Employee ownership of learning

Encouraging staff to take responsibility for identifying and meeting their own training needs has emerged as a response to changes in internal and external labour markets. At the organisational level, self-managed learning (SML) is the logical outcome of change programmes that have resulted in flatter organisational structures with more responsibility devolved to lower-level employees. In the absence of established vertical career paths, organisations no longer feel that they have prime responsibility for employee development. Instead, it is left to the individual to determine his or her own training requirements in line with organisational needs and their own career aspirations - whether they involve lateral movement or a switch to a totally different direction. Alternatively, the employee acts in partnership with the employer - who provides the necessary support and, possibly, the resources - to realise mutual benefits in terms of individual and organisational objectives.¹ It has been suggested that in flatter organisations employers should construct a new "psychological contract" with employees that offers them a chance to develop skills that will boost their employability in return for greater output and improved performance.²

At the same time, the extensive range of skills and knowledge required by all employees in many of today's workplaces, including customer awareness, decision-making competency, problem-solving capabilities and interpersonal skills, have rendered formal training approaches inappropriate.³ It was noted earlier that development is no longer solely confined to professional and managerial employees (see chapter four). More flexibility in the delivery of learning experiences is necessary to meet the differing development needs of a more diverse mix of people.

Perhaps a more important feature of SML is that it is cheaper than formal training. For example, open learning, a key learning tool in terms of self-development, is estimated to be 40% more cost-effective than traditional means of training and development.⁴

As far as individual employees are concerned, the end of the so-called "jobs-for-life" culture places the onus on them to acquire additional and transferable skills in order to enhance their long-term employability. Self-managed learning provides the means to do this by helping people to identify their core learning skills and their longer-term learning objectives. It also motivates them to take advantage of both formal and informal learning opportunities as a means of attaining their learning goals. Importantly, SML allows people to pursue learning styles with which they are comfortable, rather than being obliged to participate in formal training courses. Thus the learning experience can be tailored to meet individual needs and match those requirements with specific learning resources.⁵ Self-development also has the benefit of flexibility, enabling employees to engage in self-paced learning as and when their work-related and personal circumstances allow.

There are numerous examples of organisations that have attempted to create and encourage greater employee responsibility for their own learning. Exxon Chemicals plans to gain a competitive advantage through a competency-based education and training programme that requires all employees in its worldwide operations to identify and manage their own learning.⁶ Abbey National's use of personal development "diaries" is, in part, intended to "encourage individuals to take more responsibility for their own appraisal and personal development."⁷ Likewise, the personal development plans at Tesco are a key element of the company's training credit system that is designed to promote responsibility for self-development.⁸ Among our case studies, food retailer, J Sainsbury and Queen Victoria Hospital NHS Trust have similarly embraced employee self-development.

SELF-DEVELOPMENT

Although the term self-development suggests a degree of individual freedom that enables a person to pursue the learning objectives of his or her choice, in practice it is concerned with furnishing people with the responsibility to manage their own learning in terms of both individual and organisational needs - the benefits are mutual. Employer input into the development process is therefore vital, although a balance needs to be struck between encouragement and control.

Self-managed learning is based on the premise that people learn more when they have control over what is learnt and how it is achieved. Tough, for instance, has said that learning experiences that are "most meaningful and beneficial to the adult learner are those that are self-designed and implemented."⁹ This is supported by other research that suggests that learning is more successful where the individual has autonomy in terms of the learning process.¹⁰

The concept of self-development hinges on the ability of individuals, with guidance and advice from their employers, to (see also figure 5.1):

Figure 5.1: Self-development process

A contemporary performance management system will, by and large, help to achieve these objectives. The emphasis of current performance management systems is on staff development. Indeed, part of the rationale behind the introduction of a performance management process is the identification of training needs. A previous Management Review report found that this was the second most common reason given for establishing a performance management system by employers.¹² The performance management process provides an analysis of a person's current knowledge, skills, expertise and competency that can indicate the areas in which they can develop their abilities to perform their current role better, as well as what is required of them if they want to further their careers within the organisation.

Performance management systems generally align individual development needs with corporate needs via personal learning agreements - usually jointly agreed between the individual and his or her superior - that also outline what the employee can expect from the organisation in terms of support and facilitation. The "ideal type" of performance management system contains the following five features:

The performance management system at Jamont UK, the manufacturer of paper products , involves the: "agreement of personal objectives in line with business plans; self-appraisal; regular performance reviews (four a year); manager coaches to improve performance; individual has a key role in implementing self-development."¹⁴ Chemicals business Pfizer, has a similar process. The company's performance management system entails "pre-work [by the employee] prior to discussion with superior followed by written record that covers: current performance, reviewed against objectives; setting objectives; and personal development planning."¹⁵

Feedback and guidance

There are two necessary enabling conditions for greater employee ownership of learning: feedback and ongoing guidance. Periodic and precise feedback should be given to each employee so that he or she is informed about how well, or how badly, they are performing in relation to their learning goals. Performance reviews or annual appraisal arrangements are the most common way of supplying feedback to individual members of staff. These should be designed to provide accurate, reliable and useful information on performance that will aid improvement. The process should assess an employee's strengths and weaknesses, agree objectives and expectations and identify future training and development needs. It should also present the employee with a clear picture of how the organisation views their contribution and inform them about their future prospects. The appraisal process itself should be considered a learning opportunity.

