Tuesday, September 23, 2008

Is training an investment?

With the economic downturn in full swing (assuming, that is, that downturns can swing) and training budgets as ever looking vulnerable as the first candidate for cuts, I'm beginning to hear once more that well-honed argument that training should be regarded as an investment and not an expense. As if that was all there was to it! "Oh, please accept our apologies for this misunderstanding," say the senior management team in unison, "how much money is it that you want?" Some chance.

Let's leave aside for a minute the accounting argument about what actually constitutes an investment, and just use the term in its everyday sense. Surely most forms of expenditure incurred by an organisation could also be viewed in this way:

  • accounting is an investment in future financial security;
  • customer service is an investment in customer loyalty;
  • marketing is an investment in future sales growth;
  • research and development is an investment in new products;
  • and so on;

... which means that learning and development is not really that much further along the path in securing funding than all these other departments.

Technically, it's hard to see how training could be seen as an investment in the accounting sense, because employees (other than professional footballers) are not assets that can be sold - in fact they can leave anytime they want, and frequently do. At best, they can be regarded as one of an organisation's intangible assets, contributing to the 'goodwill' of a business. But no-one has ever dared put employees on the balance sheet, and they probably never will.

But let's just go with the idea that training can be seen by senior management as an investment. Is that enough to open the purse strings? I think managers might have a few questions:

  • What sort of return can we expect on this investment?
  • How long will it take for this return to occur?
  • How confident can we be about this return?
  • Would other measures (hiring and firing, mergers and acquisitions, new incentives and disincentives, better working conditions, improved tools and equipment) yield better returns in terms of performance improvement?
  • Would we get a better return if we just left the money in the bank (assuming we can find one that's safe enough)?

Very few organisations have so much money that they can respond positively to  every request for funds, so the process of budgeting is inevitably competitive. Unfortunately, being competitive is not something learning and development departments have historically been very good at. They need to learn and quickly.

6 comments:

  1. Clive - this is a great a timely post. Do you feel that at times small to medium sized companies can be too lazy to perform a lean sigma ROI assessment to see how have a more skilled workforce is benefiting their company?

    I think the majority of companies aren't interested in ROI or assessing the value of training if it's going to take too much work. Just keep doing the same old same old...

    ReplyDelete
  2. Lazy maybe, unsure how probably, and afraid of what the results may reveal possibly.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm intrigued by the football analogy.

    What would it be like if people were employed like professional footballers? Fixed term contracts, transfer fees between employers, with recruiters taking a cut as the agents.
    There are of course premiership footballers and league 2 footballers. Aren't we part way there?
    There are differences of course -poor performing footballers don't generally get big payouts to leave a club.
    If employee contracts were more like fotballers contracts - would employers then see people as an investment - and their training as a way to maintain or increase the value of that investment when they come to sell them?

    It'll never happen of course - but what would it be like if it did?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous3:14 PM

    Great insights! I don't necessarily agree with your comparisons between training and other activities like finance and customer service. In thinking about these kinds of things, we have to identify operating costs to keep the business running and investments in improvements to the business. If training is going to just keep things going, then it is like finance or customer service. But if it is intended to lead to changed and improved performance, then it should be analyzed as an investment--and you are absolutely right, if you call something an investment then it should be subject to a full analysis of the expected return.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous9:23 AM

    i agree to you. Training is an investment. But the point is the employee for whom we are taking so much of the effort, should be loyal. As in he shouldn't be leaving after he is done with it. At a times training is loss too... if the trained guy leaves the work. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  6. But you have to be smart about it.
    If you get trained for some unneeded skill, than you are just wasting your money

    Funds Pedia

    ReplyDelete