Training, generally. means that the individual must be away from the job. Although we could consider some individualized leaming on the job site, this is not yet common enough to be given great consideration, but it is a factor that must be explored. lf there is a priority, but the individual cannot be away from the job, the Designer might consider using individualized instruction. if so, this should be explored at this point, for it will influence the objectives as well as all the other events of the CEM that follow. Given the limitations of individualized instruction, the priorities may have to be altered.
After priorities have been determined, the needs should be listed to reflect the priorities. Note that it is not the objectives that are listed. for they have not yet been determined. First, the needs are listed. Then, it may become apparent to the Designer that not all the needs can be met and that perhaps it is wasteful to devote time to writing objectives for all the needs when it is obvious that they cannot all be included in the proposed program.
In refining the needs, prioritizing and examining, the Designer may find that some needs can be combined. This should be done cautiously, so as not to weaken the priority listing. Where needs are very similar or overlapping, the grouping process can be helpful in making program decisions. When we move to the leaming level, we will have to revert back to the original needs listing.
Process
The Designer should never determine objectives in a vacuum. It is relatively easy to sit at one's desk, carefully writing objectives, but there is always the risk of producing irrelevant statements. Determining (and writing) objectives is a processlin which the written material is the result. if the Designer alone writes the objectives and passes them around for review and reaction, it puts the other members of the organization into a conflict mode. Not all conflict is bad, but this one could be. The Designer is not the only one with a vested interest in the final objectives. Therefore others in the organization need to be involved in the process of determining the objective.
The most crucial people are the supervisors. The supervisor is the one who must make the learner available, and is frequently the one who must devote some resources (usually financial) to the the learning. it is most important as the supervisor is the one who is directly concerned with the ultimate performance change which results from the learning.
ln a sense, the same can be said for managers. They are concerned, by definition, with the performance of the supervisors in their area. it the objectives are for the purpose of changing performance. some managers will want to be involved. For training, involving the managers is important to make sure that the Objectives are consonant with other planning that the managers are doing.
ln one company, at this event, the objectives were concemed with a selling strategy that would create a high demand for a particular item the company was selling. The planned training was to provide the sales staff with more skills and knowledge about the product, market. and so on. The objectives were carefully drafted with the assistance of the district sales managers as well as the sales supervisors. Fortunately, in this case. the Designer urged that the objectives be reviewed at the next higher level of the organization.
This recommendation was not usually made, although the Designer had urged similar action in previous design work. This time somebody listened. The draft objectives were sent to a higher level for review and came back with a resounding negative response. After blood pressures returned to normal. the Designer, Managers and supervisors asked for reasons. it was simple, after explanation by the higher levels. There were to be some significant changes in market strategy of the organization. Until the higher levels had clarified their strategy, it would not be appropriate to design and conduct the training being considered.
Upper management had not yet reached full agreement on the changes or how they would be implemented. Until that time, everything was in a hold position. This had not been communicated earlier, as management did not want to risk leaks. At this time, however, management had to take action to delay the training program until their decisions were made and communicated.
A common problem, particularly in the mid-1960s to mid-1970s, was in education programs for minority groups. The general program objective was to provide learning to enable selected minority groups to move to higher level positions in organizations. These objectives were infrequently stated in such specific terms. The managers and higher level officials made broad commitments in speeches and interviews. Designers, caught up in the sweep and pleased to be asked by managers and executives, wrote program objectives focusing on minorities moving ahead in the work force.
For the supervisors, such objectives came as a shock. Supervisors discovered, when they reviewed the objectives, that they were to provide for the promotion of their better minority employees. This meant, to the supervisors, losing a good employee and having to deal with a replacement who would be an unknown quantity.
As program objectives have very often been overlooked or ignored, supervisors did not pay too much attention. The confrontation came when the minority employee completed the education program and sought the promotion. The supervisor, not having accepted the program objectives, had looked upon the learning as a way of increasing present performance. The problem could have been avoided if the supervisors had been involved in detennining the program objectives.
At this point in determining program objectives it is not necessary to involve the potential learner, though there is no harm in doing so. Considering the possible disruption and cost incurred in any design process, the Designer should take a conservative approach.
Some benefit is to be gained by involving the potential learner. Lt relates to whether the employee knows what to do and has the skill, but is not performing as desired because the standard for performance was not adequately communicated. If the Designer has been checking this out from the start of the CEM, this step could be redundant at this time.
Sedang diterjemahkan, harap tunggu..
