Transform Your Training

If you’ve been involved in training ( sorry, Learning & Development ) for more than a week, you’ll have noticed that new expressions keep coming in and names keep changing.

For example, years ago I used to work for a Training Department ( remember those? ), which then became the Learning Team.
 
We used to run Train the Trainer courses but these became Facilitator Development Programmes.
 
Sometimes this seems like change for change’s sake but sometimes there’s a good reason behind it.
 
The move from talking about “training” to “learning” was to reflect a focus on the learner and the fact that there are different ways people can learn apart from just training.

And the move towards facilitating was also meant to reflect a change in approach. It was supposed to be a move away from everything coming from the trainer and towards a more interactive, inclusive and engaging style.
 
In particular, it meant getting away from presentation – or lecture – style training. The trainer’s role was more to set up experiences and situations whereby people could learn instead of just presenting information in a one-way format.
 
I won’t go into all the reasons why this is a good thing. Let’s just  assume that it is. How  do you know whether you’re doing this? How can you tell whether you’ve become a facilitator rather than a presenter?

Here are 10 signs that you’re facilitating rather than presenting:

1. You ask yourself, ” What do these people need to learn? ” rather than, ” What do I know about this topic? “
2. You never tell people something they could learn for themselves through an activity or by your asking them a question.
3. Linked to this, you are always asking yourself, ” How can I help them discover this? ” not ” How can I tell them this? “
4. Your learners spend more time talking than you do.
    
5. They also spend more time doing other things than sitting listening.
    
6. You recognise your group’s knowledge, experiences and creativity and find ways to let them show these.
    
7. You use a variety of approaches to encourage involvement and allow people to learn in different ways
    
8. The learners spend time doing something with what they’ve learned – creating rather than consuming content.
    
9. You spend more time before the session finding out about your learners than you do preparing content and materials.
    
10. You’re probably not using PowerPoint! Or, if you do, you use it sparingly and you’re not using bullet points.

I was talking to a potential client the other day who wanted to know more about my style of training. After I’d explained a bit ( I tried to keep it to less than an hour, I did have other things to do ) she said, ” That sounds great. It’s very learner-centred “.

It struck me that this is a phrase you used to hear all the time but it doesn’t crop up so much these days. Maybe it’s been replaced by ” brain-friendly learning”, which is a phrase I use a lot myself.

But I think “learner-centred” sums up the way I think training should be designed and delivered.

What does it mean? For me, it would include the following points.

• It’s based on the needs of the learners, which may seem obvious but a lot of training isn’t – it’s based instead on the needs of the organisation.

  Obviously, there’s some compromise – organisations need people to learn certain skills and information – but the main question should be, ” What do these learners need to get from this training to make it worthwhile for them? “

• This means you need to find out what the learners need – ask them, before and during the training, involve them in the design if possible, find out what they really want to get from it.

  Don’t take someone else’s word for it – another person in the organisation might have a very different view about what they need.

• It doesn’t start from the content, ” We have to cover all this, we have to use these slides, it says so in the manual. ” Trainers need to be flexible and willing to adapt to what groups need from them, not just running through the set content regardless of who’s in front of them.
• It’s based on HOW people learn – so it includes a variety of methods and approaches to suit different types of people, so they can access the information in a range of ways, and it reflects what we know about how the brain works ( yes, it’s “brain-friendly” )
• One consequence of this is that the training is interactive, it involves and engages the learners and gives them plenty of opportunities to process and apply what they have learned.

  It’s not a passive process where learners just sit and listen and watch slides ( which is an example of “content-centred” training ).

• The training should happen when the learners need it, not because it’s part of a fixed programme and they have to go regardless of whether or not it’s of use to them at that point ( “sheep-dip” training ).
• The numbers involved in the training should be suited to the purpose and the style of the training.

  So, for example, groups are kept small to allow for participation and activity, not maximised to get as many people through as cheaply as possible.

• The training should help to develop the learners’ independence, not encourage dependence on the trainer or other ” experts “.

  It should recognise the skills, knowledge and value that the learners themselves bring to the situation.

I’m sure there are more points than this but that’s probably enough to be going on with.

Training should be fun. You should enjoy it, your learners should enjoy it. Most people would probably agree with that.