For example, staff appraisal at the BBC should contain:

Guidance is the other key ingredient on which employers should concentrate if they are successfully to encourage staff to accept responsibility for their own development. Armstrong suggests that employers can encourage self-development if they ensure that learners:

In relation to the first point, the identification of training and development needs can take place by way of self-assessment or self-awareness activities. Organisational guidance in relation to development needs meanwhile can be provided by in-house careers counselling or through developmental workshops and seminars.¹⁸ A Department for Education and Employment (DfEE) survey of 582 organisations found that employers can encourage staff to take more responsibility for their own training and development if they provide better advice and guidance (86%); better information (85%); give staff responsibility for identifying training needs (77%), and joint employee/employer funding (69%).¹⁹

The previous Government's Gateway to Learning initiative was designed to improve assessment and guidance services for adults. J Sainsbury (Choices), Royal Mail (Directions) and Vauxhall Motors (Guidelines) all launched employer-based schemes with public funding. At Sainsbury, staff receive career counselling which helps them to identify talents and skills that they use outside work and that may be of benefit in their jobs. Career development and training opportunities which take account of these capabilities are also identified. A questionnaire is used to provide a form of self-assessment to enable staff to identify any skills gap which, if filled, would enable them to progress further within the company (see case study four).

The Royal Mail's Directions programme provides a similar analysis of development needs by way of self-diagnosis. This is underpinned by the notion that if people take the trouble to identify what it is that they want from their careers, then their chances of achieving it will be much greater.²⁰ The first step in this process is outlined as follows in the Directions booklet:

The subsequent three analytical steps in the Royal Mail programme involve the participant clarifying his or her long-term ambitions and aspirations and how these can be linked to their current job; examining how their present position can help them achieve their longer-term goals, and drawing up a career plan based on the information gathered in the previous three stages of the programme.

Development centres have also been established to support self-assessment. These allow participants to measure their own abilities against "the organisation's criteria, identify their development needs . . . and plan future development activities."²² Work simulation exercises are commonly used in development centres. These may include such activities as one-to-one discussions; role play; presentations; negotiation; selling or influencing exercises; situational interviews; critical incident interviews, and written exercises.²³

At Queen Victoria Hospital NHS Trust, ward managers took part in a two-day development centre in which they agreed their own personal development plans (see case study three). Guinness Brewing Great Britain also uses development centres that consist of exercises to help participants to identify their current level of performance and identify training needs in relation to the company's competency framework.²⁴

SELF-DEVELOPMENT AND THE LEARNING CULTURE

Employee ownership of learning forms a key element of the learning culture discussed in previous chapters. This is because it is one of the best ways of promoting continuous development. As one commentator has put it:

"It [SML] enables learners to respond to the ever-changing information and skill requirements of the work environment and to match their needs with the learning content."²⁵

An Abbey National employee voiced similar views:

"Personal development plans combine the flexibility to meet individuals' different starting points and aspirations, with the provision of a framework to give guidance and direction. They can also contribute significantly to the establishment of continuous development as a key organisational value."²⁶

Self-development has been a feature of managerial and professional development for many years. Its application to other members of staff reflects a general shift in organisations away from a reliance on formalised training courses delivered by an in-house training facility towards forms of learning initiatives that support greater employee ownership of training. For example, Eastern Group has moved away from the traditional functional model of training to one where responsibility for personal development rests as much with individual employees as it does with the company.²⁷ In practice, this means that whereas in the past an individual would have been allocated a place on a formal training course, the emphasis now is one providing them with a range of development and training opportunities.

Employers have adopted three main initiatives to support greater staff responsibility for their own learning and development - open learning, personal development plans and resource centres. These are described in more detail below, and the advantages and disadvantages of each are summarised in figure 5.2.

Figure 5.2: Pros and cons of open learning/ resource centres and personal development plans

Open learning/resource centres

Open learning is a flexible method of learning that provides people with access to the learning materials that are necessary to pursue a chosen or identified course of development. This is typically done through open learning resource centres. The approach takes learning away from the classroom - which features, for example, traditional training that is "time-bound, location-bound, tutor-led and syllabus-bound" - and makes it available to staff via new technologies and published material, so that they are able to engage in learning as and when they want to, and at their own pace.²⁸ In this way, staff are encouraged to take responsibility for their own development.

