I am a trainer for Business Schools and Corporates in the area of Competency Development. My company deals with both in-house and outbound training, with my real time experience I have personally felt that Outbound Training is more effective than the In house training. But the most of the corporates all are not willing to put through their employees for Outbound Training. The reasons for that is the cost factor and they dont want to spare their employees for 2-3 days from the workplace. Will the organization grow without the individual development? Is there any views from the experts that In house training is better than Outbound, if so how?
Thanks & Regards,
Premnath
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
Thanks & Regards,
Premnath
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Premnath,
You say that "I have personally felt that Outbound Training is more effective than the In house training".
May I know that your conclusion is based on what premises? Is it on Kirkpatrick Model? If yes, then can you please give me little more details on this?
Objective of the training is to build the competencies. Outbound or inbound training are only the means. Ends can be achieved depending on you comfort level.
Thanks,
Dinesh V Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
8032You say that "I have personally felt that Outbound Training is more effective than the In house training".
May I know that your conclusion is based on what premises? Is it on Kirkpatrick Model? If yes, then can you please give me little more details on this?
Objective of the training is to build the competencies. Outbound or inbound training are only the means. Ends can be achieved depending on you comfort level.
Thanks,
Dinesh V Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Dinesh,
Thanks for the response. Well it is not the exact Kirkpatrick Model. But, it falls in line with it. The reaction and the learning in the Outbound Model is far positive than when compared to the In house model. I came to this conclusion by some informal conversation with the participants...They feel drowsy and sleepy when the sessions are In house but the participation and response is huge during the Outbound sessions.
As you told ends can be achieved depending on the comfort level. Here I am trying to analyze what is the comfort level for majority of the people.To me the bottomline is the training has to be effective.
Cheers:icon1:
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thanks for the response. Well it is not the exact Kirkpatrick Model. But, it falls in line with it. The reaction and the learning in the Outbound Model is far positive than when compared to the In house model. I came to this conclusion by some informal conversation with the participants...They feel drowsy and sleepy when the sessions are In house but the participation and response is huge during the Outbound sessions.
As you told ends can be achieved depending on the comfort level. Here I am trying to analyze what is the comfort level for majority of the people.To me the bottomline is the training has to be effective.
Cheers:icon1:
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Premnath,
Alright then, if what matters most to you is training effectiveness, then:
1. You need to follow the entire Kirkpatrick's model and make your findings on the level of training effectiveness and not just the first step of the KP model.
2. As far as the general feedback on how much the participants enjoyed, you can work it around even in an internal setup.
3. Study a bit more on how to make your programs more interactive and less of a download; this will even rev up the enjoyment quotient in your in-house trainings. But only an interactive or more enjoyable session may not prove to be the most effective at the end of the analysis.
4. You have to do a lot of hard work to learn to engage the crowd.
5. Study your target audience.
6. Decide what location will suit more based on the program.
7. What will always remain your focus is what you want to train them on and whether you are on the right track while designing the program.
8. In the Kirkpatrick's Model, if the result of the analysis does not say that the training was effective, then you are left with boasting of the good results of the other findings.
Your opinion may change, and as a matter of fact, you cannot say that all trainings are better done outside, or vice versa.
You have to work to make it a perfect mix of both enjoyment and effectiveness.
And do not worry, we all are learning to do just that.
Keep it up.
Regards,
Gagan
From United States, Irvine
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Alright then, if what matters most to you is training effectiveness, then:
1. You need to follow the entire Kirkpatrick's model and make your findings on the level of training effectiveness and not just the first step of the KP model.
2. As far as the general feedback on how much the participants enjoyed, you can work it around even in an internal setup.
3. Study a bit more on how to make your programs more interactive and less of a download; this will even rev up the enjoyment quotient in your in-house trainings. But only an interactive or more enjoyable session may not prove to be the most effective at the end of the analysis.
4. You have to do a lot of hard work to learn to engage the crowd.
5. Study your target audience.
6. Decide what location will suit more based on the program.
7. What will always remain your focus is what you want to train them on and whether you are on the right track while designing the program.
8. In the Kirkpatrick's Model, if the result of the analysis does not say that the training was effective, then you are left with boasting of the good results of the other findings.
Your opinion may change, and as a matter of fact, you cannot say that all trainings are better done outside, or vice versa.
You have to work to make it a perfect mix of both enjoyment and effectiveness.
And do not worry, we all are learning to do just that.
Keep it up.
Regards,
Gagan
From United States, Irvine
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Premnath,
Having been in the Army for 21 years, I have been through every kind of indoor and outdoor training. Thereafter, I have experienced corporate sector training for the last 2 years and have again experienced both kinds of training.
