Do you believe Southwood did a good job of internally marketing the training program (i.e., did they communicate effectively to achieve buy-in from their employees)? Why or why not? I

Southwood School: A Case Study in Training and Development

By Fiona L. Robson

TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT STUDENT WORKBOOK

Project team

Author: Fiona L. Robson

SHRM project contributors: Bill Schaefer, SPHR Nancy A. Woolever, SPHR

External contributor: Sharon H. Leonard

Editor: Courtney J. Cornelius, copy editor

Design: Terry Biddle, graphic designer

© 2008 Society for Human Resource Management. Fiona L. Robson

Note to Hr faculty and instructors: SHRM cases and modules are intended for use in HR classrooms at universities. Teaching notes are included with each. While our current intent is to make the materials available without charge, we reserve the right to impose charges should we deem it necessary to support the program. However, currently, these resources are available free of charge to all. Please duplicate only the number of copies needed, one for each student in the class.

For more information, please contact: SHRM Academic Initiatives 1800 Duke Street, Alexandria, VA 22314, USA Phone: (800) 283-7476 Fax: (703) 535-6432 Web: www.shrm.org/hreducation

08-0769

© 2008 Society for Human Resource Management. Fiona L. Robson 1

Southwood School: A Case Study in Training and Development

caSe StUDY NarratIVe

Introduction Southwood school administrators realized that a newly designed performance management system for their support staff 1 would require a formal training program. Designing and implementing the new performance management system was a challenge for the organization; the last system was unpopular with employees, and negative feelings about the value of performance management linger.

Case Overview As discussed in the fi rst Southwood case study, some of the issues identifi ed with the previous performance management system included:

Annual deadlines to complete the process were missed by many staff members. 

Some staff members were confused about what exactly needed to be completed and 

when.

There were complaints that the previous system was a “waste of time” and that 

there were no measurable outputs.

A trade union representative felt the system was not appropriate for all staff 

members.

Criteria on the forms were irrelevant to support staff. For example, support staff 

could not set objectives in pupil progress or have lessons observed.

There was little attention on identifying training needs, and where needs had been 

identifi ed, there was no follow-up with appropriate actions.

Appraisals were led by teachers with little knowledge of their appraisees’ jobs. 

Performance meetings were a one-way process; often, performance goals were 

identifi ed before the meeting and without the appraisee’s input.

Examples of support staff jobs include: administrative positions (secretaries, administrators); student support 1.

positions (learning mentors, learning support assistants, special needs assistants, computer technicians); teacher support positions (teaching assistants, departmental assistants such as science technicians); and strategic/management positions (HR manager, fi nance manager, director of administration, director of information technology).

2 © 2008 Society for Human Resource Management. Fiona L. Robson

A new system was designed in consultation with all stakeholders to address the issues raised with the previous system. School leaders felt that a formal training program was vital to ensure all employees supported the new system. This case study demonstrates how the training was designed and delivered and some of the complexities involved in this process.

Case Details The case study consists of two parts:

I. Designing the training program for managers (appraisers).

II. Designing the training program for appraisees.

I. DeSIGNING tHe traINING ProGram For maNaGerS (aPPraISerS).

The managers in this case study are the appraisers in the new performance management process. In some cases, they will be teachers with no formal management qualifi cations. In other cases, they will be support staff with specifi c management responsibilities in the organization.

Needs Analysis Initially, the director of administration recommended that a selection of managers complete a standard Internet-based training program provided by an online training organization. Managers who completed the online training would receive a certifi cate of achievement. Based on input from the HR manager, however, it was decided that a custom-designed program would be more appropriate because it would better meet managers’ needs. A custom-designed program would also allow the school to relate the training back to their new performance management system and provide fl exibility in the program’s delivery.

There were a number of options available to determine who would design and deliver the program:

The HR manager could design and deliver the training. 

The HR manager could design the content, and the training could be conducted 

by a member of the school’s senior management team.

An external consultant could design and deliver the training. 

An external consultant could design the content, and the HR manager could 

conduct the training.

In the end, it was decided that the HR manager would design and develop the program with support from the senior management team, if necessary. The reasons for this decision:

Specialized knowledge.  The HR manager had developed the new performance management system and was therefore the most knowledgeable about it.

Experience.  The HR manager was experienced in developing training programs.

Cost.  This was the least expensive option; no direct costs would be incurred.

© 2008 Society for Human Resource Management. Fiona L. Robson 3

Context.  It would be easier to include specifi cs about the new performance management system if the training was designed by an internal person.

Flexibility.  The sessions could be run at the times convenient to managers, which may have been more diffi cult to accommodate with an external trainer.

PLeaSe Note: From this point forward, the Hr manager is referred to as the trainer.