But is that really necessary? In fact, could enjoying a training session actually distract people from learning something?

I’ve certainly known people who have looked at training sessions where participants were clearly having a good time – moving around, talking, drawing, building things – and been deeply suspicious

They were often quite senior people who had endured mind-numbingly boring training sessions themselves ( and probably delivered a few ) and thought everyone else should go through the same thing. They were wary of these new-fangled ideas.

They didn’t often know much about learning so their opinions weren’t exactly well-informed. Unfortunately, their views tended to be important as they were often the people funding the training!

It shouldn’t be too revolutionary these days, though, to suggest that training should engage and interest the learners. It’s pretty clear that, if people are interested and involved, they’ll learn more than if they’re bored and uninterested.

Getting people moving around, involving them in activities and discussion, and making the training room more stimulating should be a natural part of helping the key messages get home.

But that’s the crucial point. All these things are just part of supporting the learning. The only reason for using humour, visual aids, movement, discussion or anything else is to support the learning.

In fact, that goes for everything you do in a training room. If it doesn’t support the learning, you shouldn’t be doing it.

That’s the argument I used when anyone looked with suspicion at the way I used to deliver some training sessions. I would discuss how the methods actually enhanced the learning and helped people to remember more which, in the end, justified the money that had been spent on the training.

But I have to admit that isn’t always true.

I do think there are times when you see people having a lot of fun on a training course, but I’m not sure they’re learning much. Or not learning what they’re supposed to be learning.

As with anything else, you have to manage the process. You have to make sure that what’s happening has a clear purpose and is working towards achieving the objectives of the training. That’s part of the skill you have to develop as a facilitator/trainer.

That means you have to be careful about the activities you choose to use and the atmosphere you help to create in the room.

For instance, I remember one course where the trainer was trying desperately to be ” one of the gang ” – cracking in-jokes about colleagues, talking about what people had been doing the night before, how much they’d drunk, etc.

I assume he felt this would help him build a rapport with the group. What it did was to get out of hand. He ended up having no control, no authority, no leadership of the group.

They talked while he was trying to explain things, they joked and laughed when they were supposed to be listening and they made little effort to involve themselves in the activities.

The trainer had ignored the fact that they were supposed to be there for a purpose and had set up a situation where people felt they were just there to have a good time and a chat with their mates. Having done that, there was no way back.

Similarly, I’ve seen trainers use activities which the participants certainly enjoyed, but which had no clear objective. In fact, I’ve sometimes asked people why they have used certain activities and heard, ” Oh, they love that. It always gets them really excited – and it gets great marks on the feedback forms! ”

Yes, but what’s the point of it? What are they learning? Is the time taken on the activity justified in terms of what they get out of it? Is that the best way to get this particular point across? You should be asking yourself these questions every time you choose to use an activity.

So get things the right way around. Be clear about what you’re meant to be getting across and what people are meant to be getting out of your session. Then look for interesting ways to make the content come alive and hold their attention.

Don’t start by thinking, ” This will make them laugh ” or ” This will get them moving about ” but ignore the real purpose for being there.

So, of course, I think that people should be having fun when they’re learning. But they should also be learning when they’re having fun!

( Yes, how can you tell I used to be a teacher? )

Training can be a lonely business if you always work by yourself, so it’s good at times to work with other trainers.

And working with others can really help to develop your skills and experience ( in other words, you can copy their ideas – with their permission, of course).

In fact, there are lots of benefits of working with other trainers, both for yourself and for the learners. You can share tasks, discuss approaches and help each other tackle any problems which arise.

From the learners’ point of view, having two trainers adds variety, perhaps offering a change in style, and can allow more personal attention when working in groups.

But it can also go badly wrong!

Have you ever been involved in a course where it’s obvious the trainers who are supposed to be working as a team haven’t got their act together?

Here are some of the warning signs:

• the trainers contradict each other
• they talk over each other
• or there’s an awkward silence where no-one knows who is meant to be speaking
• one trainer does something distracting while the other is leading a session ( or reads a newspaper or falls asleep – I’ve had both happen! )
• there seems to be an element of competition, with one trying to appear more “expert” than the other
• the trainers end up saying more than the learners because each feels he or she has to say something to justify being there

What are the key tips for trainers to make sure they work well together and avoid some of the pitfalls of co-training?