One commentator claims that open learning is the "favoured training option" in the UK.²⁹ The original research conducted for this issue of Management Review found that 75% survey respondents made use of open learning arrangements. In addition, 30% of those had established their open learning initiative in the past two years. A study of learning organisations by the Industrial Society reported that 29% of participants had a learning resource centre.³⁰

A series of DfEE-funded studies also found that employers were using open learning in a variety of ways, from being a component of a course led by a tutor to being made available without supervision in an open learning centre on site.³¹ Jaguar's open learning and resource centre directory includes the following ancient Chinese proverb as a foreword to illustrate the philosophy behind the company's promotion of this approach (see case study five):

"If you tell me, I will listen. If you show me, I will see. If you let me experience, I will learn."

Organisations that use open learning arrangements include:

Elsewhere, British Aerospace operates 28 Learning Resource Centres which give the company's 44,000 staff access to a range of learning materials.³⁴ TSB, now part of Lloyds TSB, has also established more than 100 open learning centres in branches across the UK to encourage personal development among its employees.³⁵ The Ford Motor Company's UK parts distribution operation at Daventry houses a Human Resource Development Centre that uses interactive and computer-based materials to supply more than 50 different courses in areas such as computing skills, quality and communications.³⁶

At a national level, open learning has been supported by initiatives such as the Open For Learning project which was designed to encourage public libraries to offer open learning materials. A 1994 study found that 53% of the 139 libraries surveyed stocked open learning packages - up from 23% in 1992.³⁷ The Government's proposed University for Industry (UfI) is modelled on the open learning approach that was pioneered by the Open University. Eventually it hopes to link employers' own learning centres to a national learning grid, with the UfI as its hub, providing a wide range of vocational learning options mainly be electronic media.

Trade unions have also sought to promote open learning among their members. For example, Unison, the public services union, launched its Open College in 1994. This offers courses that use flexible learning methods, including a basic introduction to learning and self-confidence building to encourage people to re-enter learning.³⁸

Advantages and disadvantages

Open learning has a number of significant advantages over traditional training. For example, it enables the individual to choose a learning style that suits them; it is flexible, so that people can engage in learning when it is convenient for them; it gives people a degree of control over how and what they learn; it is cost-effective compared with traditional training courses, and it enables people to take part in continuous development activity. Moreover, because the learner exercises control over the learning process, he or she is likely to retain more of the learning (see box 2.2).

However, open learning programmes are not free of problems. One DfEE study reported that the most common drawback was the "need for self-motivation/self-discipline".³⁹ Other difficulties highlighted by the study included "limits on tutor contact"; "lack of immediate feedback"; "slippage, finding the time", and "no group support". The cost of setting up an open learning resource centre and then maintaining it is also large for small and medium-sized organisations. One study says that employers should be prepared to invest between £20,000 and £100,000 in capital costs and £60,000 a year in running costs for an average-sized facility.⁴⁰

The advantages and disadvantages of open learning/resource centres are summarised in figure 5.2.

Personal development plans

Personal development plans (PDP) are action blueprints for individuals that set out the steps and activities that need to be followed to enable them to develop their careers. The individual, in association with his or her line manager, has prime responsibility for developing the PDP. It was noted earlier that personal development plans usually arise out of a performance review or performance appraisal and, they generally cover all staff.⁴¹

PDPs typically specify development needs; the action that is required - such as training courses or open learning activities - to meet these needs; what support is available, including coaching, mentoring and funding, and how progress will be assessed.

Management Review's research for this report found that of the 97 organisations surveyed the highest proportion, 81% use personal development plans as part of their learning strategies. Some 37% of respondents had introduced PDPs in the past two years. The Industrial Society report noted above found that, after training courses, PDPs were the second most common learning opportunity provided by organisations.⁴² Research for the DfEE found that 79% of employers who provided training used personal development plans.⁴³ Moreover, the larger the workplace the more common it was to find PDPs.

Practical examples of how organisations use personal development plans are provided by:

Advantages and disadvantages

An Institute for Employment Studies report says that personal development plans are a cost-effective method of encouraging self-development.⁴⁶ They can help to integrate other human resource areas, such as reward and succession planning. Communication between line managers and subordinates improves as a result of discussions about the plan and the ongoing feedback that is a necessary feature of the process. PDPs also provide an effective means of placing the responsibility for training and development firmly with the individual. It allows them to identify where they want to go and how best this can be achieved within the confines of the organisation, or outside, in their own time. PDPs have the added advantage of helping people to analyse non-work-related skills and knowledge to judge how these can be applied in their day-to-day activities or support future career aspirations and ambitions. PDPs also instigate a continuous process of individual development in line with corporate objectives.

However, using the plans for wider personnel practices raises questions about the confidentiality of the information contained in the PDP and may prevent staff from being open with managers in discussing the plan.⁴⁷ Another potential difficulty is that where development centres are used to determine training needs, the costs can rise considerably, making them an impractical method of needs analysis if applied to all employees in a large organisation. Also, while it may be argued that PDPs offer a consistent and systematic appraisal process in which employees have confidence, there is a question mark over some approaches to appraisal. A previous Management Review study reported that traditional appraisal practice - defined as a once-a-year review of past performance that is controlled by managers and in which the appraisee has a largely passive role - is still the most common approach.⁴⁸ A further study also found that the majority of appraisal systems are of the conventional variety.⁴⁹ Appraisal systems typically focus on the current job or future prospects within the organisation, whereas development centres take a more holistic approach to development needs and include future "life" issues, such as ambitions and aspirations.

