Live Training Vs. Software Self-Training - Complete training on 14001

[Tom W]

I know a lot of you are consultants and complete training on 14001; but I would like to ask the following question anyway.

I have seen a lot of software packages for sale that claim to be great training tools for implementing a 14001 system. My question would be - Do you think a few days of live training is better than purchasing the software and having it all the time to reference too?

Some of the claims for the software seem to be good, but how reliable can some canned system be?

If there are good software packages out there what are some of them?

Please take a shot at these questions and let me know what you think. Thanks.

[db]

Originally Posted by Tom W

I know a lot of you are consultants and complete training on 14001; but I would like to ask the following question anyway.

I have seen a lot of software packages for sale that claim to be great training tools for implementing a 14001 system. My question would be - Do you think a few days of live training is better than purchasing the software and having it all the time to reference too?

Some of the claims for the software seem to be good, but how reliable can some canned system be?

If there are good software packages out there what are some of them?

Please take a shot at these questions and let me know what you think. Thanks.

As a trainer, I must say that the only worthwhile training is when I do the training!

Okay, okay... There are some advantages to both live and canned training. As you indicated, canned training can be used on an "as needed" basis. Some call it "instant" training. The major drawback is it usually does not allow any Q&A, or other feedback. Also, live training can be more easily tailored to your individual needs.

I personally like live better (even as a student). But I like the idea of being able to re-wind and replay a segment over a few hundred times until I understand it.

Perhaps a mix is best.

[cncmarine]

I agree with Dave, A mix is the best.

I use the following.

Managers: first time around live training and then review of the canned pres.

Groups: Use the tape with a manager their for Q & A.


Make sure the tape can be used for refresher and Orientation

[RCBeyette]

I'm all for a mix....especially if the software or medium being used has been developed in-house. There are loads of presentations out there that offer to introduce your employees to ISO, your management to management review, your auditors to process auditing, and so on....but if the presentation has been developed in-house, well, then they leave the room knowing how the topic applies to them.

This is, for example, one reason why we do in-house Internal Auditor training. When I left the auditor training, even though it had been provided by an excellent instructor at a reputable organization, I left wondering out auditing impacted my company. There was never time to address all of my questions, because other people, in other industries, had the same questions...and sometimes the answers were different from industry to industry.

A standardized presentation ensure that all audiences receive the same information...that's the main plus to this style of presentation, in my opinion. Followed by cost. If all they do is sit and watch, additional resources (i.e., your time) aren't required.

But still...there is something to be said for the interaction with the instructor, the person who can answer their questions...or better yet, ask the audience questions, to get them them to think about the topic and how it applies to them.

[Claes Gefvenberg]

Originally Posted by RCBeyette

I'm all for a mix....especially if the software or medium being used has been developed in-house. There are loads of presentations out there that offer to introduce your employees to ISO, your management to management review, your auditors to process auditing, and so on....but if the presentation has been developed in-house, well, then they leave the room knowing how the topic applies to them.

Yep, let's mix it . There is no reason not to use both computer aided and "live" learning.

Some links to similar threads:

ISO 9001:2000 E-Learning for people new to ISO 9000
Use of Computer Aided Learning for Quality Topics - E-Learning
E-learning take 2...

/Claes

[db]

It sounds like we are all in agreement on two points:

1) some form of mix gives the most flexibility
2) live training is best when I am the trainer


Okay, there may be a few who might take exception to point # 2

[mshell]

We are training an internal auditor this year and I have recommended that she take some intro classes via the internet but I did speak to her and assess her learning style prior to this recommendation. Some people are able to do independent study without any problem while others require the interaction with the instructor.

I have recommended that the actual Internal Auditor class be Instructor led because of the volume of information.

[mshell]

Has anyone taken any of the classes offered by the institute that does the ISO 9001:2000 E-learning for people new to ISO? If so, how would you rate the training? In particular, I am looking at using the ISO 9000:2000 and/or the ISO 9000:2000 as a prerequisite for our new Internal Auditor.