• trainers should communicate with each other regularly before and during the training, meeting during breaks or at the end of a day to discuss how it has gone and to prepare for the next session
• they should plan before the event to assign roles, tasks, sessions and responsibilities
• if one has not run the course before, the other should go through the material with him or her and explain how the course normally runs in practice( which may be quite different from what is set out in the course manual )
   
• having said that, the trainer who has run the course before should still remain open to new ideas and different ways of approaching the material
   
• trainers should try not to get too possessive or sensitive about material they may have written themselves ( but new trainers should also be sensitive to the fact that things may be done in a certain way for a good reason and not change them just for the sake of novelty )
   
• each trainer should keep to the agreed timings and take care not to run over, leaving the other trainer with the problem of making up time or leaving out material
   
• trainers should not contradict each other on important points in front of the learners unless not to do so would cause confusion ( e.g. if one makes a serious mistake in what is said ). Even then, it should be done tactfully!
   
• no-one should change the material or the schedule without prior agreement
   
• trainers should agree how each will contribute and behave when the other is leading a session ( don’t assume that the other person is happy for you to “just chip in” when you have something to say )
   
• the trainers should be constructive, co-operative and supportive throughout the training ( even if they can’t stand each other )

 So long as these points are followed, co-training can be a very rewarding experience for both the trainers and the learners.

As always, the most important thing is that everything that happens in the training room supports the learning. That’s what you’re there for, after all.

For more great training tips, get your FREE copy of “How To Be A Top Trainer” from www.transformyourtraining.com

I remember sitting in a meeting some years back when a group of trainers were discussing the design of a new course. One person said something about creating an environment where the learners felt ” comfortable ” and ” at ease “.
 
One of the other trainers questioned this and said, ” Is that how we want them to feel? Shouldn’t we be  challenging them and putting them under a bit of pressure? We don’t want them too relaxed. ”
 
It’s an interesting, and crucial, discussion if you’re designing and delivering training. Just how comfortable, or uncomfortable, should people be if they are to learn effectively?
 
Actually, the way I just phrased the question gives away my own approach to the issue. Because, for me, the question is about helping people to learn effectively.
 
What is a constructive state for people to be in when they’re learning? ( I know I’ve said this many times, but here I go again ).
 
It would include being:

• curious
• thoughtful
• challenged
• stretched
• accountable for their own learning

If you can create an environment which meets these criteria, then people won’t be feeling completely at ease.
 
They’ll be challenged to think in new ways, to move out of their comfort zones, to try new ideas and perhaps question their existing ways of doing things.
 
They may also have to work quite hard, to accomplish tasks, to work with other people, to take responsibility.
 
You don’t want people to be so ” at ease ” that they are:

• uninspired
• bored
• uninterested
• lacking in curiosity
• able to fall back on easy answers or well – rehearsed approaches to situations

A training session isn’t a holiday, where people can kick off their shoes and relax, enjoying some time away from ” real work “.
 
On the other hand, you don’t want your learners to feel:

• stressed
• anxious
• confused
• overwhelmed
• embarrassed

because these feelings are not conducive to good learning. These feelings stop people from thinking clearly. They get in the way and distract them so they can’t focus properly. In other words, they are counterproductive.
 
Have you ever watched a TV quiz show and found yourself shouting at the television because some poor contestant was struggling to answer a ” simple ” question?
 
You wonder why they can’t see the answer when it’s so obvious. Any fool could answer it.
 
The reason they can’t is because trying to think of the answer to any question when you’re sitting in front of a bank of lights and cameras and a live audience is very stressful, especially if you stand to win a large sum of money if you get it right.
 
( I know this, I was on ” Who Wants To Be A Millionaire ” many years ago but didn’t get past the “fastest finger” round ).
 
When the brain is put under a lot of stress, it tends to shut down various areas and leaves open mainly those necessary for survival – it’s part of the “fight or flight” response. When this happens, you’re not in the best frame of mind for learning, to say the least.
 