In addition, line managers play a central role in planning the PDP and, as a result, they will need to acquire the skills required to provide staff with the necessary support and encouragement and the ability to instil confidence in employees who may be apprehensive about engaging in learning activities. This will entail further costs.

The advantages and disadvantages of personal development plans are summarised in figure 5.2.

CASE STUDY 3
Employee ownership of learning at QVH

Although Queen Victoria Hospital NHS Trust is small in trust terms, it sees itself as highly successful. It has broken even in each of its years of operation and has experienced steady growth in its income. An independent review of the site, as part of a study of resource management in the NHS, confirms the internal view.⁵⁰ The review gave QVH a "glowing report", highlighting its change management process and the role of staff development. The review is particularly pleasing to QVH, since at its inception the trust had no training and development strategy and there were no training facilities at the hospital. The subsequent three years have seen the development of a training strategy for both middle and junior managers. In addition, in April 1996, a new staff development centre was opened and the trust is now able to offer a wide range of learning opportunities to its workforce.

In 1997/98, QVH's training department had a budget of £78,000 and a staff of three people to deal with the development needs of the whole workforce, with the exception of the professional development of medical and nursing staff.

BUILDING A TRAINING STRATEGY

Before becoming a trust, QVH was an outpost of Tunbridge Wells Health Authority. Although the hospital has a well-established reputation as a postgraduate training centre, no staff training and development activities were carried out on site. Julia Ross, QVH's development and training manager, reports that there was "minuscule" take-up by the hospital of health authority training provision. Specifically, QVH did not make use of the 100 days training a year for the professional training of nurses that was available under a regional contract with the Institute of Nursing (IoN).

Professional nurse training was the priority when QVH became a trust. Activating the contract with IoN was therefore high on Ross's agenda.

The second step, and the major staff development activity of the trust in its first two years, was to develop a strategy for management training to support the change to trust status. QVH adopted a management structure based on "resource management", with management linked to clinical departments rather than professional structures. This process involved the devolution of management authority from the centre to nurses and doctors in the wards. In addition, the trust implemented an extensive information support system.

Ward managers have considerable managerial responsibility, including that for budgetary matters. Previously, ward managers were practising nurses who, as sisters, had had some clinical and record-keeping responsibility but little role in the management of their area. According to Ross, the old culture of the QVH could be summed-up as: "We didn't have management and we didn't need management."

This change in role required ward managers to acquire important new skills. It also gave rise to major cultural issues - the staff concerned were required to change their approach from that of nurse/clinician to that of a manager.

WARD MANAGERS' DEVELOPMENT CENTRE

In order to establish the learning needs associated with this change in role, the director of nursing and other senior managers in the trust, plus the ward managers themselves, worked with an outside consultant to establish a ward managers' competency dictionary. This dictionary "is not a blueprint but it provided a general framework for the design of a two-day development centre for ward managers", says Ross.

Each of the 10 managers taking part in the centre agreed their own personal development plan. The participants were given a common "pot" of £1,000 to spend on development objectives, but the means to achieve these goals were left to the individuals themselves: they were completely free to decide how the money was spent. It could range from purchasing specific training, to visiting other workplaces and to buying in the necessary help. The intention was that line managers should facilitate and support these development activities.

A common skills gap emerged from the development centre. Ward managers had very little understanding of the corporate and political environment - the "big picture" - in which changes affecting the trust were taking place. As a result, part of the £1,000 was spent on the development of a day-long course entitled "the enterprising manager". Additional resources were also put into this course from the central training budget and all middle managers in the trust were invited to attend.

Ward managers have bought various other development activities with the £1,000. These include courses on managing budgets and time management.

Other outcomes of the development centre include an ongoing discussion group, involving four of the original participants in the development centre, to further raise the level of corporate awareness among staff.

INDIVIDUAL IMPACT

Ross says that the individual assessments of development needs which came out of the development centre have proved very accurate. Where the individuals concerned have acted on the feedback they have received, they have "done very well".

QVH emphasises that any training should have a strong link with workplace needs. Although some of the development activities in which ward managers have taken part have involved formal courses, many have been more experiential, with learning focused on the practical application of skills.

Mentoring

The development role of mentors is also highly valued at the QVH. In all, around six of the participants in the development centre have arranged to have mentors either at a senior level in the trust or in outside organisations.

An example of how these different approaches to learning have been used in the development of QVH ward managers is provided by a member of staff who was told that she had "excellent people skills" but needed to develop her understanding of the bigger picture to be an effective manager. The individual concerned arranged to spend some time in the trust's business development centre where she sat in on a number of meetings and arranged for one of the trust directors to act as her mentor. She has subsequently been promoted to a more senior post.

