Welcome
This blog is for those who are involved with the 2006 PacifiCorp Design and Development competition for graduate student teams. I am a representative from Advanced Systems, Inc. You probably already have the problem statement. It gives you a lot of information, but I will take some time during the month of March, 2006, to answer your questions more directly. I expect to view this blog several times each week, so your answers to questions shouldn't have to wait too long. You should be aware that this isn't Email. What I tell you is being told to everyone.
You should also be aware that some of ASI's products are top secret, and if the questions start to venture into territories that are classified, I will stop that line of inquiry. Now you know the rules. I'm looking forward to answering your questions.
The real work of the blog happens when you click "comments" to ask your questions.
- Clientrep
You should also be aware that some of ASI's products are top secret, and if the questions start to venture into territories that are classified, I will stop that line of inquiry. Now you know the rules. I'm looking forward to answering your questions.
The real work of the blog happens when you click "comments" to ask your questions.
- Clientrep
posted by ASIclientrep at 2:04 PM
41 Comments:
Hi Mr. Clientrep,
My first question would be - if we are to post questions, our only option would be to post as "comments", right? I mean, we cannot start a new post with our questions, or could we?
Thanks!
Jingli,
That is correct. I will answer questions the best I can related to the structure of ASI. Questions and answers will be public, and any team may use information revealed in this forum.
What type of Internet Access do the divisions have? Broadband, DSL, Cable, Dial-up? Furthermore, is there a VPN (virtual private network) in place?
..Jim
Jim,
ASI is a substantial corporation. It has a small IT department at its HQ, but does not consider itself a high tech leader in terms of what it has in place for interoffice communication. Servers are located at all divisional plants. These are networked so that everybody can communicate with everybody else. Most of the communicating that we do is via Email. I would describe what we have as a WAN composed of 7 LANs.
This is physically implemented on leased lines because of security concerns. The management here is somewhat conservative, and believes that VPN, even with the best of encryption, puts information into a publicly accesible network.
In each of the regional HQs, there is one room controlled by the human resources department for the sake of videoconferencing. In each case, the room is equipped with webcams and LCD projectors. Most of the use for this room has been for centralized top down meetings with high level execs from national HQ broadcasting policy. It doesn't serve to do much for educational purposes. And it is probably seeing use less than 10% of plant open time.
I hope this answers your question. Feel free to ask again.
Please clarify: is the video conference room not available for training? or 80% for Training? Thanks.
Additionally: What is the current make up of your training facility or room? What development tools do the trainers have (hardware and software)?
Thanks.
..Jim
Jim,
The video conference rooms at each facility are used for videoconferencing activities less than an hour each day on average. That leaves about 7 work hours each day that it is NOT used. Scheduled videoconferences are about 60-70% synchronous with all 7 stations online in contact with the central station at the same time. There are a few conferences to clients that make up the remaining 30-40%. The physical size of the rooms changes by region but the smallest room used for videoconferencing putposes has a seating capacity of 54. So the rooms are pretty big.
As far as development tools, there isn't much that anybody can't get ahold of in hardware. Computers are PCs and are up to date. Computers used for development are on a 2.5 year replacement cycle. Developers generally work at client computers and store project work in networked shared drives.
Software is whatever is needed. There is nothing that is special high end software, but the majority of both web based and DVD based training material is developed using the Macromedia studio. Other than that, all computers have Microsoft Office suite. Individual developers are invited to add any software that they own provided their output file formats are made compatible with existing software. For instance, we have six different sound editors that people are using, but all of them produce .wav and .mp3 files. All software is licensed. When someone brings in a new favorite program, we buy a copy for that person to use.
I hope this answers your question.
Jim,
Almost forgot your 1st question. Training could get the videoconferencing rooms which are in the HR offices. Usually one day advance notice is required.
In practice, there's a circuitous reason why they don't. Office space allocated to departments has been based on usage. We have our own training rooms which, if we used any less than we do, we might not have renewed in the following year's budget.
