Why identifying the real training needs matters more than choosing the right course title.
A couple of weeks ago, I delivered a customer service workshop to a group of staff, with several managers and senior managers also in attendance.
The training had been requested by staff and the aim was to develop a more consistent approach to customer service across multiple sites.
As this was a pilot, some senior managers were there specifically to help keep discussions on track and ensure we covered the planned content, following challenges experienced during previous training sessions.
Sounds fairly straightforward, doesn't it?
Except it wasn't.
As we worked through the session, it became clear that some delegates felt they were there because they were doing something wrong.
There were frustrations around workload, competing priorities and the expectation that staff should be available to customers when they already had so much to do behind the scenes.
Rather than exploring how things could be done differently, some of the conversations became defensive. People were explaining why they couldn't do certain things, rather than discussing what might help them do them.
And I could understand some of their frustrations.
If you're already struggling to get through your workload and someone comes along telling you to do more, you're probably not going to be particularly receptive.
But that's not what the training was about.
What surprised me wasn't the reaction from staff
I've been delivering training long enough to know that people don't always arrive in the room ready and willing to learn.
They bring their frustrations, experiences, assumptions and sometimes unresolved issues with them. And that's fine. In fact, some of the most useful discussions happen when people feel comfortable enough to challenge something.
What surprised me was that, despite having several managers and senior managers in the room, nobody stepped in to help navigate those conversations.
Afterwards, I asked why.
I was told that the hierarchy within the organisation was quite strong and that people were reluctant to say anything because they didn't want to step on somebody else's toes.
I found that quite concerning.
Not because I needed someone to rescue me. Much of my work involves helping people manage difficult conversations, so dealing with challenging moments in a workshop isn't particularly unusual.
But some of the managers were there specifically to support the session.
Yet when things became uncomfortable, they didn't feel able to intervene.
And that made me wonder what happens when similar situations arise during an ordinary working day.
If managers don't feel comfortable speaking up in a training room, how confident do they feel challenging decisions, addressing inappropriate behaviour or raising concerns with someone more senior?
And what message does that send to their staff?
Was customer service training really what they needed?
I don't think the original training request was wrong.
There was clearly a need to develop consistency across sites and explore how staff approached and interacted with customers.
But during the workshop, other issues became apparent.
Staff were struggling with boundaries, competing priorities and managing customer expectations. There were also questions around communication, management confidence and how comfortable people felt speaking up.
These issues are connected.
For example, you can train someone to provide excellent customer service, but if they don't know how to set boundaries, they may continue taking responsibility for things outside their role.
You can teach staff how to communicate more effectively, but if they don't feel comfortable raising concerns with their manager, how much difference will that training really make?
And you can train managers to handle difficult conversations, but if the organisational culture discourages people from challenging those above them, will they actually use those skills?
I'm not suggesting that one workshop tells us everything about an organisation. It doesn't.
But it can give us a useful insight into what might be happening beneath the surface.
And I think we need to pay more attention to that.
Are we asking the right questions before booking training?
This experience reinforced something I've been thinking about for a while.
When organisations identify training needs, they often ask managers or staff what training they would like.
And whilst that's a useful starting point, I'm not convinced it always gets to the real problem.
Someone might request customer service training because customers are complaining. But are those complaints caused by poor customer service skills, unclear processes, workload pressures or staff not feeling confident enough to manage expectations?
A manager might request conflict management training because two colleagues aren't getting along. But perhaps the real issue is that nobody addressed their differences when they first became apparent.
Or an organisation might commission communication training when the underlying problem is that people don't feel comfortable speaking openly.
The training requested might be relevant, but is it addressing the cause or simply the symptoms?
And with training budgets under increasing pressure, surely we need to make sure we're investing in the skills that will make the biggest difference.
What if training could be more responsive?
One of the challenges I face as a trainer is that I prepare a workshop based on the information I've been given.
I develop the content, activities, examples and resources to meet the agreed objectives.
But sometimes, once I'm working with the group, it becomes clear that something else needs attention.
In this particular workshop, I could see that managing difficult customer interactions and setting appropriate boundaries were important areas for the group.
I had relevant experience and could explore some of these issues through discussion, but the workshop hadn't been designed to cover them in detail.
And that got me thinking.
What if we approached training a little differently?
Rather than developing separate workshops for every possible issue, what if we started by identifying the main challenge and then built the training around a selection of connected skills?
For example, a group might need support with customer interactions, but also benefit from developing confidence in setting boundaries, managing difficult conversations and responding to challenging behaviour.
Another group might be struggling with workplace relationships, where listening, emotional intelligence, giving feedback and addressing issues early would be more useful.
The core objectives would still be agreed beforehand. But rather than following a fixed programme regardless of what emerges, there would be some flexibility to explore the areas that are most relevant to that particular group.
Of course, there would need to be boundaries around this too. We can't cover everything in three hours, and training shouldn't become a discussion about every frustration people have at work.
But with the right preparation, a bank of connected resources and a clear understanding of what the organisation wants to achieve, I believe we can make training much more relevant.
And potentially make better use of limited training budgets.
Before you book your next training course
Perhaps it's worth asking a few different questions.
What are staff finding difficult in their day-to-day work?
What situations do managers feel least confident handling?
What issues keep coming up, despite previous training?
Are people comfortable speaking up when something isn't working?
Are we addressing the actual problem or what we think the problem is?
And how will we know whether the training has made a difference?
I'd also encourage managers to think about what would happen if they were sitting in that training room.
Would they feel confident enough to speak up when a conversation became uncomfortable?
Would they know how to acknowledge people's frustrations without becoming defensive themselves?
And perhaps more importantly, would they feel supported by their organisation if they did?
Because we can teach people all the communication and management skills in the world, but if they don't feel able to use them, we haven't really solved the problem.
Introducing Responsive Workplace Training
This experience has encouraged me to develop a more flexible approach to workplace training.
The idea behind Responsive Workplace Training is simple. Rather than starting with a course title, we start with the challenges your people are experiencing and the outcomes you want to achieve.
From there, we identify the skills that will make the biggest difference and build a workshop using relevant tools, practical activities and real workplace situations.
Depending on the needs of the group, this might include communication, difficult conversations, professional boundaries, managing conflict, assertiveness, emotional intelligence or giving feedback.
There will still be structure and clear learning objectives, but also room to respond to what emerges during the session.
It's particularly relevant for organisations dealing with several connected challenges but without the time or budget to commission multiple training programmes.
And importantly, if the issues we identify are caused by unclear processes, unrealistic expectations or organisational culture, we need to recognise that training alone won't resolve them.
I'm interested in helping organisations get more from their investment in training, but also in making sure people leave with skills they can actually use.
Because ultimately, the success of training shouldn't be measured by how much content we manage to cover, but by what people are able to do differently afterwards.
If you're considering training for your team but aren't entirely sure where to start, get in touch. We can have a conversation about what's happening in your workplace and identify what support would be most useful.