I was recently emailed a link to an article about when to say "no" to a training request. Okay, we all realize that not all training requests are a good expenditure of our time or our organization’s money, but is saying "no" to a client ever a good idea? Back in the mid 1990s I was attending a meeting at PNC Bank, where my client Tom LaBonte had just taken over as Director of Training. He told his new team of 125 people that, "The training department at PNC was doing too much training." I was not the only one puzzled at his statement. That was shortly before Tom introduced me to Jim and Dana Robinson of Partners in Change, and that was about the time I learned to see things differently. Their research tells them that 80% of all performance problems have nothing to do with training.  So, while it is certainly true that we should not develop training for every training request, in my opinion there is never a good time to say "no." What happens when we say no to a client who has come to us with a training request, whether it is valid or not, is that we risk the destruction of a trusted partnering relationship. In order to be seen as a trusted partner, we need to acknowledge the client’s concern every time he or she approaches us with a training request.  Another problem I had with the article is that in one scenario, the author immediately went away and developed a proposal for—guess what?—a two day workshop. There was little evidence in the article that detailed questions had been asked or that any analysis was done. In fact, the proposal was delivered the next day. Before the class was ever implemented, it was shortened to a day, then to a half-day and finally to an hour. Disappointed and perplexed, the author refused to conduct the workshop until he had the proper time to deliver the proper results, which he eventually did. The fact that the client repeatedly shortened and minimized the quickly and independently designed class may indicate there was a lack of trust in the consulting relationship. So what should you do when you suspect you are hearing a training request for a performance problem that either does not need training or involves far more than training to resolve? Well, don’t say "no," but start by acknowledging the client’s concern. Try to shift the conversation to outcomes and business results and away from activities. A successful result of this conversation should be agreement on a shared goal between you and your client. The goal should be stated more in terms of outcomes than activities. And finally, rather than sleuthing around on your own without the client’s knowledge, gain permission from the client at the end of your meeting to gather any other analysis data that will help you make an informed decision on how to proceed next.  Schedule another meeting to share your findings, let your data speak for itself, and you will both likely arrive at a better solution that may or may not include training, that is based on real results. Click on the Resources tab to and click on "Reframing Principles" to see the eight principles for Reframing  a Training Request, or click "Reframing Meeting" to see a sample video showing how to reframe a training request.

In last week’s blog we discussed whether it was ever appropriate to say no to a training request. I think we can all agree that there are a lot of training requests that should never be acted upon, but that saying "no" to a client can damage the trusted partnering relationship. While this is a good strategy for not damaging that relationship, how do we build a trusted partnering relationship in the first place? The answer to this question is easier than you think. It just isn’t fast! It takes time, but it can be an enjoyable and rewarding process.  The Robinson’s call this process Proactive Consulting. It is proactive because you are initiating contact with your client rather than waiting for your client to contact you. The first step is probably the hardest. You have to get that first meeting when there really is no pressing need to get together. The whole point of the meeting is to talk to your client about his or her business when there is no agenda. Again, you should focus on desired business results for the coming year. You may also ask questions about challenges both internally and externally. You should keep the meeting short—thirty minutes over a cup of coffee is good, certainly no more than an hour. Once you get your client to expect these meetings on a regular basis, you will no longer be surprised by a new initiative when it finally makes its way to you as a training request. You will also develop a different relationship with your client, as a true partner rather than an order taker. This will make it easier to ask good questions about the initiative in order to qualify it as a valid training request. You will also have an opportunity to investigate non-training interventions that may support the desired performance. One last thing you must keep in mind as you begin your proactive consulting meetings is to correctly identify the "true client." You may have to work your way up through influencers to the true client, but eventually you have to take your interest and your questions to the person who truly owns the line of business you are supporting. Ask yourself, who writes the check to create whatever solutions are developed and put in place, or who is responsible if goals aren’t met, and you will be able to identify your "true client." Visit the Resources tab and click "Proactive Principles" for the eight principles of Proactive Consulting and click "Proactive Consulting Interview" to see a video of a sample Proactive Consulting Interview.

The University of Tennessee Center for Industrial Services (UT CIS) is hosting a special one-day only Performance Partnering Workshop featuring Dick Handshaw.  "Now more than ever, the training profession needs individuals with performance consulting skills," says Bill Stetar, UT CIS productivity consultant.  "This workshop will help those who want to become better business partners to their customers by helping them achieve measurable results. It’s a great opportunity for trainers and educators to learn from Dick Handshaw, one of the best in the business." Handshaw uses positive examples, role play, and feedback to help participants develop proactive interviewing and re-framing skills. "The purpose is to help these professionals turn a training request into a performance consulting opportunity," says Handshaw. "  Stetar agrees. "Companies tell us they want their trainers not just to teach courses, but help improve operations and avoid unnecessary costs." The workshop takes place October 19, 2011, 9AM-4PM Central, at the UT CIS Polk Avenue Training Center, 193C Polk Avenue, Nashville TN 37210. Cost is $195 per person, $150 per person for ASTD members. Fee includes course materials and lunch. To register online, go to http://cis.tennessee.edu/train/programtraining/Pages/Human-Performance-Technology.aspx To register multiple people or receive the ASTD discount, contact Patty Wells, Senior Registration Assistant, The University of Tennessee Center for Industrial Services, 615-253-6371 or patty.wells@tennessee.edu.