So you need to be careful. It’s OK to challenge people, to make them think and to push them out of their comfort zones a bit. No-one wants a training course which doesn’t stretch people, which is just  too easy.
 
But go too far and it can backfire.
 
I’ve heard some people boast about how stressful their courses are, how they really put people under pressure to see who can deal with it.
 
That’s fine – if the purpose of the course is to see how people react to pressure, if you’re training them to work in a pressurised environment.
 
Firefighters, for instance, practise working in blinding smoke and appalling heat because that’s when they need to be able to operate most effectively.
 
Presentation skills courses are stressful for most people because they don’t like speaking in public. But, if that’s what they’re going to do, they have to learn to speak well even when they’re feeling stressed – because that’s how they will be feeling when they speak.
 
And, if you’re running a Time Management course, putting learners under time pressure to complete a task is relevant and appropriate.
 
But don’t create stress just for the sake of it. If your training isn’t about dealing with stress, introducing it artificially may only impede what you’re trying to do.
 
I’d love to hear your thoughts – please leave a comment.

For more great training tips, get your FREE copy of ” How To Be A Top Trainer ” from www.transformyourtraining.com

Most of the training I do is what I would call ” classroom- based “, which means it involves getting a number of live human beings together in a room for a certain length of time.

However, I’ve also done a lot of one-to-one coaching and I’ve delivered webinars and teleclasses and written self-study programmes for people to work through by themselves.

And, when it comes to my own learning, I often use web-based methods, self-study materials with DVDs and mp3s or even good, old-fashioned books!

There are lots of ways in which people can learn, of course, and they all have their place. But, with all this variety of methods, especially with web-based approaches, I sometimes hear a suggestion that perhaps classroom-based training has had its day, that it’s old-fashioned and ineffective.

Is this true? No.

Thank you, end of article. Next time – is there still a place for pencils in the modern office?

Oh, alright, I’ll elaborate a little.

Why would anyone suggest that face-to-face training might be outdated?

Well, as usual, I think money has something to do with it. It can cost a lot to get a group of people together in one place, including perhaps room hire, travel and accommodation.

Also, it is becoming increasingly difficult for people to find the time to spend away from their work to attend training. This is especially tricky if it involves a number of people from the same office or department being away at the same time.

There is also a cost in non-working time ( although, in my experience, anyone who attends training catches up on their work afterwards so it still gets done ).

Computer-based training programmes, or “e-learning solutions”, if you want to make them sound more interesting, can be very cost-effective as you only design them once, then you can use them for years – and people don’t have to travel to get the training.

Another potential criticism of classroom-based training is that it is not tailored to the individual. Because it involves a group, it has to be more general and it may not be at exactly the right level or come at exactly the right time for everyone who attends.

For this reason, individual coaching or some form of self-study may be seen to have an advantage.

And, sometimes, I think this comment arises just from the fact that classroom based training has been around for a long time and some people think anything new, especially if it involves computers and the internet, must be better in some way.

So what can I find to say in defence of classroom-based training?

Well, let’s go back to the idea of “brain-friendly” learning – in other words, based on what we know about the brain, what are some of the things which seem to help people to learn effectively?

These would include:

• a chance to interact with other people as they learn
• a chance to contribute to, and process, the information they receive
• an opportunity to create meaning rather than just consume information
• physical movement and activity
• variety of approaches and stimuli
• engaging as many senses as possible while learning and the material having an impact at an emotional level as well as an intellectual one
• having controlled repetition and reinforcement
• learning being fun or, at least, an enjoyable experience
• being able to practise and apply skills as they are learned

I would say that well-designed and delivered classroom-based training can tick all of these boxes where no other form of learning can.

It’s certainly not the only method which can offer some of these things. Other approaches can certainly offer a few of them  and, sometimes, perhaps even better than classroom-based training.

Other forms can offer more individual tailoring of learning to suit the individual and perhaps be timed more accurately so they occur just when needed.

And I do believe that, in some ways, individual coaching is the most powerful tool for personal development and change there is.

But I still think, at its best, classroom-based training can be the most effective way of offering learning to a group with similar needs.

It also allows people to share their knowledge and insights, to get away from the workplace for a while to focus on their learning and to get great value from participating in a shared experience with other people.

