Learning under a new culture

This will come as no surprise to the readers of Security Management Today, as such training provided a solution to the requirements of various British Standards and allowed companies to promote the fact that their staff were 'appropriately trained'.

Clearly, it also addressed the fact that most peoples' careers at operative level in the security industry were relatively short-lived.

As an organisation, SITO has had a major impact at entry level with more than 120,000 individuals achieving a Basic Job Training certificate across four sub-sectors in 12 years. Early indications are that the quality, duration and level of such training will be subject to improvement in a regulated future.

The debate surrounding the virtues of two-day training versus three-day is becoming academic, but it should be viewed as a sad indictment of our industry that it has taken the introduction of the SIA to make companies think seriously about the duration, relevance and quality of their training.

Of course, there has been much debate about Continuing Professional Development (CPD). As a strong advocate of CPD, I firmly agree that it must form part of the future training framework for this industry. However, let us not forget that, despite the fact that SITO, the American Society for Industrial Security, the International Institute of Security and many other professional bodies have developed an excellent array of higher level qualifications, the uptake has been somewhat slow. So what's the major problem?

I believe that one of the biggest problems we're up against is the fact that learning and training are often thought of as synonymous in our industry. Training is delivered as a perceived costly necessity, often being seen as additional to the business as opposed to playing an integral part of any commercial strategy. As a result, the Training Department will find itself the poor relation to both the Operations and Sales Departments. Consequently, little analysis of how people do learn – and of the planning needed to facilitate that learning – actually takes place.

Not surprisingly, there's no structure to training, learning is inconsistent – and of variable quality – and no formal route to qualifications is immediately apparent to a given company's personnel.

However, with most companies now jostling for supremacy in a fairly static and traditional marketplace, and new markets requiring some evidence of our ability to perform and satisfy their needs, the time for open minds and a learning renaissance is most definitely upon us.

So what exactly is 'learning'?
In business, learning is a means to an end. Generally speaking, that end is an enhanced workplace performance of people, which in turn reflects its value – better service delivery, improved contract and staff retention, lower costs, a more competitive position in the marketplace, and often an increased market share to boot. In the context of business, learning is the process by which people acquire new skills or knowledge for the purpose of enhancing their performance.

People learn all the time. They find ways of doing things, and ways of responding to given problems, but they'll do so more effectively if encouraged along that route, and when offered a formal route of recognition for their learning.

The debate surrounding the virtues of two-day training versus three-day is becoming academic, but it should be viewed as a sad indictment of our industry that it has taken the introduction of the SIA to make companies think seriously about the duration, r

There's no doubt that, in our industry, job-specific knowledge and theoretical understanding are often acquired 'in post', and indeed it was with that very premise in mind that SITO developed its extensive range of national occupational standards.

The primary function of these standards is to act as a key component for qualifications. However, they have many other uses, including training design, training needs analysis, appraisals, recruitment, skills benchmarking and quality assurance. It's now interesting to see that so many companies are approaching SITO with a view to having their own bespoke staff development programmes – based on the standards – approved in order to give them a nationally-recognised competitive edge.

The act of training
To continue moving forward as an industry we must inevitably seek to transform our 'culture of learning'. Some bold steps must be taken... and we must start with our industry trainers.

The first step towards transformation relates to outcomes. Focusing on the act of training, including how much training activity takes place as a performance measurement, is no longer adequate. Trainers must be more accountable. They must be able to demonstrate a powerful impact on employee performance in ways that benefit the company and the customer. In other words, training is accountable for the same primary measure as any other function: business value.

Although powerful, training is but one way of improving performance. No performance improvement strategy is complete without leveraging a variety of non-learning interventions, such as having the right materials and equipment to work with, creating a good working environment, providing adequate incentives and motivation, and giving appropriate feedback and coaching.

The second step is all about access. Our industry consists of widely distributed employees who are busier than ever, and calling for learning delivery solutions that meet their shift patterns and personal timescales. People want to learn according to their schedule, and as quickly/slowly and/or efficiently as possible.

Managers desire this too, as it saves 'downtime' while at the same time increasing organisational mobility.

While traditional training still has a critical role to play, the needs of people with different time requirements can now be met much more effectively by the plethora of distance learning programmes leading to examinations and competence-based qualifications.