If you look at the product data sheet, you'll see that train-the-trainer varies by region from 12 to 30 days per year. Those are the days that the training rooms are used. If training shifted into another room, we may be seen as not using the training rooms enough to keep them. So unless there's a clear need for a videoconference, we don;t usually schedule one.
Kind of sad but honest.
Hi, we are Team Bloomington from Indiana University. Here are the first three of a series of questions we have. Thanks in advance!
1. The problem statement says “ASI designs, installs and maintains satellite-controlled focus systems”. What are satellite-controlled focus systems? Could you explain how your products are used by your customers?
2. The problem statement says “for security purposes, many employees of ASI have gone through security screenings”. As of now, how many of your expert trainers and trainers have gone through security screenings? What is the process of assigning trainers for military clients?
3. How is training development and implementation currently coordinated within and between the divisions of ASI? Are there standardized practice/process across the ASI divisions in training development and implementation?
Team Bloomington,
Item 1.
Your first question is the one that I most hoped to avoid because of security issues. As a result, what I can tell you about satellite controlled focus systems (SCFSs) is pretty limited. We prefer to have the problem treated as a black-box type problem. The names of our divisions may give you an idea of what types of highly classified knowledge are involved in a SCSF. As the name would imply, someone on the ground needs to control the way something located at some other place (air, ground, ocean, etc.) is deploying its sensors to gather information. Imagine yourself standing in a field with a set of binoculars. Your have a trade off between how much of a zone you can see and how closely you can see something. The zoom knob controls the tradeoff. Put briefly, an SCFS is a multimillion-dollar zoom knob turner that is located on a satellite and can turn zoom knobs on the satellite as well as just about any place else where a signal from the satellite can be received.
I'll try to describe the use of an SCFS in a non-military context - fighting forest fires. Presume there is a large-scale forest fire in a mountainous region, and that someone has decided to put it out. The way that people would go about this is to drop water from tanker planes onto the hottest spots of the fire. To find those hottest spots, planes fly above the fire at commercial aviation altitudes, pointing heat sensors at the fire zone. The water filled tankers are much closer to the ground. The sensors on the high altitude planes are used to guide the pilots of the low altitude planes to the hot spots. This needs to be done because the low altitude pilots cannot see where they are going very well when flying into the smoke coming from the fire. They don't get much information by looking out of the plane, but are instead relying on an image like a flight simulator on a computer monitor also in their field of view. A triangulation algorithm occurring on board a satellite produces this image. The SCFS equipment on board the satellite is constantly adjusting the imaging equipment on the high altitude planes to produce the most usable image for the pilot of the low altitude plane. This image must include fire parameters and geographical mapping so that the pilot doesn't fly blind into a mountainside.
Item 2.
At least part of this is easy. As of now, all expert trainers and all but one trainer, hired at motors and relays in January, 2006, have high level security clearances. Background checks on the one new trainer are expected to be completed before the end of April, 2006. There is very low turnover in the training group. We recognize that out trainers have both training and content matter expertise. As a result, we make many efforts to retain them. The general manager of the training division assigns the trainers to military clients. The decision to assign a trainer is based on considerations of subject matter expertise and availability. Some of our trainers are on a first name basis with some of our military clients, and client requests are also considered. Geographical considerations play a part as well. We think that it is an important part of our policy that our people are able to be home weekends and holidays.
Item 3.
I don't know if I can give you a policy, so I'll give an example instead. We have a client in Minnesota who is upgrading a SCFS so that it has newer and better servo motor functions. Most of the engineering changes were developed jointly between the Arlington and Pine Lake engineering groups. Master trainers in Arlington and Pine Lakes train three of the 6 trainers from the Electronics Development division. At the end of their training, our three trainers are able to uninstall, disassemble, inspect, test, reassemble, and reinstall the new servo motors. By the time they arrive at the client site in Minnesota where they will be assigned, the master trainers have certified them. Because they are likely to be the only three people who ever train clients on the product, standardization doesn't play a big role in their preparation.
Hi, I want to send out surveys to your trainers and trainees, can I do that?
Yao
idtyao,
For the month of March, I'm the only one providing information about the company to competitors. If you anticipate using surveys as an information strategy after you are awarded a contract with us, that would be OK.