However – to be effective, there are a few things which need to be addressed:

• there needs to be effective training needs analysis to ensure the training is relevant and pitched at the right level
• the timing has to be thought out carefully
• the delivery needs to follow “brain-friendly” principles
• there needs to be support within an organisation for people to apply the learning back in the workplace
• classroom-based training is far more effective if combined with individual coaching to help learners to implement what they have learned

So, overall, I think there is scope for all sorts of training or learning approaches and I’m not ruling out any of them.

There’s a place for webinars, teleclasses, audios, DVDs, etc – but these offer only part of the whole learning experience. Classroom-based training offers far more – if properly designed and delivered.

I’d love to know what you think, so please leave a comment.

For more great training tips, get your FREE copy of “How To Be A Top Trainer” from www.transformyourtraining.com

How do you know whether any training you’ve organised or delivered has been effective?

How do you know whether the money your organisation is spending on training is being used wisely?

In difficult economic times, many businesses are looking hard at their training budgets and deciding how well their money is being spent. Or, in many cases, they’re making an assumption that training is an optional extra which can be put to one side until things get better.

If you’re in a department which is responsible for training, how can you argue against this?

How can you defend yourself against having your budget frozen if you can’t show that the training has a real impact on the business?

It all comes down to being able to evaluate the impact of training. If you can’t prove that training makes a difference, why should anyone spend money on it?

But how do you evaluate training? Here are some ideas.

One approach to evaluating training is to go back to the 4 levels set out by Kirkpatrick and outlined in his book in 1994, ” Evaluating Training Programs: The 4 Levels “, San Francisco:Berrett-Koehler.

Level 1: Reaction

You can measure Reaction by using what are often called “happy sheets”. These gauge people’s immediate reaction to a course, how they feel about what they have just done, the content, the trainer, the level of the information, etc.

Most trainers are very familiar with these. They can be designed using numbers, scales, open or closed questions or just asking learners to give their comments.

Which method you use partly depends on whether you want to make statistical comparisons, e.g. ” This course averages 4.3 for learner satisfaction “.

Generally numbers give you less useful information than comments but, as we all know, getting learners to write meaningful comments at the end of a course can be difficult. I’ve written previously on ways to make this process more useful.

These forms can be helpful but they can also be misleading. They can reflect how much the learners enjoyed the course rather than how much they actually learned.

Level 2: Learning

This level measures whether people actually learned what they were meant to learn. Do they know or understand something which they didn’t before?

Have they acquired a new skill? If so, can they put it into practice?

You can try to measure this by using:

• tests before and after the training – these may be written or practical
• observation of people at work following the training
• case studies, role plays or simulations
• interviews with learners and their colleagues and feedback from people they work with
• questionnaires

These methods clearly take more time than using “happy sheets” but they give more in-depth information and measure what people learned rather than just how people felt about the training.

One issue is how you design accurate, standardised tests and when you ask people to complete them. If they complete them immediately after the training, will they still remember what they have learned a few weeks later?

Level 3: Behaviour

This has some overlap with Level 2 in that, if people have really learned something, their behaviour is likely to change.

In fact, you could argue that if someone’s behaviour has not changed, then almost by definition they haven’t learned anything.

Level 3 is really about application – have the learners put what they have learned into practice? This is really getting close to what organisations need to know because, if people don’t put what they have learned into practice, what was the point?

You can try to measure this using:

• interviews
• feedback from colleagues or customers
• observation
• questionnaires
• focus groups

As with Level 2, there are some difficulties with these methods:

• how long after the training do you carry out the evaluation?
• what factors may inhibit people from applying what they have learned – e.g. lack of opportunity, resources, management support?
• how do you establish that changes in behaviour are due to the training and not to other factors, e.g. gaining work experience?
• how much time and cost may be involved in setting up interviews, observations, etc.

Level 4: Results

This is what businesses really want to know – what impact has the training had? What difference has it made? To put it bluntly – was it worth it?

How do you measure this? That’s the issue here – you need to establish what measure you think is appropriate, such as:

• increased sales
• speed of response
• reduced time to complete tasks
• client satisfaction ( as measured by feedback )
• productivity ( however you want to measure that )
• reduced absenteeism or staff turnover
• improved quality ( again, you have to determine some means of measuring this )

 One problem here is that not all things are easily measurable. Some businesses, of course, only value what they can measure, but it’s not always easy to measure the impact of, for example, soft skills training.

