When it comes to identifying the root cause of a nonconformance, invariably, training will always be evaluated as a potential cause of the event. While I completely agree that training must always be evaluated as a potential root cause, I must caution the investigator to go further. Going further means not to accept at face value that training is the culprit in every nonconformance event. It means challenging the notion that “training” or “training effectiveness” played a role in the identified nonconformance. It also means having an established guideline / process for measuring training effectiveness within your organization.
Identifying the root cause of a nonconformance as a “training” issue happens very often in the investigation world with little to no supporting evidence to justify this position. I believe that many organizations sign off on these investigations for several reasons:
(1) It is an easy way out—many companies incorporate a 20-working day due date for the investigation which includes: identifying the problem, determining the root cause, evaluating trends, implementing corrective and preventive actions and monitoring for effectiveness of the actions. This extremely limited time period often forces well-meaning investigators and approvers to simply accept “training issue” as a rationale for the root cause of the event.
(2) Organizations do not have a pre-established guideline and/or process for measuring training effectiveness. The question of how does an organization measure training effectiveness is one that many shy away from. Is training effectiveness measured by simply reading the SOP? Is an instructor-lead training the best vehicle to execute training? Is an acknowledgement of “read and understood” for a given procedure equivalent in comprehension to an instructor-lead training?
Before you signoff on your investigation and accept the root cause of the nonconformance as being attributed to “training” or “training effectiveness”, be sure to:
*Evaluate all other potential root cause
*Perform a trend analysis to determine whether there is a trend that may require
Identifying the root cause of a nonconformance as a “training” issue happens very often in the investigation world with little to no supporting evidence to justify this position. I believe that many organizations sign off on these investigations for several reasons:
(1) It is an easy way out—many companies incorporate a 20-working day due date for the investigation which includes: identifying the problem, determining the root cause, evaluating trends, implementing corrective and preventive actions and monitoring for effectiveness of the actions. This extremely limited time period often forces well-meaning investigators and approvers to simply accept “training issue” as a rationale for the root cause of the event.
(2) Organizations do not have a pre-established guideline and/or process for measuring training effectiveness. The question of how does an organization measure training effectiveness is one that many shy away from. Is training effectiveness measured by simply reading the SOP? Is an instructor-lead training the best vehicle to execute training? Is an acknowledgement of “read and understood” for a given procedure equivalent in comprehension to an instructor-lead training?
Before you signoff on your investigation and accept the root cause of the nonconformance as being attributed to “training” or “training effectiveness”, be sure to:
*Evaluate all other potential root cause
*Perform a trend analysis to determine whether there is a trend that may require
further evaluation
*Evaluate your current training program to determine how training is disseminated
and the mechanism for evaluating effectivenessChallenge, challenge, challenge!
*Evaluate your current training program to determine how training is disseminated
and the mechanism for evaluating effectivenessChallenge, challenge, challenge!
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment