Hiring professionals can provide training boost

Outsourcing training is a regular part of doing business today. Nationally, about 20 percent of all training dollars spent by businesses went to outside trainers, according to the national Association of Trainers and Developers (ASTD). The group says that for those companies that are most involved

Depending on the size of the company involved and the type of training needed outsourcing training may be the best choice, or it may be the only choice.

Outsourcing training for employees has several advantages according to those whose business it is to supply training, as well as those who have used outsourced services to train their workers.

For Dennis Schonewetter, president of Canterbury Press in Rome, outsourcing training was the only viable option. "We don't have an internal trainer," he says of his printing company.

As part of an effort to "build up supervisory skills," Schonewetter brought in an outside trainer. His other choice, he says, was to do the training himself, or perhaps use one of his top executives.

Kathleen R. Gorman, regional vice president for Lincoln Financial Group in Syracuse, says her operation had to go with outsourced customer-service trainers because it is so small. At one point Lincoln had 38 employees in Central New York, bu today there are just four.

Also, she says, because "we specialize in financial-services, not necessarily training in customer service."

Even larger organizations that have training professionals on staff turn to outside trainers. John Burns, of Robert Bums Training Inc. in Brewerton, notes that training depends on what needs to be taught. Going to outside trainers, he says, allows the company to find "the most diversified experience" in trainers.

Ken Steiger, of Steiger Training & Development in Tully, notes that outside trainers have "lots of flexibility." On the other hand, he says, an in-house training department can offer great expertise on skills specific to that business.

"Training departments can focus on specialized applications - technical training," he says. For other skills, such as inter-personal skills, he says outsourced trainers have an edge.

Donna Gullato, director of human resources for Diemolding in Canastota, says that about 50 percent of the training done at her company is done by outside trainers, and that percentage is growing.

Gullato, who worked previously with Carrier Corp. and the Manufacturers Association of Central New York, says that she will go to outside trainers when she doesn't have the expertise to do the training herself, but tends to handle areas of diversity training, performance management, and process improvement herself. For other matters, she goes outside.

When going outside, Gullato says she tries to keep training local. She does this, she says, because she knows the local trainers and while experts from far away are "always sexier," local trainers can be counted on should followup be needed.

However, Joan Hebei whose Joan M. Hebert Training & Consulting specializes in customer-service training," says simply being from outside can be a valuable asset. "Oftentimes, people will listen to an outside person more than someone they work with," she says. She notes that when she travels great distances to present training, "It's like Joan walks on water."

Peter P. Morrissey, president of Peak Performance Management in Liverpool, says that just being from outside the trainee's company can have an effect similar to distance. He says that outside trainers are accepted as experts by those who take training.

Clients, he reports, will come to him with stories of workers quoting his classes. "You know, I don't understand -- you're not telling them anything much different from what I tell them," a client will say.

Morrissey explains the difference by noting that "boss" spelled backward is "double-s.o.b." and that a "little veil" exists between workers and their bosses. Outside trainers, he says, can get around the veil.

The ability to train on behalf of the company, but not be a part of the company, gives outside trainers insight owners or other managers may not have. It also gives trainees the freedom to work out issues they could not raise at work, says Jaqueline Michel of J. Michel Associates in Clinton. She tells of a rising executive who was "starting to feel burned out from the demands of this prestigious position."

"There was no place she could turn to in the company to discuss" work and home issues "that were beginning to interfere with her motivation, her focus, and her performance. She was irritable with her staff and she secretly knew her productivity was suffering," Michel says.

She took part in a training program that included one-on-one coaching and "was able to step back, look objectively at all aspects of her situation, recover her motivation, refocus her goals, and find solutions to the work-life issues."

Michel quotes her as saying, "By having a sounding board outside of the company, I knew I could say anything, and it wouldn't go anywhere. As a result, I learned to handle the stress, and cleared up issues that otherwise would have continued to eat away at my enthusiasm, my concentration, my productivity, and effectiveness."

Canterbury's Schonewetter agrees, noting those working with the outside trainer his company uses "probably said things to her that they couldn't say to someone with whom they worked."

Burns notes that outsourcing training has a real financial advantage for smaller companies. By his reckoning, a single on-staff trainer would average about $90,000 a year in total costs - that includes wages, benefits, office space, and all the rest - and, after taking out vacation time, sick days, preparation, travel, meetings, and other activities would supply "80 to 100 hours of excellent training."

"You've got an outlay," he says, "and maybe not that much training."

Budgeting for training

National Association, of Trainers and According to the Developers (ASTD), the average company that responded to its survey In 1999 spent about $677 per employee for training. The top 10 percent of respondents spent, on average, nearly $1,000 more than that, $1,675 per employee in 1999.

Even when not actively training, "you are probably spending that much in inefficiencies," says Jon L. Christopher, director of organizational development at the Schneider Packaging Equipment Co. Inc. in Brewerton, He explains that budgeting for training can be worked out by rules of thumb, figuring that training expenses for an individual employee can run between 12 percent and 17 percent of that Individual's annual gross wages.

Donna Gullato, director of human resources at Diemolding In Canastota, says that she Is unfamiliar with formulas for figuring out training expenditures, but that it is possible to "tap into grants" and get government funding to pay for workforce training. She explains that her company, which has nearly 500 employees, has received grants from the job-development agency in Madison County.

Whatever is in the budget, says Gullato, make sure that It is tied to results. "Many companies," she says, "don't have a correlation between training and results."

"If they aren't looking for results," the 20-year veteran of training says, "don't do it."

Christopher says that experience has taught him that it is important that training budgets be part of department budgets. Department heads need to "regard training as an expenditure just like any other they make - like power or parts."

"Otherwise..." he says, there is "not the sense of responsibility. Kathleen R. Gorman, regional vice president for Lincoln Financial Group, says that her budget for training is based not upon a per-employee percentage, but or, last year's budget figure for training.

Even then, she says, "It's a lot more costly than you think."

"But," Gorman adds, "it's well worth it."