Trainers get 'BUY IN' with the 'WHY'

With fiercer competition and stricter work safety laws many employers are now adopting some form of induction training for new staff and understand the importance of recording completion of these induction processes.

But what does the staff member really remember three, four or five months down the track. Do they turn into robots completing a list of tasks without thinking and then sometimes shortening that task list to make the job easier and quicker for them?

Many a training program has been delivered covering all the key steps of a process, with a new staff member nodding their understanding when ever they are asked if they understand. "Got that?" - "Ahum/Yep"

Sure, when you demonstrate the steps first hand, they are understandable at the time but when the new staff member is left to their own devices a week or two later and is required to repeat the process, steps are easily forgotten.

Without embedded logic or more importantly the knowledge of 'WHY' behind each step and it's relevance to the correct completion of the whole process one way and one way only, short cuts or deviations are taken. Staff who understand the consequences or impact of a process not being followed are more likely not to deviate.

In a lot of cases there are a number of variations on the 'WHY', the law, business success and or personal safety. Examples of these are:

Temperature checking of stored food products at least three times a day in a 24 hour operation is a requirement of the Food Safety Legislation but it would also ensure that any equipment malfunction would be picked up before stock is damaged and money lost. And most importantly we are controlling the potential hazard of bacteria growing on the food (being held at the wrong temperature) and therefore we are protecting the customer from possible food poisoning.

One way of getting the "why" buy in with the staff member is to ask them how they would feel if they had bought food that had grown too much bacteria and they fell ill, needing to go to hospital to get their stomach pumped.

Another example might be:

Staff who find used syringes on the ground or in the toilets. Many incidents have been recorded, where staff have attempted to pick them up without using the appropriate PPE (personal protective equipment) such as gloves and tongs. They have accidentally pricked themselves.

Why did they do it incorrectly - maybe because they were told to use gloves and tongs, but the supervisor didn't take the time to not only instruct them about PPE but to discuss with them Why it is so important to protect themselves.

Supervisors and trainers should have an open discussion about the risks of contracting Hepatitis or HIV. They should explain to the staff member that if they do prick themselves, they will need to go to hospital for tests and that they may have to wait for months before getting cleared of HIV risks. Asking them how they would feel if this happened to them - makes them think and remember the risks. If they come across a syringe, they are now more likely not to take short cuts and to take the time to place a cone over the syringe so nobody else gets hurt - and to go and get the gloves, the tongs and sharps container for disposable.

The moral of this article for supervisors and trainers is - if you only instruct someone on what to do, they eventually will take risks and short cuts. If we take the time to involve the staff member in "Why" we need to do things this way and what the consequences would be if we didn't, then there is a much greater chance that the tasks will done efficiently, safely and according to procedures.

That is why qualified trainers and assessors delivering any form of training today, must build a competence assessment process into their programs. Before releasing a staff member to their job, their employer needs to know that they are competent in the Skill or Task required and that they can also describe the Underpinning Knowledge about "Why".
 

Previous Articles