Training and development budgets are facing the squeeze. Pete Bennett explains how blended learning can really be the best of both worlds – and cost effective too.

Anyone working in learning and development (L&D) as a practitioner or a supplier knows only too well that training budgets are often one of the first items to be cut when hard times hit. However, a report from Cranfield School of Management concludes those organisations that invest in their staff are generally best placed to save money, improve staff motivation and increase employee retention, all key factors when surviving a downturn.

The reality is that when relying on purely traditional means, training and development can be expensive and impractical during a recession. To maintain a competitive edge, you want your best people in the field rather than in the classroom; similarly, the fee and associated costs of sending a member of staff on a management development programme at the moment is simply too hard to justify for many companies.

Opportunity
Rather than bemoan the fact that their budgets have been slashed, however, HR and learning and development (L&D) practitioners should see it as an opportunity. They need to recognise that preserving a culture of learning in such challenging times is less about fighting their corner and more about proactively looking at ways to offer the organisation a more flexible, streamlined and practical approach to L&D that also delivers a direct business benefit sooner rather than later.

Key to this leaner, fitter and more appropriate L&D strategy, is to instigate a few mindset changes. First off, you need to get the workforce moving away from the preconception that learning has to be a single event-based activity, either undertaken in the classroom face-to-face or in front of a screen as an elearning course. We know that both types of learning can be effective but by introducing other component parts, a huge amount of value can be added to the learning process.

Theory
What is the point, for instance, in focusing entirely on the theory of an aspect of leadership in a costly face-to-face session when this information can be provided prior to the session online? Having acquired this knowledge, the face-to-face meeting can then be used to put what they have learned in context and to test and reflect on the theory. If you then provide learners with an online forum facility to further discuss what they have learned, even more value is added. Taking this blended approach starts to transform a one-dimensional learning event, which could easily be forgotten, to something far more meaningful and engaging for the learner and ultimately beneficial for the business.

This blended model can be applied to all kinds of training but there are a number of factors that L&D must bear in mind when using a range of component parts, chiefly that the elements must be held together and managed by robust framework. Turning learning from a one-off event into a process demands that the learner takes more responsibility for their development but without a framework or guidance, there is a danger that the momentum will be lost. So L&D's role is to empower the individual to pursue the learning at a time and place that suits them, while at the same time providing close support and remaining in control of the process.

Role of L&D
Introducing more blended learning programmes and processes will undoubtedly change the role of the L&D practitioner to one who provides learner support rather than mere administrative services, whether it be through more coaching, facilitating or virtual activities. They should also use their expertise to assess which learning style may better suit an individual since one of the other benefits of using a blend is that a choice of learning options can be offered. Blended programmes can, of course, be enforced blends to fit in with operational requirements, or optional blends where choice is possible.

For many, this reinvented but back-to-fundamentals role for the L&D practitioner will hopefully mean putting to good use knowledge, skills and professional qualifications gained throughout their career and which have often been paid for by the employer. The longer term effect of this will be to build and extend the value of in-house L&D expertise and in turn increase the organisation's training capacity. It will also help to shift perceptions of L&D where they are not as positive as they should be, for reasons based on the all-too-familiar operational constraints mentioned above.

Counting the cost
A recent study by LRI illustrated that of the £35,000 cost of a 12-day, nine-month, (four, three-day workshops) delivered programme for cohorts of 15 managers, only £11,000 was directly attributable to the training process. The remainder derived from L&D time, training materials, training consultants and so on. It should also be noted that this doesn't include the opportunity cost associated with lost working time. So while it is critical to engage, share and bond with other learners and form networks, L&D practitioners must decide whether traditional approaches to training make the best financial sense in these tough times.

When it comes to cost, a blended approach should never be seen as a cheaper alternative or a pure money-saving activity. What it can do, however, is ensure that money spent is directed at closely aligning the programme with the learner and the organisational needs and by hitting these two targets, it has a far better chance of ultimately delivering a real business benefit.
 

Pete Bennett is CEO and director of Consulting Learning Resources International