6 Responses

1. Training learning
   “Is the word ‘Learning’ replacing the word ‘Training’?”

   How can it? They have 2 completely different meanings?

2. That’ll Learn you!

    What is wrong with ‘training’ as a description of one of the ways we help people to learn? I am proud to be described as a trainer and have never felt the need to give myself a different title or description for what I do (except of course when I am coaching or (genuinely) facilitating!). 

   Learning is what an individual does for themselves – attending a training course may be one part of the learning process and those of us who provide that training course are trainers. There is a whole host of other ways in which we learn and the only people who can truly be called learning managers are individuals themselves.

   It has bothered me for a while that the profession has been moving away from departments or individuals having a label that refers to training and has moved to Learning and development – there is absolutely no way a department or individual can provide or manage all of an individual’s learning, an individual or department can however, provide a training service to support that individual’s learning. The good old-fashioned training cycle demonstrates the activities involved in that service, none of the learning cycles that I have come across can be ‘managed’ by anyone other than the person doing the learning!

   Maybe as a long in the tooth trainer I’m just a bit out of touch – so please help me understand why learning should be the more popular label for what many of us offer?

   Best wishes,

   Margaret

   Learning opportunity provider

    

3. hammers and training

   Margaret

   in response to your question about not using the word "training"

   if a department is called the "training" department then the solution to every problem is "training"…clearly there are many occasions when "training" isn’t the solution…..better management, communication, coaching, facilitation, online module, read a book, watch a video, discipline, sacking, murder (oh, sorry I got a bit carried away there!)

   "if the only tool you have is a hammer then every problem looks like a nail"

   hence some organisations shy away from the word "training" as it is perceived to be restricting

    

   Rus

4. Good point, however …

    I agree that there many ways to help an individual improve performance and better management, communication and some of the other methods you list Rus are certainly valid. Aren’t most of those other things likely to be the responsibility of the line manager? I’m not convinced that the L&D function gets actively involved in providing all those other ‘tools’, nor should they. I am aware that there are some L&D departments who provide more of a consultancy service and support the line managers in ensuring that staff are competent in their roles, however, I have worked with quite a few who mainly provide ‘training’ services either by putting on a course, procuring a training supplier, providing training materials etc.

   The risk with the L&D labelled function is that some line managers will devolve all responsibility for their team’s development to that department rather than seeing them as a resource for a particular type of learning/development support.

    

5. chicken and egg

   you only have to read the questions here on TZ to see the number of times line managers ask training/L&D/T&D/HRD departments to solve problems that they should be managing themselves……

   similarly many people in these training/L&D/HRD/T&D functions are desperate not to appear to be shirking and/or to appear to be of value that they are happy to takeup the torch/hot potato/monkey

   rus

    

6. CIPD seems to favours ‘Learning’?

    Would just like to add to the fuss that the CIPD CTP has now changed its name to CLDP!!