Designing the Training A focus group was held with fi ve managers to fi nd out what they wanted from the training and to assess their concerns about performance management. This was a useful process. The managers wanted to include training in how to deal with diffi cult people, which otherwise may not have been included in the program. Including this also assured managers that their views were important and had been considered in the program’s design.

The training would take place in-house and outside the normal workday. It was agreed that the most appropriate method was a two-hour workshop. The workshop would include various activities geared to develop the skills and knowledge of the participants:

Trainer-led interactive presentations. 

Role play exercises. 

Use of a specially designed case study. 

Small-group exercises. 

By developing and delivering the session in-house, training materials specifi c to the new performance management system could be created, rather than relying on generic training materials. It was hoped that this would facilitate the transfer from training to the workplace. The training would be mandatory for all appraisers to ensure consistency. The trainer developed a plan for the two-hour session and included activities that would appeal to participants of various learning styles. Appropriate resources and handouts were designed. The trainer used the organization’s generic training evaluation form (provided at the end of this workbook) to evaluate the program.

The program would include the following:

How to develop questioning and listening skills. 

How to complete the new performance management documents. 

How to develop SMART objectives (objectives that are specifi c, measurable, 

achievable, relevant and time-bound).

How to help employees identify training and development opportunities. 

note

4 © 2008 Society for Human Resource Management. Fiona L. Robson

Training Delivery Participants were asked to read all the documents related to the new performance management system before the training. The session was held in a classroom with the necessary IT equipment during non-school hours. Eighty percent of appraisers attended this scheduled session; the remaining 20 percent participated in another presentation four weeks later.

Evaluation of the Training Program: The Trainer’s Perspective The following is an excerpt from the trainer’s evaluation report:

Overall, I thought the session went really well. I covered all of the materials and had some good responses.

I think most of the participants now have a good understanding of how to carry out a performance review, but I am not entirely sure they believe there are benefi ts to a performance appraisal system.

I was a bit disappointed with two participants who did not actively participate in the activities. Perhaps they thought they already knew the information.

I might have misjudged one of the communication activities. I estimated that it would take about 45 minutes, but everyone completed it in 20 minutes. Unfortunately I didn’t have any extra activities, so I had to stretch out the fi nal discussion so we didn’t fi nish too early.

Evaluation of the Training Program: The Managers’ Perspective Managers were asked to provide feedback at the end of the training. Some of the results are shown below:

How would you rate the… Percentage who rated it as good/very good

Quality of materials 78%

Knowledge of trainer 90%

Presentation skills of trainer 70%

Location of training event 50%

Duration of event 85%

rate the following statements: Percentage who rated it as agree/ strongly agree

The session met the stated objectives. 78%

I feel confi dent in leading performance reviews with members of my team. 80%

The training methods used were appropriate. 60%

© 2008 Society for Human Resource Management. Fiona L. Robson 5

Qualitative feedback was also offered:

“The trainer was very good and was clearly knowledgeable about the subject.” 

“I found the practical tips to be really useful.” 

“It was a bit annoying when the administrators kept interrupting us to pass on 

messages.”

“It would have been easier if everyone had read the new performance management 

documents before they arrived at the session.”

“Some of the activities were a bit too childish – I think the trainer forgot that we 

are all teachers.”

“Some of the handouts are really good.” 

“I am still not convinced that performance management is something which 

benefi ts us – it seems like another paper exercise.”

II. DeSIGNING tHe traINING ProGram For aPPraISeeS

Needs Analysis The HR manager was assigned responsibility for this program because of the successful design and delivery of the manager’s training. This session was internally led, for the same reasons the manager’s training was internally led.

Past experience showed that it was diffi cult to hold focus groups with support staff members. Instead, an e-mail was sent to all support staff asking them what they wanted to be included in their training program. Less than 10 percent of the support staff responded to the e-mail.

The following instructional methods were chosen for this program based on experience with previous training programs (see “Sample Training Program Schedules”):

Presentations by trainer 

Practical activities 

Role plays 

Worksheets 

Training Delivery The appraisees were not assigned pre-work before the training because this may have intimidated some participants. Although details of the new performance management system had been shared with appraisees in an earlier e-mail, most participants had not seen the actual documents that would be used. The documents were distributed during the session so the trainer could guide them through and answer any questions immediately.

The session was held in a school classroom, but was scheduled outside of normal working hours (see “Appraisee Training Program Agenda”) to avoid disrupting staff

6 © 2008 Society for Human Resource Management. Fiona L. Robson

and students during the normal school day. To compensate for the inconvenience, attendees received overtime for the two hours spent in the training.

Training Program Evaluation The trainer ran out of time during training. Consequently, no formal evaluations were submitted by participants. The trainer thought it had been a challenging session; it had been diffi cult to engage the participants. The participants had very different needs and it was diffi cult to accommodate them within a two-hour session. The trainer also reported that few trainees participated in the activities or asked any questions.

