Who champions your internal manufacturing training?

[Audit Coordinator]

Hello All,
We are having some troubles with HR continuing to want to champion all our internal training as they have done for the last 20+ years. Now they only want to be responsible for parts of it so those of us in QA are scrambling to find another "owner" for all the other training that the company has, most of which is for production. Our QA department already has an overwhelming list of things to champion especially with a recent supplier management change, that now QA has to champion their vendor score cards. Seems everyone loves to dump on QA!
Just wondering how other manufacturing plants handle it as we are going to need a representative to represent our entire training program (it has it's own software program) for our AS9100D External Audit coming up next month.

 

[Ninja]

Howdy,

Championing the training itself? Who should train the 'how do we manufacture stuff'? The folks currently manufacturing stuff. I shiver to think of HR training a machinist to operate a CNC.

Is this what you are asking? Or is your question more towards documenting the training?

 

[Audit Coordinator]

Well, yes and no. HR has been the department that controlled the software that keeps all the training PowerPoint presentations - HR never did the actual trainings. They just were the keeper of them and also decided who needed what training, with the help of production managers.
I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just that it's changing and it's getting unloaded on QA. Maybe that's the best department to do it, maybe not. Just wondering what other avenues other manufacturing plants use. I believe HR is still creating the metrics every month that are used in the monthly management review meetings.

 

[Eredhel]

So going forward do they want QA to keep up with records of training, do the actual training, or both?

 

[Coury Ferguson]

My opinion...it doesn't matter who champions the Training process. At my company HR maintains all the records, but various people perform the training.

As for the metrics...since HR maintains the records, they hold the responsibility to provide the KPIs for Training, even though they don't do all of the training.

 

[Audit Coordinator]

My opinion...it doesn't matter who champions the Training process. At my company HR maintains all the records, but various people perform the training.

As for the metrics...since HR maintains the records, they hold the responsibility to provide the KPIs for Training, even though they don't do all of the training.

Thanks Coury, I think that's where were headed too. It makes sense as production, really, is who should be responsible for determining who needs what training for operators on the job. When it comes to Code of Conduct and REDACTED Harassment training, for examples, that definitely falls under the HR realm.

 

[Golfman25]

Training is a part of HR. HR supports managers in other areas of the company. So to me, logically HR takes the lead role. They are much better versed in training techniques, evaluations, etc. Department managers are probably better at content. It's a team effort.

 

[Ninja]

Training is a part of HR.

Totally disagree (one of the first times with you)...though it may be semantics...

It's a team effort.

Totally agree.

Training is up to the process owner.
Tracking training is up to the ISO Doc Coordinator {wherever they are}.

And it totally is a team effort, with the process owner being the team captain. Who else can functionally determine if someone is 'trained'?

"Keeping PPT's?" they should be in pdf and publicly accessible.
"Training" = process owner.
"Tracking training" = documentation...totally anyone other than the process owner.

Is all of your training PPT, with no "this guy actually gets it" approval?