I remember the first time I was promoted to a position, when I was named assistant supervisor of a new department. One of the first things the
supervisor said to me was "I don't have a lot of time, and I don't like to repeat myself, so pay attention and take good notes, and don't ask a lot of questions."
It wasn't the most gracious way of welcoming a new employee, especially one you've recruited for a new position, and, as I was still pretty young, it came
across as kind of intimidating. Lucky for me, I already knew the computer system, and I'm a pretty fast learner, so I wasn't someone who ever had to
ask a lot of questions when something was explained to me and, for the most part, she was a pretty good trainer. Not the most patient sort, but she knew
her stuff, and was by the book; no tricks or short cuts, which left me with things I could teach her over the next couple of years.
However, though I didn't have problems, I noticed that, until I took over the training duties, whenever she trained others, including working with some of
the people who were already in the department, things didn't go quite as smoothly. There's an inherent intimidation factor when a manager or supervisor
has you sitting at their desk to begin with, but when that same person shows irritation because they're not pleased with what they perceive as slow
comprehension of something that they know better than the back of their hand, it really impedes learning even more because, as we all know, the more
stress there is to learn something, the harder it is to retain.
As an assistant manager, I didn't have any real pressure on me for the department to succeed, but being the type of person I am, I adopted the role
anyway. When I took over training, my approach was a little bit different. I tend to be more nurturing, expecting people who are totally new to
something to be somewhat nervous, and, being confident in my own abilities to catch up with my own work at a moment's notice, didn't worry that
someone needed to learn things as fast as my supervisor wanted them to.
Of course, once I was a district manager, then a director, things changed just a little bit. I didn't have to do as much training on day to day processes,
but I did have to train supervisors on leadership, and of course I had to monitor how they trained others, and of course monitor those being trained.
Something I didn't always have the luxury of at a higher level was waiting too long for someone to learn the basic steps of a new job. Suddenly, I knew
how it felt to be the one with the pressure on, responsible for production, and knowing that I couldn't afford too weak a link on the team because, well,
if we didn't produce, people didn't get paid, equipment didn't get bought, and we might as well have shut down the entire production. That wouldn't
make people too happy with me, and wouldn't make me all that happy either.
One of the hardest skills to master when you're leading or working with others is how to determine whether someone just can't learn what you need
them to learn, or whether they need you to teach them in a different way than the norm. As a trainer now, I know that a mixture of hard copy visuals,
group interactions, and a bit of story telling enhances the learning curve, which is important when I only have a few hours to convey thoughts. I also
know that, when I leave, it's not as imperative that everyone memorizes each concept I tell them because I leave them with material, and I can only
hope I've engaged them enough that they'll feel inspired to open the material even once when they get back to their daily work lives.
At the job, though, it's tougher. Most managers forget when they were learning the ropes and how difficult it might have been for them, and with the
added pressure, they want everyone to know everything now; how realistic is that? I've mentioned this in the past, but in healthcare, even a nurse with
years of experience will have a learning curve when going to a new hospital, or healthcare facility, because each hospital has a different way of doing
things. And these are people with full training and certifications before they're even allowed to perform their jobs.
Still, we have the other side of the coin, and it's a much more slippery road. There are usually two different dynamics in place when a new employee
has difficulties learning; estimating how much time you believe it might take this new employee to learn everything you need them to learn to at least
be productive, and what kind of time you have to work with such an employee.
Each job or occupation has its own learning curves to deal with; there is no one set answer. Time consideration is going to be much different if you
have an office of 2 people compared to an office of 50 because there are so many other bodies to rely on in getting the job done. Still, even an office of
50 has needs for competence, and obviously they need that new person to learn their job as possible, otherwise they wouldn't have had to hire for the
position in the first place.
Managers need to give themselves opportunities to not only be fair to new employees, but to themselves. For instance, having some type of practical
training manual would be in their best interest. Having a printed glossary of terms would be pretty smart also. Taking a little bit of time to make a
new employee feel as comfortable as possible is a good idea, because if they're tense then you're going to be wasting a few days that you can never
get back. And establishing time frames for what you need the employee to learn is probably your best friend, because it's a measurable tool that
everyone can be calculated against, and it can be modified on an as-needs basis. Many companies have probation periods, but if there's no
established training curriculum or process then it's not fair.
By the way, I'm still in touch with that same supervisor, whose job focus has changed over the years, and I've actually heard her complain from
time to time that one of her supervisors is sometimes too tough on new employees; how the worm can turn.