How
Mentoring is the Critical "Bridge" for Successful
Development
© 2008, Barry Sweeny
PAGE INDEX:
The
Amazing Research on"Transfer of Training"
In 1987, Bruce Joyce and
Beverly Showers released the findings of their ground-breaking
and comprehensive research into the extent of implementation resulting
for various modes of training and follow up support. This information
is very dramatic and has become the prime mover behind the increase
in what is known as "coaching". The summary of their
findings are provided below. Every organization needs to understand
and respond to these data and their implications!
| The research on the
need for “in-situation” coaching:
- Learners that will transfer a new
skill into their practice as a result of learning
a theory = 5%
- Learners that will transfer a new skill
into their practice as a result of learning a theory
& seeing a demonstration
= 10%
- Learners that will transfer a new skill
into their practice as a result of theory, demonstration
& practice during the training
= 20%
- Learners that will transfer a new skill
into their practice as a result of theory, demonstration,
practice & corrective feed back during the training
= 25%
- Learners that will transfer a new skill
into their practice as a result of theory, demonstration,
practice, feed back during training & in-situation
coaching = 90%
|
CAUTION - When you do
any coaching, you MUST place that "coaching" within
the context of the mentoring relationship, for just providing
technical support (coaching) is NOT enough to make sure that employees
actually implement in practice what they have learned in trainings.
Joyce & Showers acknowledge that NO ONE will take the risks
of growing in front of another person, or their advice and "coaching"
unless they first have a relationship of mutual trust
with that person. Mentoring provides the relationship within which
effective coaching can lead to risk-taking and growth. For more
on the differences between mentoring and coaching and the need
for BOTH, click here.
The
Mentoring Bridge
The above research by Joyce and Showers (1987)
shows that the “waters” of implementation are “shark-infested”
and not promising areas for risk-taking, growth, or learning.
From the specific conversation of an employee
with a supervisor to a broad, organization-wide conference or
training initiative, implementation is almost ALWAYS where improvement
processes fail!
If left alone, employees will struggle to apply
what they learn from any training you provide to their daily practice
in the work place. Only when follow up coaching and mentoring
are BOTH provided in that work place is it reasonable to expect
that employees will be able to:
1. Adapt strategies learned in training
to their own strengths, setting, and tasks
2. Solve the problems of adaptation, adoption,
alignment, and integrating new strategies to existing settings
and other skills
3. Master the new strategies so that
their day-to-day practice is improved and the desired results
are increased.
The implications of this insight are GIGANTIC!
Whether that training is in a classroom and face-to-face,
or e-learning on the web, these principles are at work and the
results will be the same.
Except in the case of increasing awareness
when no implementation is expected, the only time we
should even provide any training at all is when we will also
provide the follow up support people deserve to help them
implement what the training has taught them.
Otherwise, why waste our time and resources providing
training we KNOW will never change practice?! We shouldn't!!
