Transfer of Training LO13685

Monica Ayers (
Wed, 21 May 1997 16:27:41 +1200

On Mon, 12 May 1997 Stan Malcolm <StanMalcolm@COMPUSERVE.COM> wrote:

Subject: Transfer of Training...

>My point was that trainers typically only design the 10 to 20% of learning that
>happens in a formal, traditional setting. We ignore the 80 to 90% of learning
>that happens on the job. (I'll spare you the rationale for the percentages
>here.) I suggested that we design the whole 100%, even if we deliver only the
>traditional fraction. I went on to suggest how we could provide more structure
>for OJT to make it more consistent, more accurate, and faster.


My name is Monica Ayers and I'm a learning advisor for a
telecommunications company in New Zealand (CLEAR Communications). My
background is that I came 'up through the ranks' from Customer Service Rep
to Trainer of CSRs. We recently underwent a restructure and the
department now meets learning needs from across the business, rather than
being decentralised to individual departments.

Stan, I'd be fascinated to hear more on how OJT can be built into course
design. I will soon be designing training for the second phase of a new
computer system, and, based on our experience in the first phase of
training, I have a feeling that people will learn a lot on the job.

One thing we have done in the past is elect 'primes' from the learning
group. Following the phase one training (for the new system) Customer
Service primes acted as the interface between the SME's and the other
Customer Service staff. These primes have ended up knowing more and being
more skilled than most of us in the training team, and they have daily
access to the others in their work area to pass on this knowledge and

The interesting thing about this concept is that the trainer might lose
his/her status as the 'font of all knowledge'. The on-the-job-learning
which the prime facilitates might exceed and even highlight deficiencies
in the formal training. Ideally, on-the-job-learning shouldn't contradict
the formal element, but certainly in my environment, this is often
unavoidable due to the fast changing nature of the subject matter. The
other thing is that in having subject matter primes at the learner level,
you are creating career opportunities for the primes to advance in the

While this approach has it's benefits, it is not always structured or
consistent, and the 'word of mouth' effect (from one person to the next)
can be time consuming.

What are other organisations doing to take learning back out into the
workplace? And how can I (from Stan's post) "provide more structure for
OJT to make it more consistent, more accurate, and faster"?

Monica Ayers
CLEAR Communications
New Zealand


Monica Ayers <>

Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <> -or- <>