tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3623132.post110370530773527531..comments2010-09-10T18:52:52.673+05:30Gautam Ghoshhttps://profiles.google.com/101036717552579040263noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3623132.post-9121838015735716742010-09-10T18:52:52.673+05:302010-09-10T18:52:52.673+05:30I believe that Learning &amp; Development should be a stand alone department or come under the purview of business operations rather than HR.<br />Traditional HR itself faces a lot of credibility issues as the nature of work is majorly administrative. many large companies have come up with the CLO title and it remains to be seen how much weightage they carry in the boardroom, especially in india<br />I fully endorse the involvement of line managers so much so that their team development efforts should carry a weight-age equivalent to their financial targets. Learning has to be decentralized and liberated from the classroom and ingrained into the culture.<br />The biggest hurdle is that mandate has to come from the very top and while Cxo&#39;s go overboard with &#39;people are our greatest asset&#39;, the ground reality focuses too much on getting numbers, many a times using myopic measures. Unless the top guys are willing to stick their necks out and willing to overlook a quarter or two to set their house in order, I don&#39;t see much change.<br /><br />while concepts like ROI have been created, I don&#39;t see any of them actually being of any practical value. Rather they are complicated. time consuming and costly affairs. Kirkpatrick himself believes that the 4th level covers ROI and there is no separate need. They have come up with ROE ( Return on Expectations) which seems simpler and practical.<br /><br />Another huge challenge as you highlighted is that quality of talent that gets to handle this department. This also takes away from the credibility L&amp;D needs. Certainly, a respected performer with the attitude and aptitude for developing others should be heading this profile.<br /><br />From what I have seen in my years in consulting is that the BD guy will prescribe training for every problem from leaky roof to attrition. this creates unrealistic expectations in the mind of the decision makers and invariably sets the whole exercise to fail. A two day program would be conducted in some 5 star and the success of the program would be judged by the smile sheets. and we all know smile sheets are more about the air conditioning, the menu and quality of the trainers jokes than anything else. The program would be deemed a sucess and the &#39;case study&#39; would be pitched in the consultants brochure. The training department would have added another spreadsheet in its database and it would be forgottenKapilhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12153345721212064073noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3623132.post-36530117150309645002009-09-23T11:47:25.010+05:302009-09-23T11:47:25.010+05:30Hi Gautam,<br /><br />Your article is awesome, there is sufficient information to understand the topic.<br />Thanks for this article, i like it.nomihttp://www.nomiinfotech.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3623132.post-50681454080782972052007-02-03T20:46:00.000+05:302007-02-03T20:46:00.000+05:30I have been trying to relate my own industrial and military experience to your training perspectives.I'm sure enjoying it!helps me to have a current think and vocab !thanks you are helping me no end<br />keep thinking<br />banjobanerjeesunil@gmail.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17948083887080400637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3623132.post-1104444879945099992004-12-31T03:44:00.000+05:302004-12-31T03:44:00.000+05:30My comments on this from the perspective of online education for legal aid (public interest civil lawyers) training is here:<br /><br />http://blog.masslegalservices.org/lau/archives/cat_instructional_design.html#000122Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com