As I often get my inspiration from networking with other training professionals, I ran across a response to a question posted on LinkedIn. This question comes up for time to time, and it’s a good question: What is the difference between a good trainer and a great trainer? I found Avinash Naidu’s answer to be exactly what I was looking for so I rushed out and asked him if I could use his response.

Of course I didn’t fly all the way to Bangalore, India. I used e-mail, and he graciously gave me permission.

Avinash Naidu’s institution, Maarga Life Foundation, a premiere life skills institute in India, is transforming the lives of people by teaching them key skills that is helping them lead successful and happy lives. As you are reading this, he is out there solving emotional problems of people, mentoring, coaching and conducting training programs for corporations.

“There is very little to debate on while deciding between a good and a bad trainer (in the context of training). The problem arises when we have to choose between a good and a great trainer. Anybody who is passionate about training can deliver a good program, but only a selected few can combine passion, intelligence, commitment, and cutting-edge skills to deliver programs of lasting value.

“Here is a common misconception while judging the value of a training program. If the trainer is able to engage the attendees throughout the session, and is able to create a wow factor by the end of the program, he/she is usually considered to be a great trainer. But, nothing can be further from the truth. A training program’s real worth can only be judged based on the lasting value it is able to create. Almost all trainers, with a little effort, would be able to create that wow factor. Most companies fall into the trap of believing that an engaging program is a great program. I believe that if engagement is the most important criteria, then attendees are better off watching a meaningful two-hour movie than attending a day long training program! Great trainers have the ability to move beyond engagement levels to create programs of lasting value.

“Here is one way of delivering an outstanding program of lasting value. Firstly, even before starting the subject of discussion, powerful learning states have to be created by getting the attendees on to thinking, analyzing, learning and interpreting mode. This is absolutely necessary to move the attendees from a judgmental mode to an accepting mode. Secondly, the golden rule of communication has to be followed –that is, if you want to influence somebody, you already have to know what influences them.

“First few hours of the training program should be dedicated to understand more about the attendee’s interests, aspirations, beliefs and influencing factors. Once the basic rapport has been established, important ideas have to be conveyed and the attendees should be allowed to present their interpretations. This process has to be followed to convey all new ideas – build rapport, present the idea, accept the interpretations. Finally, the trainer should use this entire process to create strong, unforgettable mental images that the attendees can hold on to long after the training program has ended. The ability to artfully do this differentiates an ordinary trainer from an extraordinary one.”

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

If you would like more information on Avanish Naidu or his Foundation, click here.

As for Jack Shaw, his training blogs can be found on this site, and related blogs on other topics through his Actingsmarts website under What I Say. For a look at the human side of training from his Cave Man perspective, please check out his book, The Cave Man Guide to Training and Development. Happy training.

Today mentors can and should provide expertise to protégés (males) or protégées (females)–essentially less experienced individuals to help them advance their careers, enhance their education, and build their networks. While mentoring is an important aspect to leadership training, it does not hold to a typical training environment or process; however, its tradition has existed even longer than traditional training.

Wikipedia always comes to the rescue when you need immediate clarification and not too much depth. It describes “mentoring” as a process that always involves communication and is relationship based, but its precise definition is elusive. There are two basic types of mentoring involving the training and development process that we are concerned with in this forum:

1. the new-hire mentor. In this case, a more experienced person, not necessarily one of the people high up in the company heirarchy but high enough “sponsors” a new employee, giving them a polite tour of the corporate culture and then there is
2. the high-potential mentorship. Usually, when we think of mentoring, we think of this kind–where especially selected employees are offered the opportunity to develop a relationship with a senior leader.

Both fit Wikipedia’s general definition: “Mentoring is a process for the informal transmission of knowledge, social capital, and the psychosocial support perceived by the recipient as relevant to work, career, or professional development; mentoring entails informal communication, usually face-to-face and during a sustained period of time, between a person who is perceived to have greater relevant knowledge, wisdom, or experience (the mentor) and a person who is perceived to have less (the protégé).”

Even so, can you train mentors and mentees to maximize the benefit and miss the formality imposed by training?

I think it’s possible, but there has to be some structure–points that focus and provide opportunities for mentees to learn important points of interpersonal and public communication, problem-solving/leadership techniques, company technical expertise and time management.