For the time being, you are selling our management on your plans.
Yao,
It must have been late when I wrote that last comment. I forgot that you are part of the company already. It stands to reason that you will be able to communicate with other employees via Email, put a survey onto a network server, or even hand out paper surveys that you collect (of course, that would only get you one location.)
The parameters of this competition prevent you from conducting an actual survey in practice. That presents a problem to you. Consider your resolution of the problem - if you really need survey results - a part of the solution you propose.
Thank you for the quick responses, Mr. Clientrep. Here are three more questions. Thanks again!
4. We understand that the master trainers serve as SMEs , but can you please describe in further details the instructional design and development process that's currently being used by ASI? Who design the training materials? Who else are involved? What are the roles of the different people involved in the process?
5. Please explain how important the master trainers and trainers are for ASI.
6. Do the trainers have other tasks in the organization than conducting training at end-user sites?
4. We understand that the master
trainers serve as SMEs , but can you please describe in further details
the instructional design and development process that's currently being used by ASI? Who designs the training materials? Who else are involved? What are the roles of the different people involved in the process?
Because we conduct most training as hands-on face to face sessions at
client sites, we provide real human beings and products rather then
extensive multimedia. To really describe the process of training
development at ASI, you have to go to the product-engineering phase.
Before a product is created, engineering meetings are held in the
divisions with all the master trainers in attendance. As salespeople present pre-development product specs, engineers and master trainers are both hearing about it at the same time. That means that the master trainers know what the product is supposed to be before it even exists.
Subsequent engineering meetings are attended by at least one master
trainer. During product development, master trainers meet regularly
among themselves to decide on strategies for instructing clients how to work with the new products that are being developed.
Prototype demonstrations are attended by all master trainers at the location for each prototype of a product. As prototypes are tested in
engineering, at least one master trainer spends at least two hours
shadowing the project's lead engineer. Master trainer notes are one of the main sources of materials for product training manuals. Other main sources are sales specification sheets and images taken from photographs that the master trainers take of the prototypes at
different stages of assembly.
5. Please explain how important the master trainers and trainers are for ASI.
As you read their job description above, you should guess that master
trainers are extremely important. Engineers tend to speak to each other in ways that non-engineers usually don't understand. Master trainers seem to have cracked the code of tech-speak and are very good at turning it into English.
As you see in the answer to your next question, the trainers have a
similar importance.
6. Do the trainers have other tasks in the organization than conducting training at end-user sites?
Trainers spend between 50 and 90 days each year at client sites. This
figure is based on anticipating workweeks that start Monday afternoons and conclude Friday mornings. On average, trainers spend 44 half days a year in actual transit. Their schedules are written with the thought of actually needing 36 half days for travel, but extra days seem to crop up due to unreliable transportation conditions which are out of our control.
Here's what a typical breakdown of a trainer's yearly time contains:
* 70 days at client sites
* 22 days in transit
* 15 days in all-day or half-day meetings involving company matters
* 25 days in train the trainer sessions
* 25 days in material development
* 43 day miscellaneous including:
* quite a bit of the miscellaneous time is spent in a "junior partner" role related to the master trainers.
* Trainers are required to provide feedback on how instructional strategies are working. This is used for ongoing material revisions.
* Trainers are encouraged, whenever possible, to create material revision proposals that are presented to master trainers for approval.
A sizable portion of trainer miscellaneous time is taken up in the creation of reports and materials related to these proposals.
Thank you for your quick reply and your great help. I understand the difficulty we are confronting. I have posted the Questionnaires online, which you can download from this link . Please read these questions. If you think they are workable, please pass out the link to the “end-users” as well as training staffs. If there is a problem, please let me know. Thank you!