Another participant in the development centre was advised that they had a "rather aggressive" management image. As a result, they sought funding from the local Rotary Club to enrol for an external certificate of management course. The person concerned has also received internal coaching from senior colleagues and is now considered a very effective manager.

WIDER MANAGEMENT TRAINING

Some ward managers have also moved on to the wider modular management development programme (MDP), which has been available since the opening of the staff development centre in 1996. This is based on a series of modules over six days, followed by work-based projects. Subjects covered include: managing your team, managing in the business context and managing yourself. There is also a recall day at which participants present the results of their projects. The trust is considering seeking NVQ accreditation of this course. However, Ross emphasises that it is primarily about training managers for the QVH. Managers who seek formal qualifications are encouraged to enrol on external courses.

Action learning sets are an optional part of the MDP. A number of such sets have evolved involving ward managers. Participants work on projects related to their personal development plans and also act as problem-solving groups to address challenges that they collectively face in the workplace.

PROMOTING LEARNING ACROSS THE TRUST

In the first two years of the trust's operation the absence of management skills meant that management development was the central focus for the small training department at QVH. However, on 1 April 1996, a dedicated staff development centre was opened on the site, available to all staff, consisting of three meeting rooms, an information technology training room and a learning resources library. The library holds books, video tapes, audio tapes and personal study packs. Staff are encouraged to use these facilities for self-directed study in professional development, management skills and information technology. Staffing in the training department has also increased from one to three. So Ross now has the support of a training officer and administrator.

The trust has made a commitment to pursue Investors in People accreditation and aims to ensure that "every member of staff has the opportunity of developing to achieve their full potential".

A major objective in the current year is to ensure that the performance management system which had applied only to senior and middle management is now established across the organisation to include all staff. The intention is that staff who do not currently have a personal development plan and who want one should have such a programme in place by the end of the financial year.

Training needs analysis

The training department is now seeking to address the training needs of the whole workforce. The starting point is an annual training needs analysis based on the requirements identified in individual staff appraisal reports and in the trust's business plan. In the current year, this analysis has identified a number of key deficiencies in the areas of confidentiality, data protection, legal issues and the handling of complaints.

Ross says that focusing on personal development is critical if training and development are to be effective in an organisation. Also, "you need to know where people are and to start from there, otherwise they will not learn from their training and development opportunities."

A feature of the previous year's programme popular with staff was the "clinical services seminars". These take place bi-monthly and have been retained for the current year. The seminars are aimed at non-clinicians who want to understand the core business of healthcare more clearly. In addition, technical seminars for managers dealing with specific human resourcing issues are held at lunch times. These have also been retained for the current year.

Broader development of staff

QVH's annual training budget is allocated on a departmental basis. Service managers in the trust can choose to respond to staff requests for learning opportunities which are not directly work-related. For example, a dyslexic porter, whose disability did not prevent him from performing his job effectively, was sponsored for coaching to help him cope with his disability, even though there was no immediate benefit to the trust from this. In a further example, staff in one department received funding and time off work to attend a counselling skills course, even though the skills acquired were not essential to their day-to-day activities.

SOME PROBLEMS . . .

It would be strange if, in developing a training and development strategy from scratch, there were no hiccups. Ross believes that she underestimated the amount of ongoing support that ward managers would require after taking part in the development centre. She was rather disappointed that the ward managers did not make "more imaginative use" of their £1,000 development pot - a sizeable part of which remained unspent.

She believes that this inactivity was to some degree the result of a big change in line management personnel, so that the ward managers did not receive the level of encouragement to pursue their development needs that was desirable. As a result, "all the responsibility was theirs, which was very difficult for some of them. People should be responsible for their own development, but there should be support from the employer. It can be very hard if managers aren't supportive. The organisation has a responsibility to provide a culture which is supportive of learning."

Ross also feels that she underestimated the support that managers needed in determining and then expressing the development needs of their staff. She believes that this is in part a reflection of the old culture of the hospital, "where there was no training and staff of long standing saw no need for it".

A GLOWING REPORT

An independent review of "resource management" in the NHS sponsored by the Public Accounts Committee and conducted at the beginning of the 1997/98 financial year by independent consultants, gave QVH a very positive report. Specifically, it found that:

According to Ross, this assessment is supported internally and the trust board is highly supportive of the work of her department, which is seen as having a pivotal role in changing the culture of the organisation.

CASE STUDY 4
Sainsbury sells the importance of self-development

Increased competition in the supermarket sector prompted J Sainsbury (Sainsbury) to implement a major review of its business strategy at the highest levels in the organisation. The outcome was a clear set of corporate objectives that also outline the contribution that can be made by staff development in achieving these goals. Training and development at the company are now required to meet the following three key objectives: increasing the business focus of training, providing staff with new opportunities for development and encouraging employees to take greater responsibility for their own learning.