However, focusing on results may have the benefit of forcing trainers to really think about the purpose of their training. Why do people need the training? What is it meant to achieve? What are the outcomes?

I’ve seen a lot of training where these questions haven’t really been asked at the start so the training lacks focus, purpose and clarity.

And no-one can say whether the training has achieved what it set out to achieve because they aren’t really sure what that was.

 You don’t need to do all levels of evaluation for every training event, that would be overkill. But, if your training budget is under threat or people are wondering whether it’s worth paying you to go in and run a training course, it would be wise to think about how you’re going to prove the value of what you’re doing!

I’d love to know what you think so please leave a comment.

For more great training tips, get your FREE copy of “How to Be A Top Trainer” from www.TransformYourTraining.com

One of the things I’m often asked about on my Transform Your Training courses is, ” How do you deal with difficult questions? ”

 It’s something which quite new trainers, in particular, seem anxious about. So here are a few practical tips.

 First of all, what makes a question a “difficult” one?

 There seem to be 3 kinds of questions people are concerned about:

1. questions you don’t know the answer to
2. questions which are off the topic
3. questions which suggest the person hasn’t understood anything you’ve said!

The first issue doesn’t arise as often as some people fear it will. If you’ve prepared your training session, you will be ready for most questions. And you probably underestimate how much more you know about your topic than the people you’re training.

 But it can help if you anticipate problems. For example, go through your material and think, “Where could I get caught out?” Or think about the one question you hope no-one will ask you. Then go and research the answer so you’re ready if it does come up.

 But what if it does happen – you’re asked a question and you really don’t know the answer?

 Well, it depends what sort of question it is.

 There are some questions where you know you should know the answer ( and maybe you do ) but you just can’t think of it at the moment. Maybe your mind’s just gone blank for a minute.

 Or sometimes it’s a question you really haven’t come across before and you actually don’t know the answer.

 In both cases, try opening it up to the group.

 ”What does everyone else think?”

 ”Who has come across this before?”

 Don’t feel you always have to be the one with the knowledge. Encourage others to contribute. Someone else will probably come up with an answer – or, if not, at least it will buy you time to think of one yourself.

 In fact, do this even where you do know the answer to a question, to get people in the habit of sharing their knowledge and not seeing you as the one who has all the answers.

 Resist the temptation to say, “I’ll find out and get back to you” unless you know that you can find the answer very quickly.

 This might be OK in the situation where the answer has just slipped your mind for the moment but you know where to find it. But offering to find the answer to a question where you have no idea about the answer could commit you to hours of work.

 You could always try saying, “That’s a very good question and I haven’t come across it before. If you come up with the answer, I’d be interested to hear it.”

 It should go without saying that, if you don’t know the answer to a question, you don’t just make stuff up!

 Sometimes you will get a question you can’t answer because it actually falls within the second category – it’s a question which is off the topic so you weren’t expecting it.

 One way to head off these questions is to be very clear when you’re setting out the scope of the training at the start so that people know what you’re going to cover and what you’re not going to talk about.

 But they may still come up because people have thoughts which suddenly come into their heads and they need to ask something that’s bothering them.

 You need to make a decision whether you should really spend time on the question you’ve been asked. Is it a good use of the group’s time to discuss this or is it a distraction?

 Don’t feel obliged to spend time discussing it just because one person has asked. You have to balance your desire to help the individual with your responsibility to the group as a whole.

 If you think it might be of general interest, and it’s not too much of a sidetrack, you could ask the group whether they want to discuss it for a while.

 Otherwise, just say, “That’s an interesting question but it’s really outside the scope of what I wanted to cover right now.”

 You could offer to discuss it with the person individually later if you want to. But, again, don’t feel you have to commit yourself to spending time on something which you never said you were going to cover anyway.

 The third type of question is where someone asks you about something you’ve already covered and it makes you wonder whether they’ve heard, or understood, anything you’ve said.

 It’s the sort of question where you think to yourself, “I can’t believe you’re asking me that.”