Handshaw, Inc. and founder Dick Handshaw are featured in the September 2011 issue of the Greater Charlotte Biz Magazine. The magazine targets 100,000+ business owners, managers and executives in the 16-county greater Charlotte region. Handshaw was a featured local business profile and the article includes information on the history, service offering and core competencies offered by the company. Handshaw, Inc. provides training services, performance consulting and technology solutions to its clients. To read the article visit: http://www.greatercharlottebiz.com/article.asp?id=1245

Last week I was fortunate to attend the eleventh annual U.S. Coast Guard Human Performance Technology Workshop in Williamsburg, VA.  Over 500 attendees from the Coast Guard and other military branches, as well as various civilian contractors and HPT professionals attended the conference titled "Performance Improvement:  It’s What We Do!"  As we listened to Rear Admiral Stephen E. Mehling make his opening remarks about his command and their many accomplishments it reminded me again how fortunate we are to be U.S. citizens and to be defended and represented by such a high quality military community. It is easy to see that the Coast Guard HPT professionals are an impressive team of people that are dedicated to their work and performance improvement. They also have a very high value for mentoring.  Each year a member of the Coast Guard community is recognized for outstanding mentorship in HPT and that person receives the prestigious Charles E. Swaringen, Jr. Award. The winner must have made a significant impact on the professional growth and improvement in the area of HPT of more than one individual during the preceding year. Mentoring is something we all most likely have experienced during our lives as either a mentor or mentee or both. As technology continues to drive much of our activities, behaviors, and mindshare, this workshop reminds me that nothing can replace quality time spent mentoring or helping another professional improve his or her skills. There are many high quality and very successful training interventions and performance support capabilities available in the market today, but no one has been able to duplicate the total value of a human mentor to the quality of life and work of others.  The lesson learned for me from this workshop is to take more time to mentor others close to me. My salute to the Coast Guard HPT community for making mentoring a very high honor and priority. Brent Jennings, Vice President, Sales and Marketing at Handshaw, Inc.

Contrary to what some learners might think, instructional designers don’t write assessments to taunt, trick, or otherwise torture our victims…I mean learners.  We write assessments so that we can assess our learners’ performance at the end of the instruction.  But, what if the test results show low scores?  Does it really mean that learners have not met the performance objectives, or could it mean that we’ve written bad test questions?  To rule out problems in the test instrument, design your assessment with these goals in mind: Goal #1: Reliability.  If a test is reliable, it means you get consistent results.  You should be able to give the test to Learner A three times, and each time he or she should receive approximately the same score.  If your test does not prove to be reliable, the cause could be errors within the test instrument, such as badly written questions.  The cause could also be errors in the use of the test, such as it is administered incorrectly, or errors within the learner’s response, such as if the learner is distracted. Goal #2: Validity.  If a test is valid, it means that it measures the content it sets out to measure.  Your test might prove to be invalid if the wrong testing instrument is selected, the test is poorly constructed, or there are too few or unrepresentative test items.  There are four types of validity, on which you can find much in-depth information, that answer these questions: Content validity - Does the test measure the instructional objectives which are being taught? Predictive validity - Can the relative success of a learner be predicted based on the score of the test? Concurrent validity - Does the test accurately measure how learners perform on the job? Construct validity - Does the test measure qualities or factors outside of the performance objectives? Goal #3: Usability.  If a test is usable, learners can take it effectively, efficiently, and satisfactorily in the environment in which it is given.  The test should be easy to administer, score, be economical to use, and have a good format. If your assessment meets these goals, you can be confident that you’ve designed a solid assessment. Beth Hughes is a Senior Instructional Designer at Handshaw, Inc. She takes projects through the entire process of instructional design and development, incorporating learning principles, instructional needs, and methodologies into the best learning solution for each client. Beth earned her M.Ed. in Instructional Systems Technology from UNCC.

I get the great pleasure of interacting daily with decision makers in a variety of roles, within a multitude of differing organizations, in a wide range of industries.  So when I start to hear similar challenges from all those diverse people, I’m naturally inclined to listen even more closely to what they’re saying.  These days, no matter how they describe it, clients are clamoring for assistance with aligning individual performance to business goals, whether the goals exist within their own department or go all the way to the top. The requests come in many forms from booking Dick Handshaw for a series of Performance Partnering workshops, to an opportunity to partner with a client to assess the validity of training requests, or simply a desire to have our consultants and designers execute analysis the right way.  The bottom line is our clients are more concerned than ever with the bottom line. Dick talks in his workshops about the responsibility that employees have to be stewards of their organization’s resources.  The great recession and the slow recovery (preceded by the rise in stature of procurement resources in the 2000s) have put an even greater level of scrutiny on how decision makers allot their organization’s funds.  What better way to show the executives how well those funds are being used than mapping results of solutions directly to the goals those same executives set for the organization? Jim and Dana Robinson published their first Performance Consulting book in 1995.  Some have given them credit for coining the term around the same time.  So, performance consulting is by no means a new approach.  In fact, just think of all that has happened in the world at large, and specifically in corporations, since the book was published.  The myriad of political, financial, ethical, and social developments of the past 10-15 years prompted Jim and Dana to publish a second edition in 2008.  As always, they were right on time.   Depending on how much you choose to believe from the media, financial and otherwise, we’re in for a prolonged period of recovery.  Those with buying power within organizations may find their decisions on how and what to spend continually put under a microscope.  As a result, showing alignment between individual performance and business goals will be the greatest justification for their expenses.  And, of course, it is and always has been simply the right thing to do. David Carmichael, Vice President, Operations at Handshaw, Inc.

