Optimizing Training Review

[CPhelan]

Hi folks,
Working in a medical device company with ~200 employees. I am working to revamp the training process and the training review process. The current model is our training coordinator downloads the employee current training record and sends this to the managers to review to ensure they are trained to the most recent revision of documents. There is pushback from supervisors and managers as everyone is busy and its a manual process.

We are utilizing a new document control system and I believe the best way of completing this is to download the Document Master List for released documents from the document control system and then develop a macro or utilizing a formula in excel to pop in the employees current training record and compare against released docs.

That's my initial thinking as something easier than the current manual process but just wondering if there are any recommendations on better training review processes.

 

[Tidge]

If you are not concerned about enforcing any sort of periodic refreshers on procedures (that haven't changed), a straightforward mechanism is to incorporate a training period into the change control process, during which time employees/managers train (and if necessary, document training) to the upcoming release.

If the procedures fall into the category of "employees consult them at the time of use", it is a common technique to remove all obsolete revisions of procedures such that employees can no longer refer to them.

 

[William55401]

Training needs to be part of your lifecycle to implement new / revised content. Red lines are created or new content created, CO generated, CO approved, Training Occurs, New / Revised Content Implemented. Your doc control system should tie closely to individual training records. Some orgs (think big Multi Nationals) do not implement new / revised content until they get to a 90+% training rate. Placing a dependency on training prior to implementation keeps you org in control. New employees are trained to what ever is in effect at the time and they are then subscribed to the right content for their roles. You org needs to develop training matrices to ensure they understand who must be trained on what (by job role). Hope this helps; have fun. Enjoy the ride.

 

[Funboi]

I don’t understand why people think that when a document changes, there must be a retraining. This is bizarre. What is needed is a check on the change impact on competency. Training isn’t the b-all and end-all some seem to think and it‘s certainly not required in ISO 9001

 

[Tidge]

I don’t understand why people think that when a document changes, there must be a retraining. This is bizarre. What is needed is a check on the change impact on competency. Training isn’t the b-all and end-all some seem to think and it‘s certainly not required in ISO 9001

I suspect it is because it more straightforward to require and document training (uniformly) to a revised procedure than it is to require and document an assessment of if it is required that training take place (uniformly). YMMV, but it is likely easier to address a failure of an employee to train to a document upon its revision if all employees are required a training period for all revisions.

This approach is blunt and lacks nuance, but uniformity in application probably yields better returns than those that would come from trying to micro-manage which procedures require (re)training and which ones do not. EDIT: The after-action assessment of "did retraining occur (for all procedure revisions)?" is also an easier question to answer than "was every assessment correct and appropriate (for all procedure revisions)?"