provide the basis of a negotiated career plan. This, in turn, means that before putting pen to paper, an organization must be specific about where it’s headed and have identified the necessary skills, knowledge, and competencies necessary to achieve its objectives. Perhaps you’re considering expansion of your estimating department, which in turn might require that the department acquire a designated manager. Or perhaps you have upgrading mobile devices for your field crews on the docket, which would mean beefing up your supervisory bench. Only after an organization is clear about what lies ahead in the long-term, and the short-term objectives that will get it there, can management begin to explore the staffing required and begin slotting in talent.
For their part, employees must be clear about how they see their career unfolding and what they need to accomplish to achieve their vision. While today’s employees don’t want to be limited by being told what to do, they are also looking for guidance. And although self-direction is a critical part of the process, managers should not assume that even purportedly independent millennials are prepared to proceed without guidance.
Number 4: Employee development programs are holistic. Organizations must acknowledge that what employees do on the job reflects the mixed bag of intellectual, emotional, and psychosocial experience that accompanies them to work every day. To assess how such non-employment-related factors can affect job performance, managers are advised to establish regular employee check-ins. They might, for example, request that employees rate their job performance and perhaps suggest changes or refinements that might improve their efficiency. Employers should solicit input on what employees view as their most confounding challenges and aspects of their job that they may be struggling with.
And while we’re at it, managers must develop the capacity to differentiate between talent and readiness. Talent can be easy to spot, but readiness is less easily defined. One way to look at it is a composite of skills, experience, and, most significantly, motivation. Perhaps a manager has their eye on a particular employee as having leadership potential, but through the process of regular employer-employee communication, they have established that because of challenges in that person’s personal life, now is not the time to move them up. Or as much as a manager might want to expand on an employee’s training and experience, they might ultimately conclude that this individual lacks the skills, experience, and incentive to move into management.
Number 5. Employee development programs should facilitate proficiency in the “soft skills.” These include: self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, and empathy. Aside from the goal of expanding inter-employee communication and team cohesion, these competencies can also help facilitate the implementation of career goals. If management isn’t equipped to provide these skills in-house, it should consider contracting with outside experts to address such proficiencies as the capacity to read body language and other forms of non-verbal communication. As one consultant put it, “When your team members are in harmony, they function more efficiently and consistently and tasks are accomplished with less time and effort.”
Number 6. Employees must “own” their development plans. While the thought is to provide the opportunity for employees to help themselves, management must play its part. It’s not enough to set a plan in place and send the employee off to their destiny. Management must demonstrate continued enthusiasm and excitement.
To get a bead on the personnel challenges employers face in today’s global economy, Keith Ferrazzi, CEO of Ferrazzi Greenlight, a human resources consulting firm, assembled a team to review employee development research and conduct a survey of training executives at 16 major corporations. His results were published in the Harvard Business Review and three issues stand out. First, the need for employers to recognize and acknowledge how the pace of technology-driven change is fueling rapid skill obsolescence. To compensate, employers must jettison rote skills training in favor of opportunities for employees to learn rapidly and regularly. Second, employee development in the present global economy requires a fundamental adjustment in perspective away from learning as an occasional activity to achieve what Ferrazzi characterizes as an “ongoing campaign.” This brings us face-to-face with a major rock in the road that trainers and human resource personnel have struggled with for years—that people learn at different rates and via different methodologies. To address this inconsistency, Ferrazzi suggests that employers make flexible, on-demand learning options available, adjusted not only to the various stages of an employee’s development but also individual learning patterns. “The development and growth of your talent,” says Ferrazzi, “is vital to your ongoing success, ability to innovate, and overall productivity.”
Ferrazzi also cautions that if managers expect employees to uphold their designated responsibilities under the employer-employee development plan, two conditions must be met: an evident and sincere corporate commitment to employee development and trust between employees and the organization’s leadership. He cites research by the American Psychological Association that one in four workers don’t trust their employer. Worse, half of the survey respondents don’t believe that their employer is being upfront with them. The solution? Start with practicing what you preach. “If managers want employees to engage in learning and development, then they need to show that they are actively pursuing their learning journeys as well.”
Number 7. Coaching is essential and of special value for bringing along talent that may lack the experience to move up. And, it must be acknowledged, coaching is also time-consuming. The solution? Ferrazzi suggests “igniting” managers’ passion through corporate support and incentives for them to undertake such activities as one-on-one mentoring, buddy-to-buddy training, pairing promising individuals with subject matter experts, assigning them to special projects, and devising stretch assignments that allow them to undertake aspects of the position they will occupy if they take the next step up the ladder.
Number 8: Employee development plans must include strategies and methodologies for accurate review and evaluation. Evaluation criteria must be drafted in a way that is both specific and measurable in relationship to development plan goals. A master timeline should be established that defines the project’s stated running time and identifies incremental objectives. Evaluation criteria should be spelled out and quantified whenever possible to facilitate a clear and accurate evaluation of employee progress. A calendar that specifies the frequency and depth of such reviews should be included. Methods for updating or revising goals and strategies in light of unforeseen challenges should also be defined, with provision for feedback from both parties. While it might be tempting to argue for more generalized criteria or adopting additional goals en route to make the review more flexible, it nonetheless remains that lack of specificity will make evaluation all the more difficult.
The parties to the development plan must agree on how the plan will be implemented and any activities that might be required before setting it in motion. Also, operational details, such as any additional employees who might be involved, must be specified as well as provisions made if an employee is to be absent from their job for some time. Likewise, even before implementation gets underway, the employee should be apprised of why they are being asked to proceed as the plan describes and how its goals and objectives benefit both themselves and the company. Such activities will make the evaluation process proceed in a smooth and orderly manner. In short, the more precise the plan is at the front end, the easier the evaluation will be.
Number 9: Employers must be prepared to offer employees opportunities to apply what they’ve learned. For a development program to be successful, an employee must be able to immediately apply their acquired skills in a manner that allows for feedback, cements learning, and identifies any additional learning or development that might be required.
If all this planning and negotiation causes your eyes to glaze over, don’t despair. There’s a movement afoot to bundle training and development into a one-step process, validation for those of us who are inclined to think of the two as a unit. In theory, at least, this would make sense, particularly in today’s business environment where management and employees are chronically overloaded. Such an approach would streamline the learning process and acknowledge the view that employee training, education, and development are not separate activities but all part of a larger whole