Yao,
The information posted in the ASIclientrep blog is meant to be public so that we can get more information out to all potential competitors. I cannot allow a survey that is addressed to you. What I can do is work with you to do the following:
1) You change questions that are non numerical into a Likert scale so that numerical values can be filled in
2) I will circulate it to staff and ask for answers (I don't expect a high rate of return)
3) I will repeat questions, describe scale, and provide mean and standard deviations as part of a post in the blog
I strongly recommend revision of your last question. Among the items you are including as "authoring tools" are 2 comunication methods, a design standard, and a term describing a category of products. If you allow this wide a definition of authoring tools, you open the door to every piece of software available. This would make any answer meaningless.
- ASIClientrep
Ok Mr. Clientrep, a few more questions again. Please feel free to let us know if you need clarifications on them. As always, thanks a lot!
7. How many end users does a typical client of yours have? Can you provide us with the numbers of end-users in each of your client companies? (No need to identify your clients, of course.)
8. How many end users does ASI train on average per year?
9. Are you only training first-line operators, or do you also train their supervisors?
Thank you for reminding me of the rules. I have reorganized the questions and here is the link where you can download the questionnaires. Please post the frequency on this blog.
I still have a question for the trainers. What do they think the most difficult thing when they give the training? Thanks.
Yao
Yao,
The link is much better as far as a survey that can be deployed. Would it be OK with you if I set up numerical interpretations of the numbers such that Stongly Agree = 1 and Strongly Disagree = 5, with other values ranging between?
The chart about the use of tools doesn't look as if it will get the kind of information you want. My guess is that everyone will say that they use Email more often than anything else, but I don't see how that would help you make a case for anything. I suggest you look at the wording of this item and talk it over with your teammate/partner to get the right question before I deploy it.
Jingli,
A couple of your last questions seem to refer to the divisional data sheet that was part of the problem statement. The numbers of client personnel trained is included there. If you are looking for some clarification of what these numbers mean in terms of typical class size and length, I'll provide that information if you ask.
As far as training supervisors rather than front line operators, it doesn't happen very often, but it seems to happen with smaller clients. When we get to the military, you can guess that most anybody on any front line is staying with the job for the minimum length of time. That is where there is the highest turnover. We get about a year's work out of a trained focus system operator before the person has moved on and we have to train someone else. But in a situation like the fire service, we get some of the same people on a regular twice a year basis for system update training.
I hope that's an answer. If the data from the problem statement needs to be enhanced to answer your first couple of questions, let me know what you need.
Thank you, ASIclienttrep, yes, please use the numbers as comfortable as you can.
For the questions about trainers, my purpose is to ask what kind of training software they use for their training work and what they think the most difficult part of traning. If it is possible, they can jot down the answers and give that to you.
Thank you!
Yao
Yao,
OK,
I'll circulate the survey and come back with some numerical results. I'll put a cutoff of Wednesday the 29th as the last day for getting the survey back to me. What comes back then, I'll post by the end of the month.
As far as software usage goes, Jim Thomas asked the question earlier. The gist of the answer is that we do not develop in a standard package but that most training product development is done in the Macromedia studio. CD or DVD based products are usually done in Flash. Some of the trainer/developers think that the scripting language in Flash provides a lot of flexibility for making products with a high level of interactivity.
Here's an answer to a question you didn't ask - At training sessions, most of the training is done from CD-ROM or DVD-ROM rather than from the web. Our trainers carry their own notebook computers for presentations. Presentations are done without any network hookup. We do this because it allows us to keep track of the computers that have had the training materials stored on them.
Mr. Clientrep,
Thanks for answering our earlier questions. We have a few more questions regarding your answers to those questions. We’d appreciate it very much if you could please clarify.
1.In your answer to our question #2, you mentioned that “the general manager of the training division assigns the trainers to military clients”. So does this mean there actually is a training division in your organization in addition to the seven divisions shown in the problem statement document? If so, could you please describe its location, composition, and most importantly, its function?
2.In your answer to our question #3, you mentioned that standardization doesn’t play a big role in preparing the trainers. To us, this has answered the part of question 3 which asks about the standardization of training implementation.
