Evaluation of Training for Operational Staff

[Galwaygirl1]

Hi, I've recently started a new job as head of Training for a company that works to TS standards. My previous experience is mostly management development. I know that at our last audit we were pulled up for not having a good evaluation process. Any tips on how to implement this for Operational staff, and any tips in general for working towards this standard?

 

[somashekar]

On the operational staff, we have the mapping displayed in the shop of all the operational staff across all the required skills. This mapping is under four catagories.
Not Trained
Semi Skilled
Skilled
Skilled and can also train.
This is under the direct control of the shop floor manager, and is a live document which undergoes periodic updation.
Get this well to your shop floor managers that the authority and responsibility for evaluation of training for their operational staff rests with them.
There may be a need to train the managers about how to evaluate their operational staff's training. Your plans must be to work on such needs.

 

[Stijloor]

Hi, I've recently started a new job as head of Training for a company that works to TS standards. My previous experience is mostly management development. I know that at our last audit we were pulled up for not having a good evaluation process. Any tips on how to implement this for Operational staff, and any tips in general for working towards this standard?

When you state "TS", do you mean ISO/TS 16949:2009?

ISO has many Technical Specifications....

Stijloor.

 

[qusys]

Hi, I've recently started a new job as head of Training for a company that works to TS standards. My previous experience is mostly management development. I know that at our last audit we were pulled up for not having a good evaluation process. Any tips on how to implement this for Operational staff, and any tips in genaral for working towards this standard?

Hi Galwaygirl1, welcome on the Cove Forum.
I would like to contribute to your thread.
In ISO TS it is mandatory to have a documented procedure on the training. You should include the method to evaluate the effectiveness of the training within the scope of that procedure. THis can be done to verify how much the traineed applied the concept learnt in the training in his/her job, as per performance evaluation dome by supervisor and linked with quality objective of the area, cascading from the one of higher level of the company.
You can also have the process of the certification after training on the job that is also required by ISO TS. These are only some ideas. There are many way to implement it. Another is to respond to check list o quiz after a class training and get a minimum threshold to pass.So, the acquision of the goals of the tranng can be demonstraed.
I would also like to remember that 6.2 clause , pertinent to ISO TS, also requires to have a process to measure the quality awareness as well the technological ones related to your organization. In this case too, you shall have a method to do it.
I hope to have helped and I am available to contunue the discussion with other more expert Covers.
see you

 

[Jen Kirley]

Welcome to the Cove!

The question of assessing competency has been discussed many times. To help speed your availability to answers, please see the related links listed at the bottom of this page.

I would say that measuring competency of staff is rather more complex than with operator level employees, because in staff we expect more inventiveness and flexibility. We expect people to "think on their feet" versus exactingly following procedures.

But we still need to do what is right for our employer, and that first means the employer needs to set standards and provide a means to grow to the level of meeting them. For staff this means not just how to enter the correct SPC data, but also SPC theory to the extent of their responsibility for using it. That part in italics is critical. When we go through registration audits I always make sure I am a guide and I point out, in a conversational sort of way, that for us competency means performance to the extent of the employee's responsibility. So I would work closely with HR and find what expectations there are for this-and-that job role.

I would look for opportunities to build competencies that haven't been recognized yet. This could mean project management, which in my experience is something that has sometimes been assigned without decent training in how to make sure everything gets done and stays on target, yet follows essential rules like safety. It's so easy to assume that someone with such-and-such a level of education should be able to perform at XYZ. I have learned such assumptions are sometimes wrong.

So as a general description I will simply end with:

1) Define what the organization wants out of this staff
2) Define what competency means in terms of results. Rubrics may help.
3) Make sure they actually get the development training, to reduce variation in giving what the organization has said it wants.
4) Look at results. This means both quantitative (timeliness, completeness, accuracy, profitability) and qualitative (works well with peers, builds up subordinates, inspires confidence in subordinates, peers and managers).

I hope this helps!

 

[Galwaygirl1]

Hi, yes I mean exactly that, and it's all so new to me that I didn't realise how unclear I am being!

 

[Galwaygirl1]

Hi,
this is extremely helpful. We do have a very good system to train and track each operator's level of knowledge and skills, but the idea of their appraisal being the evaluation is so simple, I don't know why I didn't think of that. Now I need to formalise that.
Do you know where I would find what sort of things the assessors ask for at the audit? As I mentioned, this is all new to me, and I have a lot to learn...

 

[Jen Kirley]

Hi,
this is extremely helpful. We do have a very good system to train and track each operator's level of knowledge and skills, but the idea of their appraisal being the evaluation is so simple, I don't know why I didn't think of that. Now I need to formalise that.
Do you know where I would find what sort of things the assessors ask for at the audit? As I mentioned, this is all new to me, and I have a lot to learn...

Thank you,

My experience with several registration audits has shown that expectations of recognizing exhibited competency are far lower in staff than in operators.

That's sad because staff arguably have at least as many opportunities to wreak havoc as operators. But the fact is, establishing means to evaluate competency at the operator level is far easier. It can be measured in real time, via production line errors. Errors in staff production are recognized more gradually and less acutely than in operators - it's recognized via evaluations like internal audits, long after the error has been made and arguably after it's been felt by results. Also, appraisal of competency via performance evals requires the person's manager to be competent in such appraisals, to maintain objectivity and maintain a particular standard across the board. We could argue that problems with accomplishing all that has helped make the Dilbert cartoon series so profitable.

What to do? The organization that truly understands staff development and competency lays out specific, targeted development goals and means to understand achievement in practical, real world terms - and in a timely way, before they can go make costly mistakes. But that isn't easy. Most of us use the standard line: "We evaluate understanding at the point of training, then we do regular performance evaluations with supervisors, and we recognize competency though success in performing tasks: that is, the absence of mistakes."

 

[qusys]

Hi, I've recently started a new job as head of Training for a company that works to TS standards. My previous experience is mostly management development. I know that at our last audit we were pulled up for not having a good evaluation process. Any tips on how to implement this for Operational staff, and any tips in general for working towards this standard?

Hi,
From a first reading of your original post, I did not immediately understand that you were referring to the staff dedicated to the management of the people ( in this case I would intend top management, managers reporting to them, department mgmt and/or supervisors, correct me if I am wrong).
In any case, clause 6.2.2, point b) refers also to " take any other actions to satisfy these need" .
We have also intrepreted " any other action" with the eventual assignment to act as project mgrs in specific projects of the company, also to a world wide level in a multinational environment and check for reached goals and objectives.
Besided, our organization created ad hoc meetings ( almost to be intended as a "training") with external consultants or partecipated to benchmarking events with other companies related to topic of quality, processes management , best practices, where managers could learn something to the eventually applied in our organization. So, checking at the results, this was an indirect way to demonstrate the process of "training" effectiveness was in place.
For instance, the fact that there are some changes in an organization based upon an introduction of TPM, Quality standards, lean methodogies and there is a planning to acquire knowledge from managerial staff to better cascade the activities to their reporting, it could be considered " training" , whose effectiveness could be checked at a distance of at medium/long term looking at the achieved goals.
We also applied method to mentoring and coaching some managers, when they are called to pass from a process to another , or from a dept. to another .
I agree that this issue for managerial staff is very difficult with respect to the certification process of operator or technicians, but it could be considered as a tool at this purpose in order to meet the clause.
Hope this helps now and excuse me for the misunderstanding from my side