Smoke Screens, Siberia, and More—Popular Misuses of Training

Classroom training is like acetaminophen. When used properly, it can ease pain and promote health. Used for the wrong reasons, though, it can at best make no difference—or even cause further damage. Managers need to be honest about why they are sending people to training, or they risk not only wasting time and money, but also demotivating good employees. Indeed, managers need to be self-aware enough to identify four main misuses of training.

Training as a smoke screen

This is when training masks performance problems stemming from causes not rooted in skills deficiencies. Poor human performance can be the result of a number of root causes, many of which do not call for a training solution. For instance, if an employee’s poor performance is the result of a lack of tools, poor job design, or misguided incentives, then added skills through more training likely will not improve overall performance.

Training as a status symbol

Another misapplication of training is when employees attend training not for the purpose of attaining new skills, but for the certification that comes with it. There are times when workers who see the professional marketability of particular certifications or designations sign up for training just to be able to put that designation on their curriculum vitae—but not to gain skills to improve job performance. The certification should be a side benefit of the training, not the goal.

Training as a hidden reward

Training is sometimes held offsite in cities away from offices. One company I worked with had numerous offices scattered across the United States. They hosted two annual training summits, one in Boston in September and another in Phoenix in March, both coveted locations for those times of the year.

Although these were training sessions in name, attendance was not determined so much on skill gaps, but on who their managers wanted to reward with a week away from the office. The desirability of the location overshadowed the need to gain improved skills, thus training was used as a perk, not a performance solution.

Training as Siberia

Sometimes training is misused in a manner opposite that of a reward. This scenario occurs when there is a “trouble” employee—someone who isn’t performing at a high level, but who the organization isn’t prepared to actively manage.

This may be the person who is soon to retire or is likely to cause problems when confronted. On some occasions, these people are easily avoided if enrolled in each training course that a company offers. It may feel positive, as if that “trouble” employee is being given new skills to find a new job, but in reality it is just a way to keep that person out of sight for a week at a time. Worse, putting this person in training occupies a spot that may be better spent on an employee who truly needs those new skills.

Bottom line

Investment in training needs to be managed closely. Training can be a costly performance solution, and even when successfully imparting new skills, the expense may tip the ROI balance in favor of choosing not to train.

When misused, training can be a large waste of money and time. Worse, misguided training can serve to diminish rather than improve performance by taking people out of work for days at a time. Or, it may confuse an employee as to what their real performance expectations are by providing unneeded or superfluous new skills.

Training is incredibly powerful, but its investment should be approached with a clear picture of the performance that needs improvement—ideally in measurable terms and what the total cost will be.