How to make Learning and Development both scalable and targeted

How much money has your organisation wasted on training employees for skills they already have? How many times have you, personally, sat through an expensive training course for something you’ve already mastered? 

A scattergun approach involves training as many people as possible but in a disorganised, untargeted manner. There are several reasons this could occur: perhaps the Learning and Development (L&D) manager has no visibility of the skills the team currently possesses, or maybe the organisation is rolling out training to everyone to take advantage of a supplier’s bulk discount. 

L&D is more important than ever in the post-pandemic world. Rapid digitisation has increased the urgency for effective training programs, particularly in the context of the ongoing talent shortage. The 2022 Business Return on L&D report (Deakin Co.) found that every $1 invested in L&D is associated with an average additional $4.70 in business revenue per employee. Leading organisations with strong L&D programs have a lower average attrition rate (14%) than laggards. 

But a scattergun approach can undo all these benefits. The negative impacts go well beyond the money spent on the training program itself. Other costs include time taken away from employees’ workload, associated project delays and disengaged team members due to frustration and boredom. 

How to get targeted with L&D programs

The answer lies in gaining visibility into the skillset of the entire team through a process known as skills assessments or skills mapping. Yes, doing so will require an extra investment of time and money to find the right solution, but the savings that stem from targeted training will vastly outweigh the costs of poorly organised training. 

A skills assessment will ideally provide visibility at two levels: the macro view or “heatmap” of the entire teams’ skillsets that will enable you to immediately spot gaps, and the micro view where you can zoom in on an individual’s strengths and weaknesses before making L&D investment decisions. 

Here’s how it typically works:

1. Create an L&D strategy that looks at enterprise-level goals and determines the workforce capabilities needed to achieve these.
   
2. Understand “what good looks like” for each role in the unique context of your organisation. Avoid guesswork or generic skillset recommendations found on the internet – remember, this is supposed to be a targeted exercise based on real data. One of the most effective ways to do this is to take a group of your highest performers in a particular role (such as the top 20 sales professionals), and ask them to complete a skills assessment. This will identify the skills held in common by your highest-performing talent. For sales professionals this would likely include high scores in soft skills such as communication, influence and persuasion.
   
3. Then, roll out the same skills assessment to the rest of the team and compare their results with the high performers to identify any gaps. Flag significant gaps for potential training.   
   
4. Consider the training options available. If it’s a technical skill, the employee might benefit from a formal training program (onsite, offsite or online). Soft skills are often better addressed through a coaching or mentoring approach. Your decision will depend on organisational priorities, budgetary constraints, how many employees need the training for a particular skill, and whether they are based remotely.
   
5. Roll out the targeted L&D program, then run the skills assessment again to measure improvement. 

A skills assessment may reveal surprises such as strong leadership potential in a junior employee. It could also be used to spark a data-supported conversation about an employee’s suitability for a different role. For example, the assessment may reveal someone will need a lot of training to gain the people skills required to do well in customer service, but their strong analytical skills could mean they would thrive in a data analyst role.

Exploring software solutions

The process above would involve a great deal of work if undertaken manually, but there are plenty of software solutions available to support L&D. Large organisations typically have an end-to-end team management platform that incorporates skills assessments and training platforms, but smaller organisations may choose instead to build an L&D technology stack. 

This may include a Learning Management System (LMS) where training content is controlled and distributed by the L&D team, or a Learning Experience Platform (LXP) where learners gain access to open content from multiple providers, both internal and external.  Video conferencing platforms can be used to deliver remote training. Smart systems are able to take the results from a skills assessment and direct individuals to relevant training programs without the need for human intervention. 

Be sure to ask about integration when considering any L&D software solution. An LXP, for example, should integrate with third-party sources, internal team management software, analytics platforms, content management systems and offer calendar integration. Effective integration will enable a personalised training experience, reducing admin and redundant data while improving reporting and compliance.

The train vs hire question

Faced with the prospect of rolling out a complex and expensive L&D program, it is understandable that many HR managers choose to fill skills gaps by hiring instead. But the ongoing talent shortage and steepening hiring costs are causing many organisations to rethink this approach. Upskilling your team increases revenue, efficiency, engagement and retention as team members feel valued when you invest in their future through a personalised program.

The best advice is to hold off on the train-versus-hire question until you have conducted a skills assessment. A skills map of your organisation will help you see where significant gaps exist that can’t be easily addressed through targeted training. 

For example, your organisation may intend to implement blockchain technology, yet a skills assessment reveals that no one has any knowledge or experience in this area. In this case, hiring a blockchain expert would be a sounder decision than attempting to upskill someone from scratch. On the other hand, a skills assessment may reveal that with a little targeted training, one of your mid-level employees will be able to step up into a senior leadership role and enable your organisation to avoid the costs of hiring at this level.