A key element of the new strategy is a dictionary of Operational skills, which brings together competence requirements for all retail workers throughout the company (see figure 5.4). This has facilitated a structured evaluation of the training needs of workers across the business. The programme is the focus for ensuring that training and development contribute to the new business objectives.

Figure 5.4: Sainsbury's Operational Skills Dictionary

Sainsbury's new approach to training and development also includes a revised and more open procedure to select staff for development opportunities. The company has an ongoing commitment to provide development opportunities for all staff. This is part of the Choices scheme for career development and will be reinforced in the new JS Guild system, which will reward staff who develop themselves and show a commitment beyond the normal duties of their job.

Assessment of training needs at Sainsbury is based on cycles for determining the "performance gap". This involves a form of process analysis marketed by consultants ACT. Typically, organisational change - for example, a new information technology system - will throw up new skills demands, and the ACT process helps to identify these demands and the development needs that are required to meet any shortfall.

BUSINESS-FOCUSED COMPETENCIES

Operational skills were introduced for all Sainsbury's retail staff and management in 1996. They were updated in a dictionary published in April 1997. This sets out the technical competencies for retail posts in the company with defined levels. There are 46 competences grouped under five headings:

Every retail job within the company is profiled to determine its level of demand against each relevant competency and all employees are assessed in terms of the resulting profile to determine individual development plans.

All material used in the operational skills programme is in line with retail sector National Vocational Qualifications (NVQs), and, as these change, Sainsbury's own schemes are revised to keep them in line with the industry standards. Staff are encouraged to "go for" NVQs if they wish, but there is no financial incentive to do.

Management training at Sainsbury has been linked to a competency-based approach for some time. However, the introduction of Operational Skills saw a refinement of management development to ensure an approach which "aims to be consistent across the company and which is part of a coherent whole", says Clare Williams, Sainsbury's training manager.

THE JS GUILD

The JS Guild system will reward employee performance in three areas:

Levels of the award are bronze, silver and gold. Bronze is typically awarded for achieving set levels of customer service performance standards. Silver status would require an additional commitment in the form of involvement in the company's continuous improvement programme. To gain a gold award, participants must show involvement in the community. This may be through charities which the company has itself endorsed, such as Children in Need, or independently. According to Williams, the aim is to reward "team players" and those who take a personal responsibility for their own development. The new system for identifying personal development needs under the Operational skills programme will be used to identify the training required to achieve a bronze , silver or gold award. The JS Guild is open to all retail staff and is entirely voluntary. The awards will not attract a financial incentive.

"We have not done a good enough job in thanking people, in recognising their contribution. But we would not be cynical about that and say that people will only jump through a hoop if you hold a carrot at the other side of it," says the director of human resources and information systems at Sainsbury, John Adshead.⁵²

The rationale for the introduction of the new scheme was in part prompted by the results of an employee opinion poll conducted in 1996. Entitled the Talkback survey, it found that only a minority of employees (41%) thought that the company offered a chance for personal growth and development. The JS Guild is part of a programme to address this concern.

The company is meanwhile in the process of introducing a performance management system that will both identify development needs and provide the basis for performance-related pay awards. This is planned for full implementation in the early part of 1998 and is intended to reward staff who are performing above the necessary level for the job. According to Williams, this will inevitably mean that, in spite of the lack of a direct financial incentive, "Guild members will receive a performance-related payment as they are the company's high achievers".

Initially, the scheme was piloted in two stores. After this pilot it was "substantially revised" to "make it less cumbersome and to ensure that any subsequent staff development dovetails with the Operational skills training", says Williams. When Management Review visited Sainsbury, the scheme was undergoing a further trial in 15 stores.

CAREER DEVELOPMENT FOR ALL

A new system to identify candidates for career development has been introduced in some regions and is to be implemented throughout Sainsbury in early 1998. Each store and region is to have a development committee, consisting, at store level, of the store manager and personnel manager. The job of the committee is to identify staff development needs and those with management potential.

They will then be asked to participate in a development centre to identify their "skills gap" and agree a development plan based on identified weaknesses. All subsequent training will be linked to management competencies. This system, following on from the staff survey noted earlier, is designed to give greater transparency and consistency to development arrangements.

Sainsbury sponsors managers who are motivated to study part-time for a degree in retail management at the Manchester Metropolitan University. Fees for those studying this course are met by the company and students are given some time off. However, they are also expected to sacrifice some of their holiday entitlement to attend the course. The company also has a small number of staff studying for the MBA at City University, which is also a part-time course with costs met by the company.

PROVIDING CHOICES

In 1992, Sainsbury piloted its Choices scheme as part of the then Government's Gateways to Learning initiative, which aimed to provide career guidance to employees to help them to fulfil their potential. Choices was subsequently implemented for retail employees across the organisation. Under Sainsbury's scheme, staff receive career counselling that helps to identify talents and skills that they use outside work and may be of benefit in their jobs. Career development and training opportunities to develop these capabilities are also identified. The system also uses a questionnaire to provide a form of self-assessment to enable staff to identify skills gaps, which, if filled, would enable them to progress further in the company.

