Indeed - especially if the training course was run in a language that was not the first language of the delegate......
Training record - how to verify valid training participation
- Thread starter Aphel
- Start date
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
Randy
Super Moderator
I see this "training" stuff all the time with what I do, and 99 times out of 100 it's wasted resources. I recently looked at some orientation training for a new EHS Manager, the guy is a CSP, degree in Safety and a member of ASSE for 20+ years, he had to take "training" on PPE, LOTO, and a couple other things....Why?....Because some moron auditor gave them a NC because not everyone had received "required" regulatory training (CFO, COO, CAO) and others that don't do LOTO, or need to wear PPE............. There are 500 more cases like this and maybe more.
I don’t know how many times we need to point this out for people to stop this madness of ‘training records’. (I know this is harsh but it is true)
‘Classroom’ training - good effective targeted training, not broad wide shallow training - is necessary, but it is hardly sufficient. The silly ‘read and understand’ stuff is nothing more than CYA done for the sole purpose of ‘compliance’ and placating lazy @$$ auditors. Real effective training goes beyond classroom (or internet self piloted) lectures, even if quizzes and tests are utilized. There must be the hands-on, directly observed, coached, and assessed by results ‘training’.
I can’t tell you how many annual required internet training I had to take on ethics, bribery, harassment and safety. After the first introduction to what is acceptable and what is not, this so-called training only served to inform the violators how to not get caught.
I’ve personally provided training on new and existing policy and practices and watched as the trainings signed the attendance sheet and said as they walked out the door “I’m not doing that” and then watched as their managers saw their non-compliance, defended it and even encouraged it. I’d like to see an auditor focus on THAT and some silly signature…
Minimal, bare bones Compliance to a standard does NOT equal effectiveness or competence.
‘Classroom’ training - good effective targeted training, not broad wide shallow training - is necessary, but it is hardly sufficient. The silly ‘read and understand’ stuff is nothing more than CYA done for the sole purpose of ‘compliance’ and placating lazy @$$ auditors. Real effective training goes beyond classroom (or internet self piloted) lectures, even if quizzes and tests are utilized. There must be the hands-on, directly observed, coached, and assessed by results ‘training’.
I can’t tell you how many annual required internet training I had to take on ethics, bribery, harassment and safety. After the first introduction to what is acceptable and what is not, this so-called training only served to inform the violators how to not get caught.
I’ve personally provided training on new and existing policy and practices and watched as the trainings signed the attendance sheet and said as they walked out the door “I’m not doing that” and then watched as their managers saw their non-compliance, defended it and even encouraged it. I’d like to see an auditor focus on THAT and some silly signature…
Minimal, bare bones Compliance to a standard does NOT equal effectiveness or competence.
Similar threads