Another part of question 3 asks about standardization of training development. What we meant was, is there a certain protocol/model that master trainers and trainers use when developing training materials? In other words, do the training materials have common structural features because the trainers follow the same protocol in developing training materials? (What we mean by structural features is, for example, do the training materials all have similar sections? Do they all use the same fonts, etc.?) Or is the development of training materials all idiosyncratic to the master trainers so there are no common structural features to the training materials across the divisions? Put it in a third way, do master trainers know how other master trainers develop training materials and to they follow the same methods to produce materials with similar structural features?
We probably have over-explained this question - hope these are not too confusing.
3.In your answers to our question 6:
a. You mentioned that “quite a bit of the miscellaneous time is spent in a ‘junior partner’ role related to the master trainers”. What does this mean?
b. You also mentioned that “trainers are required to provide feedback on how instructional strategies are working”. Our question is: where do trainers’ feedbacks come from? Do trainers use a particular instrument to evaluate their sessions? (If they do, can we get a copy that?) Or are their feedbacks mostly based on their sense of how the training went?
4.Your answers to our questions 7 and 8 pointed us to the problem statement’s data sheet. Thank you for that. But we think that the data sheet numbers answered our question 8 only.
What we meant by question 7 was, can you give us an idea (or even some hard numbers) on the sizes of your client companies. We wanted to get a sense of how small your smaller clients are, how big the bigger ones are, and are your clients mostly smaller ones, or bigger ones.
5.As you indicated in your answers to our questions 7, 8 and 9, yes, we would like to be provided with information on your typical class size and length. In fact, we do have a whole set of questions regarding how training is conducted at end-user sites. So, in addition to the typical class size and length, please also explain:
a. Are the classes always conducted inside a classroom provided by your client? Or is training also conducted on-site where your products are installed (for example, in the client’s plant near the equipment on which your products are installed)?
b. Do the trainers always use the real product/parts to explain things? Or, considering the expenses of the products or safety, do they use simulators or models of the products instead?
c. Based on your experiences, how valuable are the hands-on experiences to your customers and how crucial are they to the effectiveness of your training?
We realize these are a lot of questions. We appreciate your spending time giving us the answers. Thanks!
Jingli,
You have many questions indeed. I will include an answer to only qustion 1 in this post, and will repeat your questions with answers for the next 4 posts. Otherwise the answers would become unwieldy (or moreso).
1.In your answer to our question #2, you mentioned that “the general manager of the training division assigns the trainers to military clients”. So does this mean there actually is a training division in your organization in addition to the seven divisions shown in the problem statement document? If so, could you please describe its location, composition, and most importantly, its function?
Many of the trainers, and I number myself among them because of former experiences, think it's unfortunate that ASI is a business. But the business side of life pays the bills so we treat it as a necessary evil. There are three people in the Wabash Corporate HQ who arrange most of the logistics of getting us where we need to be. They have no training experience. One MBA is technically the manager of national training. Unless there are bumps in the road, nobody who actually DOES training deals with HQ. I think that they tend to commodify (treat us like a commodity) us a little bit, but they're willing to back off when more than one trainer tells the training mgr about wrong decisions. You may be interested to know that several master trainers were offered and turned down the national manager position. It would be a pay cut and loss of status.
2. In your answer to our question #3, you mentioned that standardization doesn’t play a big role in preparing the trainers. To us, this has answered the part of question 3 which asks about the standardization of training implementation.
Another part of question 3 asks about standardization of training development. What we meant was, is there a certain protocol/model that master trainers and trainers use when developing training materials? In other words, do the training materials have common structural features because the trainers follow the same protocol in developing training materials? (What we mean by structural features is, for example, do the training materials all have similar sections? Do they all use the same fonts, etc.?) Or is the development of training materials all idiosyncratic to the master trainers so there are no common structural features to the training materials across the divisions? Put it in a third way, do master trainers know how other master trainers develop training materials and to they follow the same methods to produce materials with similar structural features?