Conclusions This case study shows that there are many issues to consider when planning, designing and delivering training programs. It is also clear that because people have different needs and learning styles, it is diffi cult to produce a program that will be rated well by everyone. In this instance, it was harder to satisfy people because of the topic; negative experiences with the school’s previous performance management system made this training unpopular.

© 2008 Society for Human Resource Management. Fiona L. Robson 7

Program 1—Manager/Appraiser Training Program

Suggested Timing for Each Session Segment

Total Time: 2 hours

Introduction to session: 15 minutes 

Lecture on general communication skills: 15 minutes 

Refreshment break: 10 minutes 

Lecture on how to complete performance management documentation: 25 minutes 

Video on performance management: 30 minutes 

Questions and answers: 10 minutes 

Computer-based test: 15 minutes 

Program 2—Appraisee Training Program

Suggested Timing for Each Session Segment

Total Time: 2 hours

Introduction to the training (includes goals and objectives): 10 minutes 

Discussion with participants about what they want to get out of the session: 5 minutes 

Lecture on why performance management is important: 10 minutes 

Case study on dealing with diffi cult situations (whole group discussion): 20 minutes 

Role-play on dealing with diffi cult situations (pairs with a 

third person providing feedback): 20 minutes

Interactive presentation on SMART objectives and training needs analysis: 10 minutes 

Small group case study on setting SMART objectives 

and identifying training needs: 15 minutes

Whole group discussion on how to complete performance 

management documentation: 15 minutes

Introduction to additional resources, including handouts 

and website addresses: 10 minutes

Session evaluation: 5 minutes 

Sample Training Program Schedules

8 © 2008 Society for Human Resource Management. Fiona L. Robson

TRAINING EVALUATION FORM

Your name: Name of training session: Name of trainer:

Why did you attend this training session?

Please rate the following aspects of the training:

V e

ry G

o o

d

G o

o d

S a

ti sf

a ct

o ry

P o

o r

V e

ry P

o o

r

Quality of materials

Knowledge of trainer

Presentation skills of trainer

Location of training event

Duration of event

S tr

o n

g ly

A

g re

e

A g

re e

N o

t su

re

D is

a g

re e

S tr

o n

g ly

D

is a

g re

e

The session met the stated objectives.

The activities in the training session worked well.

The training methods were appropriate.

This training helped me develop my knowledge in this area.

This training helped me develop my skills in this area.

I now feel confi dent conducting performance reviews with members of my team.

rating: on a scale of 1 to 10 with 1 being the lowest and 10 being the highest, rate your level of knowledge before the program.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

on a scale of 1 to 10 with 1 being the lowest and 10 being the highest, rate your level of knowledge after the program.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Additional comments or suggestions:

Thank you for taking the time to complete this evaluation.

© 2008 Society for Human Resource Management. Fiona L. Robson 9

aPPraISee traINING ProGram aGeNDa: PerFormaNce maNaGemeNt

Session introduction (led by trainer) 

Session overview •

Goals and objectives •

Question-and-answer period for initial questions from participants •

Introduction to performance management 

(interactive presentation led by trainer)

What does performance management mean? •

Why does the school have a performance management system? •

What are the benefi ts of performance management? •

review of the new system (lecture by trainer) 

Practical considerations 

Who will conduct staff appraisals? •

How long will the appraisals take? •

Where will the appraisals take place? •

How far in advance will appraisees know the date for their performance review • (one week, more)?

What documents/evidence will you need to show your appraiser? •

Review the new documents and explain how they were designed. 

Explain how to complete the new documents. 

role-play activity 

The group will be split into teams of three and will receive a completed performance review preparation sheet. One person will play the appraise, one person will be the appraiser, and a third person will observe and provide feedback.

communication skills 

After a brief interactive presentation, the trainer will work with the groups through role-play scenarios.

How to make the most out of your performance management review 

Five tips for a successful performance review. •

Dealing with diffi cult issues. •

Following up after your meeting. •

Question-and-answer session followed by the distribution of the performance 

management documents

Session evaluation 

10 © 2008 Society for Human Resource Management. Fiona L. Robson

Internet Sources CIPD (2007). Creative Learning Methods (online). http://www.cipd.co.uk/ subjects/training/trnmthds/creatmthds (Accessed 14 August 2007).

CIPD (2007). Identifying Learning and training needs (online) http://www.cipd.co.uk/subjects/training/trnneeds/idtlneeds.htm?IsSrchRes=1 (Accessed 15 August 2007).

NWLink (2007). Instructional System Design (online). http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/sat.html (Accessed 27 October 2007).

Free Management Library (2007). Systematic approaches to Training and Development (online). http://www.managementhelp.org/trng_dev/basics/isd.htm (Accessed 27 October 2007).

1800 Duke Street Alexandria, VA 22314-3499