Staff are issued with a leaflet in their pay packets inviting them to a seminar in the store. This focuses on the importance of self-development and how personal skills and attributes can be used and developed in the workplace. A light-hearted personal "Cosmopolitan-style" questionnaire helps individuals to identify any transferable skills that they possess.

The leaflet also includes a career guidance voucher, which in 1993 had a face value of £36. The company has subsequently found that ascribing a value to in-house guidance has little meaning for staff, so this figure has not been updated.

In advance of guidance sessions, which are undertaken by store personnel managers trained in counselling skills, participants complete a further questionnaire. This provides the basis for the development of an agreement on the employee's personal strengths and past achievements, areas that she or he would like to develop and any barriers that need to be overcome. Subsequently, a personal action plan is developed which sets out steps that the individuals should take to achieve their objectives. The implementation of the action plan is seen as the responsibility of the individual member of staff in line with the Sainsbury policy of encouraging employees to take responsibility for their own development. The company will fund training courses identified as part of the plan, but these must be undertaken in the employee's own time.

In 1996/97, 11,000 staff took advantage of Choices. A review of the programme conducted in 1996 found that, of the employees who had so far taken part in the scheme 31% had been on courses sponsored by the company. These ranged from computer skills to cake decorating.

A similar proportion had received in-house training. Significantly, managers reported a measurable improvement in performance in 12% of cases. Moreover, only 2% of staff participating in the scheme over the previous three year had left the company, compared with an average annual 17% turnover in the company.

OTHER MOVES

Sainsbury's training department has experienced major restructuring over the past year - a single corporate division now deals with both retail and central training. The work of the "professional trainer" is now limited to behavioural skills training and to the evaluation of technical skills, while technical training is carried out by practising "experts".

For example, individual store staff are trained to become coaches in checkout operations. Typically, there are 10 coaches in an average-sized store. The effectiveness of the training provided is subject to evaluation by the training department. Competent coaches receive a pay premium as compensation for the extra effort involved.

The move to the use of "hands-on" coaches is the result of an assessment that it is difficult for professional trainers to keep up to date with rapidly-changing technology.

MOVING FROM SKILLS BREADTH TO SKILLS DEPTH

For many years, Sainsbury's retail staff training was focused on multiskilling in order to increase workforce flexibility across the company. However, more recently research into customer needs has identified a requirement for increased technical skills in specialist departments, such as bakery, meat, and wines, beers and spirits. As a result, the company has started to send relevant staff on external training courses, rather than relying on internal development, as was the case in the past. Sainsbury's intention is to create "professional trades people".

So, in contrast to many other employers, the current training and development strategy is aimed at increasing the specialist skills of some of the workforce, rather than broadening their skill base to make them more flexible.

EVALUATING THE CHANGES

Sainsbury has monitored the level of operational skill that staff possess against metrics such as mystery shopper ratings and sales levels. Although, as Williams points out, it is difficult to attribute a direct causal effect, mystery shopping ratings have improved in areas where the Operational skills programme has been put in place.

In addition, the introduction of the store development committees has tended to make staff more confident about the objectivity of the selection process for further development opportunities.

LESSONS

The biggest lesson that trainers at Sainsbury have learnt is the importance of making sure that all learning activity is justified in terms of the needs of the business. This is seen as essential if the costs of an ongoing training resource are to be justified at board level. "It is essential that the priorities of the training department should reflect those of the business," says Williams.

The experience of developing the JS Guild programme has also shown that it is important not to make learning opportunities too complicated and to ensure that any new scheme is linked with those that have gone before. Equally importantly, every feature of the company's human resource management should support the espoused vision. As Williams puts it, "we need to spell out the links between performance measurement and skills training and to make the link between training and work objectives, otherwise staff will see training as separate from what they do on a day-to-day basis."

THE FOUNDATIONS OF THE SAINSBURY'S LEARNING STRATEGY

The major "restrategising" of the company in 1996 brought with it greater clarity of business objectives. Previously, "although the company knew where it wanted to go it didn't always tell its staff," says Williams . The new business plan has made it easier for the training department to devise training and development strategies which are directly linked to business objectives. The IiP framework is seen as providing a useful framework for this process. Indeed, while the company as a whole is currently working towards accreditation, some individual stores have already achieved it.

The issue of raising the profile of learning opportunities and of encouraging staff to want to learn is a live one for Clare Williams and her department. She considers that the use of workplace coaches is in itself having a positive impact on the attitude of staff to the learning opportunities provided by the company, encouraging them to make the best use of them - "they are being trained by people who are just like them, so the process is more comfortable and brings it closer their day-to-day work". The Choices programme also seeks to highlight development opportunities and encourage staff to take these up. In a further push to encourage staff to embrace learning, Sainsbury will be holding a learning event throughout the company in 1998.

1     Burgoyne J and Germaine C (1984), "Self-development and career planning: an exercise in mutual benefit?", Personnel Management, vol 16 (4).