It's a basic that the training situation will have instructors and students brought together. Special material is developed for instructors. It always contains and surpasses what is available for students. That is, it's bigger, contains lesson plan outlines, mentions learning objectives, and provides deeper resource material about the product. Of course, the trainers were involved in the assembly of all the materials, including the instructor versions, so this results in much of the exclusive material taking the form of notes. Students always get a 3 ring binder with a minimum of a subject related timetable and subject specifications. Additions to the basics have included printed matter about the products in the past, but most of what is handed out to students is now on a DVD. This is both encrypted to play only on specially designed players and copy-protected. We don't care much about formatting or fonts. There is typically quite a bit of illustrated material with labels.
In practice, we describe the model we use after we've created the training sessions. The nature of the product and its usage has tremendous influence on what gets developed. We have a number of standard features like corporate logos and title pages. These are so second nature that we don't even think about them. Master trainers in each division have a library of material to share with others in their same division. And they help each other, so there's commonality that results from the sharing of ideas. But it's essentially idiosyncratic.
3. In your answers to our question 6:
a. You mentioned that “quite a bit of the miscellaneous time is spent in a ‘junior partner’ role related to the master trainers”. What does this mean?
Good master trainers aren't dropped into the company like manna from heaven. They're developed from the trainers. They assist master trainers in all aspects of the master trainer job, moving progressively to higher levels of responsibility and autonomy. Eventually, they become master trainers if they choose to follow this path.
b. You also mentioned that “trainers are required to provide feedback on how instructional strategies are working”. Our question is: where do trainers’ feedbacks come from? Do trainers use a particular instrument to evaluate their sessions? (If they do, can we get a copy that?) Or are their feedbacks mostly based on their sense of how the training went?
We do Kirkpatrick level 1 and level 2 assessment. There are some standard "how'd you like the training?" forms and assessment items contained in the training session that measure mastery of the tasks and understanding required for trainees to perform their jobs. Experience has shown us that the level 2 knowledge transfers to the job, but we do not measure this.
4. Your answers to our questions 7 and 8 pointed us to the problem statement’s data sheet. Thank you for that. But we think that the data sheet numbers answered our question 8 only.
What we meant by question 7 was, can you give us an idea (or even some hard numbers) on the sizes of your client companies. We wanted to get a sense of how small your smaller clients are, how big the bigger ones are, and are your clients mostly smaller ones, or bigger ones.
Largest Client: U.S. Army. With Reserves and National Guard included employs over 1.1 million people
Smallest client: Unnamed microwave relay tower construction company employs around 3500 people
We hold many more training sessions for our largest clients than for our smallest. That makes the military by far the largest client for our training services. The population of just the army includes about 1 million persons who are in high turnover situations. As a result, we have a standard curriculum for military users of our products to provide adequate background knowledge. This is why the mix mentioned in the problem statement of training types is around 60/40 basic/technical. If we didn't count the military, we'd have almost all training as technical.
5. As you indicated in your answers to our questions 7, 8 and 9, yes, we would like to be provided with information on your typical class size and length. In fact, we do have a whole set of questions regarding how training is conducted at end-user sites. So, in addition to the typical class size and length, please also explain:
a. Are the classes always conducted inside a classroom provided by your client? Or is training also conducted on-site where your products are installed (for example, in the client’s plant near the equipment on which your products are installed)?
We always begin a class in a classroom or some type of group meeting facility provided by our client. If the situation calls for it, we can go to ground based equipment.
b. Do the trainers always use the real product/parts to explain things? Or, considering the expenses of the products or safety, do they use simulators or models of the products instead?
We almost always stick with the real equipment rather than simulators. Over time we've found that our equipment costs are nearly 95% in development. So if we have a circuit that works or a die that stamps out mounting bases, the creation of additional production units is minimal compared to the cost of "tooling up". Because we have repair as part of the training in many instances, we end the sessions with working and calibrated demos back in our hands. They are checked by the instructors, and if they aren't working, the students aren't certified until the ARE working.
Another device we use is a simulated problem injector. This works to provide troubleshooting exercises by making it appear that problems exist when, in reality, the unit is working fine. This makes the working unit its own simulator of its potential problem states.
c. Based on your experiences, how valuable are the hands-on experiences to your customers and how crucial are they to the effectiveness of your training?