The only difference here and regular training is that the mentor is the trainer. Once the mentor is aware of the need for this focus, most leaders/senior management understand the need for training, and some would even welcome some structure to a system that is still sorting itself out.

Let’s face it: a mentor with a plan–that’s training. The new-hire mentor, as a mid-level employee, has nothing to lose and everything to gain if he treats his own mentee to real training, and guides him or her in the same way as the higher-level mentor; and his mentee would be a fool not to accept it. In the case of a high-potential mentorship, the bigger problem may actually be the trainee, the protégé or protégée–better known as the mentee who feels entitled to special treatment.

In this situation, we simply can’t train for the mentee position; someone has to be anointed–which, by the way, is not intended to be a negative sense. By virtue of being in that prime position, we may have someone who will only take direction from his or her mentor. That is why it is the mentor that must “do” the training.

To be one of the “anointed ones,” someone has to be noticed–having those qualities perceived by the the company or its leaders as “the right stuff” to be a leader of the future. That being said, it is important to note that Tom Wolfe’s novel, The Right Stuff, about the early space program is not about those men who do, in fact, have “the right stuff” defined by what is needed to fly a rocket into space, but rather what is perceived by the public as “the right stuff.” We know now that the Mercury astronauts were not selected for their ability to fly jets, but rather their reputation, and physical ability to take the rigors of space. Monkeys and dogs did sit in the same place and perform the same functions.

Unlike Wolfe’s message, which was not one of promise or fulfillment, the mentor program of today–just like the mentor program of days long past–still strive to select the very best and make it work. No one will argue the importance of such a program to the retention of key personnel and corporate knowledge.

A mentor will sometimes see himself or herself in an employee and decide this person with their guidance and wisdom can one day run the company. To make the mentoring process work, there has to be a deliberate effort to mold and shape an individual. Shadowing alone is not enough. Training mentors to train their mentees may be one way. Mentors who take the job seriously stand to do great things for a company’s future and much for their own legacy.

Mentoring in Europe has existed since at least Ancient Greek times. It’s really only since the 1970s that mentorism has spread in the United States, mainly in leadership training contexts. It has been described as “an innovation in American management.” If done well, the mentoring process will indeed serve the individual by providing the necessary exposure to the reality, the best training an employee can have, i.e., the experiential training needed to do the job.

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

For a look at the human side of training from my Cave Man perspective, please check out my book, The Cave Man Guide to Training and Development. Happy training.

If you have been following the series on Learner-Centered Training, you have already read about the first two steps in creating this environment. The third step is the practice phase. This is a crtical step in the training as it is where learning transfer takes place. It is also critical in this phase to remove the roadblocks to successful transfer and application. Below are a few examles:
No immediate need to apply the learning on the job. No support system to reinforce the learning. Lack of cultural support for the new learning. Lack of reward for applying new learning. Lack of consequences for failing to apply new learning.
Only 5% of classroom learning is retained without reinforcement and coaching	There a number of ways that you can take to esnure successful transfer or integration of the learning. It is important to reinforce the learning during and after the training session.
Building Integration that Removes Barriers	During the Session Job Related Simulations Problem-Solving cases using real business issues Evaluation of learning-tests, quizzes, demonstrations, etc. Have participants create detailed action plans of how they can use the learning on the job Have learners create job aides for their new learning Schedule follow-up conversations or coaching sessions to review transfer on the job.
	After the Session Set up group follow-up sessions with learners to share their experiences implementing the learning (can be done remotely if needed) Partner learners with a mentor Use tip of week reminders that can be delivered in any media format Start a blog or wiki following the training for learners to post best practices and success stories Involve and train managers and leaders to support the learning Reward managers who support training and participants who demonstrate the skills and knowledge Use metrics and evaluations to determine results What other ideas do you have? What can you share? Sources http://www.bowperson.com/ http://www.alcenter.com/ — For more resources, See the Human Resources library. — Sheri Mazurek is a training and human resource professional with over 16 years of management experience, and is skilled in all areas of employee management and human resource functions, with a specialty in learning and development. She is available to help you with your Human Resources and Training needs on a contract basis. For more information send an email to smazurek0615@gmail.com or visit www.sherimazurek.com. Follow me on twitter @Sherimaz.