Prompted by my day-job work, an exploration of what others area saying about ‘on the job training’ (OJT)…
What is OJT?
From CIPD:
On-the-job training (OJT) can be defined as an activity undertaken at the workplace which is designed to improve an individual’s skills or knowledge. OJT is a well-established and well-used intervention designed to enhance individual skills and capabilities with the characteristics of:
- being delivered on a one-to-one basis and taking place at the trainee’s place of work
- requiring time to take place, including potential periods when there is little or no useful output of products or services
- being specified, planned and structured activity.
From Wikipedia, as of 22 December:
On-the-job describes training that is given in a normal working situation, using the actual tools, equipment, documents or materials that they will use when fully trained. On-the-job training is usually most effective for vocational work. Off-the-job training takes place away from normal work situation which means that the employee is not regarded as productive worker when training is taking place. An advantage of off-the-job training is that it allows people to get away from work and totally concentrate on the training being given. This type of training is most effective for training concepts and ideas.
In the lead sentences, both definitions hit the key point; OJT is training that takes place on the job. Although circular, this is worth emphasizing and making distinct from informal learning while performing the job in production. CIPD goes on to make the point that OJT is “structured” and I accept that as a necessary condition following from the word ‘training.’ What some call ‘unstructured OJT’ and others call ‘shadowing’ or the ‘buddy system’ — (CIPD mentions ‘sitting next to Nellie’) — really isn’t training at all and has largely unknown and unpredictable results, including the transmission of bad practices. Let’s not call it OJT (i.e. training!) unless we are willing to invest in performing task analysis, defining learning objectives, training the trainer, and creating supporting instructional material such as check-lists.
The TRDev mailing list on Yahoo! Groups recently had a lengthy thread with the subject line “Impromptu OJT.” To honor terms of use there, I’ll not quote, but mention that one of the last posts in the thread helped solidify in my own mind that OJT is “just” another training delivery method — a method to have in your learning and development toolbox along side ‘instructor lead classroom’, ‘asynchronous eLearning’, ‘self-paced assigned reading’, etc. etc. Leading to the next question…
When to use OJT?
From my reading so far, I’ve found relatively little guidance on this question. The Wikipedia “vocational” word choice isn’t very instructive; however, Peter Blair‘s “jobs where employees perform repeatable tasks” seems a useful first filter. An additional consideration might be jobs that involve significant physical interaction — obviously manufacturing, but also many service industry jobs are in this category.
Compared to classroom or eLearning, OJT provides deeper context and more cognitive triggers for questions from the trainee as they struggle to perform a new task in the actual work environment. eLearning, in general, should be more scalable with its minimal delivery cost. Like, OJT, classroom has the potential for one-to-one real-time interaction with a subject matter expert; and should also be more scalable as it has a more favorable instructor-to-student ratio. OJT on the other hand has a scalability plus in that it is relatively easier to schedule, including “just in time” scenarios.
I’d like to have more insight here, and so I’m especially interested in your thoughts or pointers to what others have said in this area.
Good Practices
My favorites resources and top tips from what I’ve reviewed so far on this topic…
In the book Training On the Job (ASTD Press, 2002) Diane Walter suggests using the following five-step OJT cycle (Chapter 10, p. 172-185):
- Trainer and Trainee develop rapport with each other and establish a shared mental model (what others have labeled the ‘Tell’ step)
- Trainer demonstrates a task and trainee observes (i.e, ‘Show’)
- Trainer coaches trainee during performance of the task (i.e., ‘Try’, my own word)
- Trainer observes trainee perform task and gives feedback (‘Do’)
- Debrief, which includes scheduling time for further practice and/or formal evaluation (‘Measure’)
In Walter’s model, supporting the above is a team created, verified and tested “Training Module” and “Cover Sheet.” The Training Module uses a two-column format. The first column is the ‘What’ described in up to 15 ‘action steps’, described using ‘action verb + noun’. For example: Position template. The right column covers, as appropriate for the particular step the Why, When, How, Safety, and Quality. The Cover Sheet includes: module title, type (skill or knowledge?), performance objective, trainer preparation, special requirements, prerequisites, a review of the five-step cycle, notes, author(s), and approver(s).
In his four-page Unraveling the Five Myths about OJT, Charles Levine advocates for careful selection of OJT Trainers:
OJT trainers are usually chosen because they are very good at a specific task. This apparently logial choice comes with an inherent weakness, however. Sometimes the best practitioners tend to skip over “simple” items, while drowning their students in more advanced details. …When selecting trainers, look for two key characteristics — listening skills and patience. The best trainers are those who are well respected throughout the department and who are already well-known for their informal “helping and coaching” skills.
In his Tips for Structure On Job Training web site, Peter Blair shares this tip regarding the ongoing maintenance of training material:
[Regarding] trainer’s responsibility for keeping the training materials up to date: This aspect of a trainer’s responsibility must be monitored and enforced. There will be a temptation for trainers to add “their own” improvements to the training process. In each case, one of two conditions exists. Either the “improvement” is not really an improvement and no one should be doing it, or it is a true improvement and all trainers should be doing it. The only way to ensure and maintain consistency in training is to have all trainers accept their responsibility for keeping the training materials up to date.
and also from Peter Blair:
Decide which tasks if any, will require training other than Structured OJT. For the most part this would be tasks that require skills and or knowledge as a prerequisite to learning to perform the task itself. Pre-requisite knowledge, or cognitive oriented training, normally done in a classroom environment, should be separated from Structured OJT and a course or courses developed accordingly.
What has been your experience with on the job training, either as a program developer, trainer, or trainee?
I have one question, we have on the job training and we have on the job trainers. How can one decide how many on the job trainers are required. Is there a guideline or pattern structure that can be followed.
On the job training is a great way to learn a new career or skill. In order to get the most out of the experience, we must make an effort to communicate effectively with those around us so that we can gain as much knowledge and information as possible. We need to fully involve ourselves in the experience to gain the most benefit.