 Try not to say those words out loud and do your best to keep the look of shock and disbelief off your face.

 Also, don’t say, “I think I covered this earlier.” In other words,”Were you not listening?”

 Actually, perhaps they weren’t. Perhaps they did just miss something you said or didn’t understand at the time but didn’t want to stop you at that point to ask.

 Or maybe they got bored and switched off.

 Or maybe your explanation just wasn’t the model of clarity and brilliance you thought it was.

 Once again this could be a good time to turn it over to the group. It’s a good opportunity to do a recap with everyone and get them to go over your key points again.

 Also, if one person is asking this question, there may be other people who also didn’t follow but didn’t have the courage to say. So having a group discussion will help you to see whether everyone has got the message.

 As a general point, one way to cut down the problem of difficult questions is to make your training as interactive as possible and involve your group in the learning as much as you can, so there’s plenty of discussion and activity going on. You’re more likely to get these questions if you’re doing a lot of presenting or lecturing and only allowing questions and contributions towards the end.

I’d love to know what you think, so please leave a comment.

For more great training tips, get your FREE copy of “How To Be A Top Trainer” from www.TransformYourTraining.com

A couple of years ago I was thinking of buying a new car, a black VW Passat. Suddenly, every time I went out, I saw black VW Passats everywhere. I remember thinking, ” I didn’t realise they were so common! ” It nearly put me off buying one.
 
Similarly, when my wife started suffering with migraines, we kept spotting articles about migraines in lots of newspapers and magazines.
 
Has this ever happened to you? It probably has.
 
Why does this happen? Because you have programmed your brain to look out for information which is relevant and important to you. So you start to spot things which were always there but which you didn’t notice before because they weren’t important to you at that time.
 
How many people do you see in a day? How many cars do you see? How many do you remember?
 
Your brain takes in millions of messages all the time, it can’t hold onto all of them. It has to pick and choose what it pays attention to. It chooses what is important and that can change depending on your interests and your needs.
 
My wife is often amazed ( not necessarily in a good way ) by how much I can remember about football results and trivia. I can scan the sports pages and remember most of what I’ve read there without much effort.
 
On the other hand, if she asks me to collect something from the shops while I’m out, chances are I’ll forget if I don’t write it down.
 
Why? Because my brain knows what’s important to me and pays attention to that. ( I have to say, that doesn’t go down well as an excuse for forgetting the shopping ).
 
We all notice, and remember, things which are important to us. We remember what we focus on and pay attention to.
 
What does this mean to you as a trainer? How can you use this to help your learners to remember?
 
It means you have to get your learners to focus, to pay attention – and you have to make them see that what you’re trying to get across to them is relevant and important.
 
Here are a few ways to do that:

• make sure your material actually IS relevant and important – why do your learners need to know what you’re telling them?
• prepare the ground – let them know what they’ll be learning and why it’s important, generate some cusiosity and interest before you even start
• pose some questions about the material beforehand so they’re primed to think about it in advance, ideally get them to think of their own questions and let you know what they are before the session
• also ask them, at the start of the session, what they need to get from it and make sure you cover these points
• spell out the benefits of paying attention and of learning the material you’re covering – how will it help them?
• base your training on real-life issues and situations where possibe rather than made-up ones – focus on the real problems your learners have
• direct attention to your material, especially key points, by saying things like, “look at this…”, “think about…”
• avoid distractions in the training room, such as mobile phones, noise, interruptions so people can focus on what they’re doing
• ask people how they will apply what they are learning and what difference it will make to them
• see one of your main tasks as being to increase your learners’ motivation to learn, to get them in the right frame of mind – curious, interested, eager, positive – so they’re ready to pay attention

We remember what we pay attention to – and we pay attention to what we’re interested in and what we think is relevant and important.
 
So any time you invest in persuading your learners that your material will be relevant, interesting and important to them will be time well spent.

I’d love to knw what you think, so please leave a comment.

For more great training tips, get your FREE copy of “How To Be A Top Trainer” from www.transformyourtraining.com

Have you been on a training course recently ( or run one yourself ) where there have been some little toys on the table – springs or bendy men? Or sweets? Or music playing when you went in? Or those smelly felt pens ( the brown ones are cinammon, in case you’ve ever wondered but didn’t want to find out ). 
 