That level 2 evaluation in question 3b wouldn't be all that meaningful if the client personnel didn't actually do what we're training them to do. We certify that they "know" and "can". Customers are happy with it. The information we get from them isn't compiled for analysis, but is anecdotal confirmation that the transfer of learning to the job is taking place.
Thanks for meticulously answering our questions, Mr. Clientrep! We have a few more this time:
10. What do you do to continue your customer support after training them on a new product? If they have questions or problems during using your product, who do they contact? Do you have a customer tech support division that handles all customer tech questions, or do the trainers shoulder this responsibility?
11. What percent of ASI’s sales revenue is generated from your military clients?
12. The problem statement mentions that “ASI’s largest client, the US military, is pressuring top management at ASI to bring its training into conformance with military standards for distributed learning”. Can you find out for us what the military standards are? If you cannot, how would you suggest that we go about finding these out?
So much for this time, Mr. Clientrep. As always, many thanks!
We don’t have too many questions left ;-)
10. What do you do to continue your customer support after training them on a new product? If they have questions or problems during using your product, who do they contact? Do you have a customer tech support division that handles all customer tech questions, or do the trainers shoulder this responsibility?
We approach an ideal situation in the implementation of our training. Students do not get certified without demonstrations of the required knowledge and skills. This is a very important feature of our overall business strategy. A tech support division would be costly and (if it were run like most consumer level support centers) leaky. It would also be slow in responding - being staffed by people who could, at best, look up information in the same encoded DVDs that are already available in customer facilities. On the few occasions that needed information is not available, trainers field the need for help. Their first resource is the master trainer. And the master trainer's first resource is engineering. If we're stumped at the engineering level, we put engineers onto planes and get them to where they'll do the most good. Engineers accept their positions with the understanding that there may be a 5% travel requirement in emergencies.
11. What percent of ASI’s sales revenue is generated from your military clients?
An easy question: Around 60%
12. The problem statement mentions that “ASI’s largest client, the US military, is pressuring top management at ASI to bring its training into conformance with military standards for distributed learning”. Can you find out for us what the military standards are? If you cannot, how would you suggest that we go about finding these out?
The military is very big on SCORM compliance. You're welcome to Google this. SCORM stands for "Sharable Content Object Reference Model". It's the first word in this that really gives us our problems. Part of our package is the customizability of our training. SCORM is looking for reusable learning objects. And we don't like reusability. The way we look at things, nobody else is going to develop our training. We don't want our images, processes, or methods getting into the hands of anybody outside of our control. So we don't make learning objects that are meant to be interchanged.
Another problem with SCORM is that it demands that we categorize the student experiences in training on difficulty scales. We think this is great for educational institutions, but that's not what we're out to become. We could work with SCORM standards on learning of our control software, but we're much more hardware oriented. And the hardware is unique enough to make the imposition of SCORM standards look like it's pulling us in the wrong direction.
From what we can see, standardization is a top-down phenomenon that some of the higher-ups in the pentagon have endorsed too wholeheartedly. To our way of thinking, the real problem isn't us but them. They need our product and our training - and we know how to produce both. We need their contracts, which we know we'll get because there isn't anybody else they could hire without losing about 5 years of technology advantage.
Mr. Clientrep,
One of your responses mentioned that trainers are required to provide feedback on how instructional strategies are working. You further mentioned that this is used for ongoing material revisions. My question is: who receives the feedback, and who revises the materials.
Thanks,
Jim Thomas
Who receives the feedback, and who revises the materials?
Jim,
Good question! Here's what happens:
Items collected from students fall into 2 categories depending on whether they are smile sheets or actual student assessments. 2 copies are made of all collected on-paper smile sheet feedback documents.
Smile sheets are sent to the national training manager in
Wabash. These are tallied for annual performance review documentation. Trainers keep copies for themselves in case of discrepancies.
Actual learning assessment instruments are kept in a file cabinet alongside the program they accompany. Some of the 43 days of miscellaneous decribed in the answer to Jingli's 5th question are spent with these items doing manual assessment item analysis. This usually exposes the question areas that are giving trainees trouble. With this information in hand, the trainer compares strategy with question and consults with the master trainer to see if the learning processes can be made smoother. Sometimes we find that the strategies are just fine and we have to revise the assessment instruments
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Mr. Clientrep,
These are the last two questions we have. Thanks for having done a superb job all along!
