In-house training might not be enough
By Brian Kreissl
Most people who have followed my blog over the past couple of years will be aware that corporate learning and development programs are a major interest of mine. I am a passionate advocate for lifelong learning, and I believe organizations need to provide meaningful learning and development to employees in order to attract, retain, engage and properly deploy them.
Workplace learning needs to be a mixture of formal training, on-the-job learning, coaching, mentoring, reading and development opportunities such as secondments, temporary assignments, cross-functional project teams and stretch assignments. Much of this learning should be of an informal nature.
Having said that, internal training and development doesn’t always have the same cachet as external learning programs provided by colleges, universities, professional associations and vendors in relation to industry certifications. Even where learning and development is required for the job with respect to organizational and industry best practices, methodologies, techniques, norms, rules and compliance requirements, employees care deeply about the transferability of their knowledge, skills and competencies.
Retaining and engaging employees
Paradoxically, one way to retain and engage employees is to ensure they remain marketable externally. Employees who don’t feel they are being given the training and development opportunities they need will vote with their feet.
While few people these days remain with their employers for 20 years or longer, ensuring they remain marketable by maintaining their skills and providing the credentials necessary to further their careers may just make them decide to stick around a few years longer or even remain with the organization long-term. People who feel trapped in their jobs and careers are more likely to leave the organization or become disengaged in their work.
Some employers worry that providing relatively expensive learning and education to their employees may cause them to leave. This is definitely a risk — particularly when considering expensive programs like MBA or other graduate degrees or executive development programs.
However, employees who aren’t given financial and other types of support from their employers for their education are likely to leave anyway. While it is possible to structure reimbursements to support employee retention and require individuals to repay all or part of the costs of their education if they leave within a certain period of time, I wouldn’t support any type of “golden handcuffs” that force employees to stick around against their wishes.
Why try to retain disengaged employees who would rather be elsewhere, even if you have invested a significant amount in their learning and development? That’s not to say organizations should be foolish in reimbursing employees for any and all education completed, without a cap or any relevance to their current or future roles, or decide to fully fund just about anyone who decides to pursue an MBA.
Tuition reimbursement programs
The best way to help manage external education expenses while giving employees options is to implement a tuition reimbursement program for external education and learning. It may also be necessary, for example, to have special programs for high-potential employees in the form of individual development plans and funding for executive education programs. Many employers also provide funding for professional memberships and certifications.
With respect to tuition reimbursement programs, they can help support learning that isn’t provided in-house and provide assistance to employees who want to further their education. Such programs are appreciated by employees and can help to ensure they remain marketable. After all, no one knows when their job could end.
Program guidelines can help eliminate duplication with in-house programs or irrelevant education (if that is even a goal because helping employees to become marketable elsewhere can be a brilliant retention strategy in the short- and medium-term, particularly with entry-level roles). They can also help to manage costs.
Another important goal of tuition reimbursement programs is to attract talent who may not necessarily have the academic credentials typically associated with the role. Given the shortage of skills in some fields, it may be a way to entice underqualified candidates who nevertheless show considerable potential to join the organization and further their education on the employer’s dime.
According to a recent survey conducted by Robert Half Finance & Accounting, 80 per cent of Canadian finance executives surveyed were willing to fund education for employees without a degree. The same study noted that a degree might not be necessary for securing a role in accounts payable, accounts receivable, credit and collections or payroll.