2     Hall L (1996), "Lateral thinking", Personnel Today, Training supplement, October, pp.20-21.

³     Storey J (1994), "Management development", in Sisson K (ed), Personnel management: a comprehensive guide to theory and practice in Britain (2nd edition) (Blackwell, Oxford), pp.365-396.

4     Ford T (1997), "Open learning and business - the obvious partnership", foreword in The World Open Learning for Business conference and exhibition (WOLCE)catalogue.

⁵     Chalofsky N (1990), "Professional growth for HRD staff", in Nadler L and Nadler Z (eds), The handbook of human resource development (Wiley, New York), pp.13-14.

⁶     IRS (1996), "Exxon Chemicals: worldwide education and training", Competency, vol 3 (4), p.2.

⁷     Tamkin P, Barber L and Hirsh W (1994), Personal development plans: case studies of practice, Institute for Employment Studies, report 280, p.36.

⁸     IRS (1997), "Tesco experiments with training credits", Employee Development Bulletin 86, February, pp.7-9.

⁹     Tough A (1979), The adult's learning projects (2nd edition) (Learning Concepts, San Diego).

¹⁰    Making P, Cooper C and Cox C (1996), Organisations and the psychological contract (British Psychological Society, Leicester), p.282.

¹¹    Mumford A (1981), in Armstrong M (1995), A handbook of personnel management practice (5th edition) (Kogan Page, London), p.506.

¹²    IRS (1996), Performance management, IRS Management Review2, July, p.21.

¹³    Bevan S and Thompson M (1992), in Armstrong M (1994), Performance management (Kogan Page, London), p.39.

¹⁴    IRS, see note 12, above, p.36

¹⁵    Ibid.

¹⁶    IRS (1996), "Merit pay and grading at the BBC", Pay and Benefits Bulletin 396, March, p.7.

¹⁷    Armstrong M (1994), Performance management (Kogan Page, London), p.507.

¹⁸    Harrison R (1997), Employee development (Institute of Personnel and Development, London), p.351.

¹⁹    Individual commitment to learning - employers' attitudes, Policy Studies Institute for the Employment Department (1995).

²⁰    IRS (1995), "New Directions at Royal Mail", Employee Development Bulletin 67, July, pp.10-13.

²¹    Royal Mail Directions booklet.

²²    IRS (1995), "Development centres", Employee Development Bulletin 71, November, p.16.

²³    Ibid.

²⁴    IRS (1996), "Guinness Brewing Great Britain: supporting a broadbanded system", Competency, vol 3 (4), Summer, pp.5-6.

²⁵    Abbot J and Dahmus S (1992), "Assessing the appropriateness of self-managed learning", Journal of Management Development, vol 11 (1), p.50.

²⁶    Tamkin et al, see note 7, above.

²⁷    IRS (1996), "Personal responsibility for learning at Eastern Group", Employee Development Bulletin 80, August, pp.14-15.

²⁸    IRS (1995), "Absent friends: trainer support in open learning", Employee Development Bulletin 72, December, pp.5-6.

²⁹    Ford, see note 4, above.

³⁰    Industrial Society (1997), Learning organisations, Managing Best Practice 33, March, p.10.

³¹    IRS, see note 28, above, p.5.

³²    IRS (1997), "Standard Life launches new open-learning centre", Employee Development Bulletin 89, May, pp.12-13.

³³    IRS (1997), "ScottishPower opens the doors to learning", Employee Development Bulletin 94, October, pp.12-15.

³⁴    British Aerospace (1997).

³⁵    "TSB says Yes to open learning", Personnel Today, Training supplement, February 1995, p.5.

³⁶    IRS, see note 32, above, p.13.

³⁷    Allred J (1995), Open and flexible learning in public libraries: the second baseline survey 1994, Information for Learning (Wetherby, west Yorkshire).

³⁸    IRS (1994), "Unison launches training initiative", Employee Development Bulletin 57, September, pp.14-15.

³⁹    IRS, see note 28, above, p.5.

⁴⁰    Malone S (1997), How to set up and manage a corporate learning centre (Gower, Aldershot).

⁴¹    Tamkin et al, see note 7, above, p.2.

⁴²    Industrial Society, see note 30, above, p.10.

⁴³    Policy Studies Institute, see note 19, above.

⁴⁴    IRS (1996), "Work-based learning at Riverside Community Health Care Trust", Employee Development Bulletin 80, August, pp.11-14.

⁴⁵    IRS (1996), "Personal development for the whole workforce", Employee Development Bulletin 82, October, pp.4-6.

⁴⁶    Tamkin et al, see note 7, above.

⁴⁷    Ibid.

⁴⁸    IRS, see note 12, above, pp.40-41.

⁴⁹    SHL 1995 survey of UK appraisal practices, SHL Ltd (Ditton).

⁵⁰    The Queen Victoria Hospital NHS Trust Resource Management - end of project review and final report. Consultation draft July 1997.

⁵¹    Ibid.

⁵²    Personnel Today, 10 April 1997.