Replying to LO25304 --
>I am interested in understanding what your thoughts are on training in
>regulated industries. Is the trend increasing in training being delivered
>on-line ? Are violations of industry standards related to training
>increasing ? Any ideas on the overall industry costs associated with
>in-sufficient or improper training and resultant failures to meet
>regulatory standards ?
introduction of quality management is important to our company and a lot
of effort similar to the procedure which you discribe has been taking.
We see 'paradox' results: The measures for fulfilling the quality
standards, living the system (QS9000) etc. rise continually - as well as
our quality problems and costs.
In terms of Kirkpatrick's 4 levels of training evaluation (thanks to the
list!): Success up to level 3, failure on level 4.
My interpretation is that putting attention on regulations is not same as
fostering that what has been regulated - qualtiy standards and quality in
this case. Thus in fact, if we see the attention of employees as a scarce
resource, then forcing their attention to a quality system may very well
distract attention for quality.
I know, we have had this issue before, but I think it is important enough
to have another round:
What are the conditions necessary so that attention to a quality system
does not distract attention from quality?
For me, this a bit like asking, once again, and again in another form the
old question: What distinguishes a learning from an ordinary
"Winfried Dressler" <email@example.com>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.