Outbound training does create a changed and positive environment for better absorption of ideas. A lot of activities involving physical movement can't be done indoors. A change in scene is always welcomed by the participants.
The regular training rooms may create monotony for the trainees because of being in the same everyday environment. Things like team building can be done in a very effective manner in outbound camps. In my last company, we had an outbound in Mussouri, and the bonding it created between people from different departments was unmatched. The company had a policy of having at least one outbound per year for every person.
I feel you can have a combination of indoor, outdoor - morning to evening, and outbound; and select the subjects as per the indoor versus outdoor requirement. However, the cost issue is definitely a factor that hampers people from opting for outbound.
Biologically, if we see, the human mind is genetically tuned to being in large open green spaces; hence, the mind tends to get cramped up when we sit in 6'x6' cubicles. An outbound triggers the creative mind once it gets back to natural surroundings. Even the sages leave the cities and rush to the mountains when they want to attain nirvana.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Having been in the Army for 21 years, I have been through every kind of indoor and outdoor training. Thereafter, I have experienced corporate sector training for the last 2 years and have again experienced both kinds of training.
Outbound training does create a changed and positive environment for better absorption of ideas. A lot of activities involving physical movement can't be done indoors. A change in scene is always welcomed by the participants.
The regular training rooms may create monotony for the trainees because of being in the same everyday environment. Things like team building can be done in a very effective manner in outbound camps. In my last company, we had an outbound in Mussouri, and the bonding it created between people from different departments was unmatched. The company had a policy of having at least one outbound per year for every person.
I feel you can have a combination of indoor, outdoor - morning to evening, and outbound; and select the subjects as per the indoor versus outdoor requirement. However, the cost issue is definitely a factor that hampers people from opting for outbound.
Biologically, if we see, the human mind is genetically tuned to being in large open green spaces; hence, the mind tends to get cramped up when we sit in 6'x6' cubicles. An outbound triggers the creative mind once it gets back to natural surroundings. Even the sages leave the cities and rush to the mountains when they want to attain nirvana.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Mr. Riyaz,
I stand by what I have said in my earlier post. Would you mind sharing the training effectiveness of outbound training? What measurable change did it bring about? I would be thankful if you could share some information.
Thanks,
Dinesh V Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I stand by what I have said in my earlier post. Would you mind sharing the training effectiveness of outbound training? What measurable change did it bring about? I would be thankful if you could share some information.
Thanks,
Dinesh V Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi,
When everything fails in this country, the Indian Army is called in. A bridge was constructed for CWG by the Army in 5 days flat.
Yes, we have a complete system of training which includes indoors/outdoors/camps/simulations...everything.
Whether it's a boy Prince in a Hole or floods or earthquake or War, the Army's training systems have withstood the test of time.
Corporate training can only train a guy for earning a few bucks more. The Army's training systems can push a guy to sacrifice everything, including his life, for a cause.
So this is the proof...
The Mumbai Dabbawallas may not follow Kirkpatrick model or indoor training, but they do deliver to perfection.
On the other hand, the biggest well-trained corporates like Enron or Lehman Brothers can collapse despite any number of models working for them.
So the point is simple - there is nothing wrong with indoor or outdoor training; they are a means to an end, but don't expect everyone to toe a particular line of thought as proposed by one single person. Each person is free to choose the model that works best for him, based on his experiences. It is better to avoid making pointed barbs against any individuals in such discussions.
For Blood Pressure - a Physician may prescribe a medicine - Ramdev would prescribe Yoga - A homeopath may prescribe some pills... So who is right and who is wrong?
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
When everything fails in this country, the Indian Army is called in. A bridge was constructed for CWG by the Army in 5 days flat.
Yes, we have a complete system of training which includes indoors/outdoors/camps/simulations...everything.
Whether it's a boy Prince in a Hole or floods or earthquake or War, the Army's training systems have withstood the test of time.
Corporate training can only train a guy for earning a few bucks more. The Army's training systems can push a guy to sacrifice everything, including his life, for a cause.
So this is the proof...
The Mumbai Dabbawallas may not follow Kirkpatrick model or indoor training, but they do deliver to perfection.
On the other hand, the biggest well-trained corporates like Enron or Lehman Brothers can collapse despite any number of models working for them.
So the point is simple - there is nothing wrong with indoor or outdoor training; they are a means to an end, but don't expect everyone to toe a particular line of thought as proposed by one single person. Each person is free to choose the model that works best for him, based on his experiences. It is better to avoid making pointed barbs against any individuals in such discussions.
For Blood Pressure - a Physician may prescribe a medicine - Ramdev would prescribe Yoga - A homeopath may prescribe some pills... So who is right and who is wrong?
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Looking for something specific? - Join & Be Part Of Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.