It may be a well-kept secret to many people here in Charlotte, but there is a very active ASTD Chapter operating in the Greenville/Spartanburg area. I will be doing my presentation entitled, "Instructional Design:  How to Sell the Real Value" for that group on the evening of Tuesday, November the 15th. This is a good example how small our world of learning professionals can be. I started my initial contact with this group through my good friend Paul Barber who used to live and work in Charlotte and helped me start an ISPI chapter back in the late 1990s. Now my primary contact is Beth Freeman, who worked with me at my first job out of graduate school at First Union National Bank here in Charlotte.  Even closer to home, she and her husband Ben were my next door neighbors about the same time.  Don’t worry, Beth, I’m not telling how long ago that was. It’s remarkable how long networks can stay with you in this field. I have been to two meetings with this group, the most recent of which was a workshop with none other than one of my favorite presenters, Thiagi.  The chapter has a great place to meet and is very welcoming to visitors.  I am looking forward to another visit. I’ve been spending much of my time lately conducting workshops for clients. I delivered our "Performance Partnering" and "Results-Based Instructional Design" workshops for Bank of America’s Global Learning Group. I delivered two sessions of each workshop in person and am now adapting them to be delivered in a virtual classroom format.  Bank of America, or NCNB as it was originally known, was one of my first clients. I’m also delivering two courses to my newest client, Quintiles, Inc. in a virtual classroom format. I’ll spend much of November delivering "Performance Partnering" and new workshop called "The Gaps Map."  Although Quintiles is a new client, my connection to them also goes back a ways.  In 1992 I was nominated as one of three finalists in the North Carolina Entrepreneur of the Year Contest.  Quintiles was the finalist that won that category. Given that they are a global company with over 20,000 employees today, I would say the judges made a good choice. It’s an honor to be working with them.

For as long as I have been in this business—and that’s twenty seven years, but who’s counting—my best ideas for new services or products come from my clients. My newest workshop offering called "The Gaps Map Workshop" is the direct result of a request from Amanda Browde with Quintiles, Inc. Amanda was interested in having me conduct the "Performance Partnering Workshop" as four virtual classes for her audience of over twenty Performance Partners who reside in just about any time zone you can name. She also wanted them to go beyond just doing the proactive consulting or reframing meetings and be able to identify performance gaps. This lead to the development of the new "Gaps Map Workshop," which along with "Performance Partnering" will be delivered in virtual sessions lasting two to three hours each. Participants will still practice role plays and receive feedback thanks to live audio and web cams. In trial runs, we think the learning experience in the virtual sessions will be just as valuable as the experience in live classes. And I can complete all seven sessions with the global participants by repeating each one from my office at different times—without getting on a lot of airplanes. One of my favorite features of this course is that we used three Quintiles case studies for the sample video that demonstrates how to gather gaps logic in a meeting with a client. I think it will be much easier for participants to learn how to interview for the Gaps Map logic using business cases that they are familiar with. They will practice their interviewing skills to complete the Gaps Map using two other scenarios that were developed by Amanda and her colleagues at Quintiles. Each new client that uses the course will have the opportunity to create their own demonstration video and case studies for role plays. We have added this course to our line-up on the website. You can read the short description of it below. Thank you, Amanda, for a great idea. The Gaps Map Workshop Identifying Gaps Logic is something Jim and Dana Robinson made famous during their long and distinguished careers. Their books are widely read and will be available for a long time. The trick is not just understanding the gaps logic, but how to ask the right "Should, Is, Cause Questions" to complete the Gaps Map in order to understand the entire Performance Relationship. The interview is the part of the process that requires a little practice and feedback. In this perfect companion piece to our popular "Performance Partnering" course, we will view good and bad video examples of how to conduct an interview to begin completing a Gaps Map.  Participants will practice the skill during the workshop in realistic scenarios and receive feedback on their performance.

Dick Handshaw will be sharing his presentation "Training Request?  Ask Questions First" at the Training 2012 Conference & Expo.  The conference will be held in Atlanta, GA from February 13th - 15th and Dick’s session will be offered on the first day from 9:45 - 10:45am.  To learn more about the conference, visit www.trainingconference.com.  To receive a $200 discount on your Training Conference registration, use Discount Code:  CA2SP (valid on new orders only, not valid on Leadership Summit, one discount per attendee.)