If you’ve been on one of my courses, then the answer will be, ” yes “, at least to some of those. I don’t tend to use music but I do use the other things – chocolate features quite heavily.
 
Why? What’s the point? What difference does it actually make?
 
Good questions. And, if you’re a trainer, you need to have an answer.
 
Because I’ve been on lots of courses myself where trainers have used these things. They’ve become popular recently as part of the movement towards what has been called ” accelerated learning ” or ” brain friendly learning “.
 
But I suspect, like many things which become popular in training, some of the people I’ve seen using them don’t really know why. They are either just copying something they saw on a course somewhere or, at the other extreme, they make exaggerated claims about the impact of these sort of things.
 
In the same way, I see people using inappropriate ice – breakers or ” team building ” activities which they’ve got from a book  – but don’t get me started on those.
 
Anyway, here’s my view.
 
The whole move towards ” brain – friendly “  learning is meant to reflect what we know about the brain and about learning ( the clue is in the title ). 
 
The problem is that what we think we know keeps changing but here are a few key elements:

• people need to be in a positive and receptive state to learn effectively – they should be curious, motivated, relaxed, focused rather than anxious, stressed or resistant
• learning is multisensory – we use all our senses to take in information and we recall items more easily if we can attach more senses to them – there are more clues to help us find the memory
• the brain works better when there is some physical activity and exercise which sends it more oxygen – as opposed to long periods of inactivity such as sitting listening to someone talking
•   variety is important in learning because people cannot focus for too long doing just one thing and people have different preferences for the way they approach new learning situations

So where do the toys and the smelly pens fit in?
 
Well, I don’t make huge claims for the benefits of these things but they have a place. I’ve heard people say that you need to have bendy men and springs to play with because they appeal to ” kinaesthetic learners ” and the smelly pens make it a ” multisensory experience “.
 
That might be going a bit too far. I just tend to think that some people need things to fiddle with when they’re concentrating or they get distracted. Whether that makes them ” kinaesthetic learners “, I’m not sure.
 
And people do seem to like the smelly pens ( and chocolates ) and get quite excited about them, which makes them more interested in what they’re doing and happier about being there.
 
So, for me, they are a part of setting up an attractive and stimulating learning environment and they can play a role in the overall experience for your learners.
 
For example, when I set up a room I want people to come in and think, ” Hey, this looks interesting ” I want it to look as if we might actually have some fun. I also want it to be clear that they won’t be sitting there all day watching a PowerPoint presentation.
 
This is a major part of getting people in a positive and receptive state for learning.
 
A word of warning, though – be mindful of your group and their expectations. Read the mood.
 
Some groups come into a room and I can immediately tell we’re going to have a great day. They love all the bits and pieces – the toys, the cartoons – they’re excited and ready to get going.
 
Others seem more reserved, as if they’re thinking, ” What’s all this? We’re giving up valuable time to come here for this.”  They may find it a bit childish and, if so, it could set up more resistance and be counterproductive.
 
In that case, I often find that explaining what I’m doing helps a lot. I tell people why I’ve provided the toys, sweets, etc and why we’ll be doing certain things during the day.
 
That way, I make it clear I’m treating them as adults and I’m doing things for a good reason. I also say, ” It’s not compulsory – if you want to fiddle with a spring and eat some chocolates, go ahead. If you’d prefer not to, that’s fine. ”
 
Usually, more reserved groups respond to this and gradually warm to the idea as they realise it’s not just some pointless piece of silliness
 
But that’s just the start.
 
There’s no point just putting a few sweets and bendy men on the tables and then delivering a long, tedious presentation which ignores all the other aspects of ” brain- friendly ” learning.
 
The rest of the training has to build on the positive start. It needs to be interactive, lively, engaging, relevant – otherwise the toys and sweets are just window dressing.
 
So, by all means, use these things in your training – but make sure the training itself is also ” brain – friendly ” or no amount of smelly pens will make a difference.
 
I’d love to hear your thoughts – please leave a comment.

Get your FREE Copy of ” How To Be A Top Trainer “ from www.TransformYourTraining.com