We provide around 2500 training days per year from my team and have a no show rate of 11%, i.e. candidates who've nominated themselves, been approved and recommended by their manager, who then don't turn up.
I have no data to verify if this is high, low or average. However, it 'feels' correct based on my experience in L&D roles.
Does anyone have any pointers as to whether this figure (11%) is consistent, researched anywhere, or correct?
8 Responses
anecdotal answer
Andrew
It seems to vary a great deal;
I have one current commecial client where if they say there are eight delegates, eight people will be there (one or two may be last minute replacements but line managers pay for no-shows so it just doesn’t happen.
I had another client in the public sector, where is was common to have 12 names on the list and find four would actually show up; on one occasion 2 turned up so I cancelled the course. The client went berserk; "Who did I think I was cancelling their course?"….wider heads prevailed when they looked and realised that they were wasting over half of their training spend on no shows…..after that the numbers got better (eg 8/12) but only after some managers got seriously reprimanded.
Generally it seems to be a consequence of the answer tot eh question "From whose budget does training cost come?"
Personally I’d say that an 11% no show rate, regardless of the industry norm, is a pretty disastrous waste of resources, especially in these straitened economic days…..
I hope this helps.
Rus
It’s an improvement…
Thanks for your comments Russ – 11% is an improvement on the previous year of 23%! Course attendees are up from previous years, and many managers I work with appreciate the terms I have to work to. I’ve done a lot of work to try and help managers understand the need to take their L&D budget seriously:
My reason for asking the question initially was to try and understand whether a tolerance of 5%, 6%, 7%, etc is acceptable. I know 11% is too high but it ‘feels’ comparable to what I’ve experienced before.
One quick suggestion
Hi Andrew
Just a quick thought – one organisation I worked with started sending reminders to attendees a few days before the course, either by email or phone call. This took the form of "we’re looking forward to seeing you on Monday, have you received all the pre-course reading/information and do you know where you’re going?" This certainly increased attendance – it also gave people the opportunity to pull out and be replaced. The minimal cost was well covered by lowering the failure rate.
My local hospital does this, too, via phone for out patient appointment – and apparently it has had an enormous impact on missed appointments.
Apologies if you’re already doing this. For what it’s worth, I think an 11% non-attendance rate is quite high and is a sad waste.
Jenny
E Mail
Hi Jenny
You make an interesting point…
I would always e mail delegates twice (approximately 2 weeks before and 3 days) before a course to start rapport building and explain what will happen on the course.
There really is no excuse other than an accident or serious transport problem for a delegate not showing up.
ah ha Andrew..
……..just seen your reply; well done on getting the figures so much better.
I’m inclined to agree with Steve; only a serious medical emergency should really prevent a delegate attending (alright, ground all the aircraft and intenational delegates are going to have a hard time, cover the UK in 2 feet of snow ditto)
There are lots of "political" reasons that people don’t show up which are worth investigating; here are some that I heard in a public sector organisation (I only pick on the public sector because I believe that is your stamping ground)
~Oh, I’m too busy to take time off to go to training
~My manager decided that I had to be somewhere else
~If I show that I can take time off to go to training then that means I’m not business critical and could be declared redundant
~I have the authority to decide that I am too busy to attend training so I have to exercise that authoprity to prove I have it
~It would damage my credibility to go to a training course, after all I am paid to be more knowledgable than my team aren’t I? (this was dressed up as I couldn’t possibly be seen attending a course with Grade?s)
~What is the point of attending training, the governement will move the goalposts in a couple of months anyway which will make anything I learn now, moot.
(don’t you just love it when managers use the phrase "time off for training", as if we are Redcoats and delegates are coming for a holiday!)
It might be worth looking at why people don’t attend as well as/rather than what is an acceptable/norm drop out rate.
Rus
Thanks all…
Thanks Jenny – we do this already in the form of an Outlook appointment. we send an appointment to the delegates 14-20 days before the training event and ask them to confirm their attendance – this puts the appointment in their diary with all the relevant information of venue, times, etc. It goes in as an ‘Out of Office entry’ so should clearly highlight that they are not due to be in their workplace. Thanks Steve – In addition, we set a reminder for 3 days before so they should have no excuse for non-attendance.
In response Russ:
~Oh, I’m too busy to take time off to go to training
Then it shouldn’t be booked, talk it through with your line manager, and if you don’t turn up I’ll still charge you.
~My manager decided that I had to be somewhere else
Then your manager has to accept that I’m still going to charge you – they approved your nomination.
~If I show that I can take time off to go to training then that means I’m not business critical and could be declared redundant
Interesting – I’m expecting this more in the current climate (I am in the public sector)
~I have the authority to decide that I am too busy to attend training so I have to exercise that authoprity to prove I have it
Then you have the authority to justify the budget spend too?
~It would damage my credibility to go to a training course, after all I am paid to be more knowledgable than my team aren’t I? (this was dressed up as I couldn’t possibly be seen attending a course with Grade?s)
I ‘scale up’ training for this to try and hit those with ‘grade awareness’.
~What is the point of attending training, the governement will move the goalposts in a couple of months anyway which will make anything I learn now, moot.
Public sector – the goalposts always move and isn’t it better to be able to know how it should be know yto understand how it may be in the future?
The major issue is lack of training contract – the trainer, candidate, line manager triumvirate lacks a strong enough link from trainer to line manager and this is where the absence of management responsibility to engage with their staff learning is failing. The rate of 11% is a symptom of the lack of manager accountability and my hard line charging policy is at least making managers look at their nominations, if not for the right reasons.
rock on, Andrew!
Great to see that you have these issues under surveillance and control……..congrats: 11% and falling.
It is interesting that you mention the term "contract" between trainer and internal customer……..I had a conversation at Christmas with a family member who is an FD of a global organisation and we were talking about cost cutting in the current economic climate. Her view was that training will always be vulnerable, regardless of ROI/ROE, perceived value, longer term good sense etc, simply because it was non-obligatory in contractual terms.
Faced with an attitude like that from very senior people it is valuable to have, as you seem to have, a clear "contract" otherwise……….
Rus
Briefings
We ran a survey with attendees last year and 18% of managers had briefed their staff before the training intervention. Less than 1 in 5 attendees received a briefing from their manager within a week of the training event.
I went back to managers and asked if this was fair for my trainers, to train on a subject in isolation, with no link to the workplace performance or expected behaviours if unsupported by the manager. That appears to have been the ‘K’ point…managers have been working harder to create the relationship but we still feel like we are the waiters explaining the menu, not sitting at the table helping choose as an equal.