Quality Magazine
  Home
  Subscribe
  Subscribe to eNewsletter
  Subscription Customer Service
  Online
  Industry Headlines
  eXtras
  Blogs
  Quality Product Spotlights
  White Papers on the Web
  Tech ManufactureXPO
  Quality Downloads
  Webinars
  Quality Showcases
  e-Inserts Plus
  Online Store
  More Product Info
  Archive
  Q-Tube
  Q-Cast Podcasts
  Quality Showrooms
  Brain Teasers
  Current Issue
  Coming Events
  Features
  Departments
  Columns
  Products
  Quality Quick Clicks
  Special Sections
  NDT
  Vision & Sensors
  Aerospace
  How To Guide
  China Editions
  Quality Guides
  Quality Buyers Guide
  Software Selector
  Registrars Guide
  Services Guide
  Quality Services
  Job Marketplace
  Industry Links
  Classifieds
  Career Center
  Events
  Quality Expo 2012
  IMTS 2012
  Meetings and Shows
  Industry Webinars
  Quality Awards
  2012 Quality Plant of the Year Nomination Form
  2012 Quality Professional of the Year Nomination Form
  Quality Leadership 100
  Quality Info
  Media Planning Guide
Search in: EditorialProductsCompanies
Evaluate the Value of Training
by Gillian Campbell
May 8, 2003

ARTICLE TOOLS
EmailEmailPrintPrintReprintsReprintsshareShare



"In a company valued by its owners for its ability to generate cash, training is often seen as an expensive waste of capital," wrote one respondent to Quality Online's training survey.

According to a recent American Management Association survey, there is a direct correlation between increased training activities and improvements in worker productivity, profitability and shareholder value in both the short and long term. The report states, "Companies that increased their training activities were three times more likely to report increased profits and shareholder value than companies that cut back on training. They were 66% more likely to report productivity improvements, twice as likely to reduce their turn-over rates and 150% more likely to improve the quality of their products and services."

While 93.3% of the respondents to Quality's Online survey said their employer provides on-site, off-site or both types of training for their employees, 6.7% said their employers provide no training whatsoever. One of the respondents at a company that provides no training said, "You figure it out the best way you can."

Fortunately for most respondents, that kind of experience is most likely minimized due to the on-site or off-site training that their employers provide; 86.7% of the respondents said their companies provide on-site quality training for their employees, and 82.2% said their companies pay for employees to enroll in quality training courses offered outside of the workplace.

The most popular type of training provided is hands-on, which is made available to 68.9% of the respondents. Hands-on training is followed by classroom, 64.4%; seminars, 60%; book/workbook, 51.1%; computer, 35.6%; and video, 31.1%.

Of those responding, 46.7% said the majority of the training budget is spent on teaching quality management principles. The remainder of the training budget is divided among training on how to use equipment, 15.6%; part inspection and measurement, 11.1%; and quality software, 2.2%.

Despite its importance to the bottom line, training accounts generally for a small percentage of costs. In the Quality Online survey, 74.4% of respondents said that 0% to 5% of the total budget is spent on training at their companies. Another 15.4% put training expenditures at 6% to 10%, while 7.7% said 10% to 20% of the budget is spent on training. Only 2.6% of the respondents work for companies that spend more than 20% of the budget on training annually.

The survey respondents work for companies of varying sizes. And while some might expect that the smallest companies would be least likely to provide training, the survey results don't support that. In fact, all respondents who work for companies with fewer than 100 employees said their employer provides training of some kind. The 6.7% who said their companies provide no training at all work for firms of all sizes, ranging from 100-to-500 employee firms to those with 1,000 employees or more.



Gillian Campbell
Gillian is Editor for Quality magazine. You can reach her at campbellg@bnpmedia.com

|PrintEmail

Did you enjoy this article? Click here to subscribe to the magazine.




























Most Emailed Articles

  1. Management: A Closer Look: Understanding Risk Management for Medical Device Manufacturers
  2. Other Dimensions: Does New Stuff Have to be Calibrated?
  3. Auto Industry Goes on U.S. Hiring Binge
  4. Jim’s Gems: Don’t Focus on What Seems Unfair
  5. GD&T Workshop: A Top Down View
  6. Understanding ISO 13485
  7. Test & Inspection: Sensing the Thread
  8. Software & Analysis: FMEAs for the Medical Industry: Which FMEA Type Should I Use?
  9. Shifting the Paradigm: Business System Analyses for Identifying Areas to Improve
  10. ISO 13485: Medical Devices and Risk Management
Top Searches
  1. Quality 101
  2. Quality Management Systems
  3. quality assurance
  4. quality inspector
  5. quality performance indicators
  6. LEAN Quality Management Systems
  7. surface finish
  8. root cause
  9. variation management
  10. optical inspection
 
Most Popular Articles
  1. Other Dimensions: Does New Stuff Have to be Calibrated? 01/31/2012
  2. Quality 101: Nondestructive Testing 02/22/2008
  3. Quality 101: An Introduction to Gage R&R 12/01/2005
  4. Understanding ISO 13485 01/02/2008
  5. 50 Years of Quality--Take Another Look at Nondestructive Testing 10/23/2011
  6. Measurement: The Democratization of Measurement 01/27/2012
  7. Aerospace Industry To Face Challenges in 2012 02/07/2012
  8. Quality Measurement: Effects of Screw-Thread Geometry 10/01/2005
  9. U.S. Manufacturing Making a Comeback 02/01/2012
  10. Quality 101: Surface Finish Measurement Basics 09/01/2004
© 2010 BNP Media. All rights reserved. | Privacy Policy