13. The problem statement says CEO and ASI's Board of Directors are concerned that "employees" will not take technologically-delivered learning as seriously. By "employees", do they mean end users or ASI employees?
14. What are the trainers' and master trainers' general reactions to trainig through "distributed learning"? Given the potential and popularity of distributed learning, have you ever considered using it as an alternative option for your current training practice (for either tainer or end-user training) ? Why would you think it will or will not work for ASI?
Hi,
Karen and I are two graduate students from Syracuse University.We heard about this competition a bit late I guess. We know that the time period reserved for the questions about the problem is ending soon, so we may overwhelm you by our questions. Sorry about this in advance.
Here are the questions we would like to know:
1.What is the most time off employees receive? What comes with an entry level position for vacation time/sick time/personal days? Can they accrue personal days? Meaning, every 160 hours an employee works they accrue 1/2 personal day?
2.How much does it currently cost you to do a basic training session using the system you have now?
3. After the trainers have completed training, it states instructional materials are created, are those created together by the trainers? For example, the trainers in Texas and in Minnesota work together to create the same guides to administer to the end-user. Or is it that Texas trainers develop their own guides, and MN trainers develop an entirely different set?
4.Do you have any references we can refer to about SCORM? We are interested in viewing the model you are being pushed towards. If you cannot provide documentation because it is labeled as "sensitive" we understand.
5.What type of incentives(if there are any) do you currently use to keep the employees' full attention to the training?
6.How do you keep track of competency right now? What type of assesment tools do you use?
Thank you,
Nilay & Karen
It's a bit late, but I promised Yao to get his survey information on here. What I put here will be a question, followed by the number of people who responded, followed by the mean score, followed by the standard deviation. Email was sent to 65 people. 16 responded. All are trainers. An early clarification was sent to them that made it clear that where training sessions were described, they were to think of the sessions they attend as trainees - that is to say, the ones conducted by master trainers.
Scores are based on the following scale:
5= Strongly Agree 4=Agree 3=Neutral 2=Disagree 1= Strongly Disagree
1. The hours I spend on the training workshop can improve my work a lot. 16 4.33 1.39
2. In the training workshop, I can find a lot of information very familiar to me.
16 3.28 2.21
3. When I came across the knowledge I known, I can stop the trainer to jump to the next new one.
16 1.37 2.09
4. I prefer a self-paced training rather than a workshop, because I can control my pace and decide what to learn.
16 2.72 2.96
5. I prefer a workshop rather than a self-paced training, because I can discuss questions with other people in the same department.
16 4.11 2.63
6. When coming across training about how to operate a new instrument, I prefer watch the video.
16 2.02 1.66
7. When coming across training about how to operate a new instrument, I prefer have a hands-on practice. 16 4.64 0.87
8. When I have a question, I like to discuss it with the trainer rather than the colleagues in the same department.
16 3.06 2.33
9. I think the web-based training will be more time-saving.
16 3.93 2.54
In addition to the question above a generalized question about tool use was sent. It was phrased as follows:
"Of all the items that you use in developing training products, name three technologies you regard as extremely important. A list of technologies is enclosed in parentheses as suggestions for the kinds of answers that might count. You are not limited to these. They are only suggestions. (paper and pencil, PowerPoint, Flash, Online Chat, Video Conferencing, Email, Breeze, A Course Management System, A Learning Management System)"
16 People responded. Because each wrote down 3 things, a total of forty-eight answers were received. These are included in the following list, in order, with number of mentions in parentheses.
Email (16), PowerPoint, (12), Word (7), Dreamweaver (2), Flash (2), Course Management System (2), Pencil and Paper (1), Elluminate (1), Authorware (1), Project (1), Access (1), Audacity (1), Photoshop (1)
13. The problem statement says CEO and ASI's Board of Directors are concerned that "employees" will not take technologically-delivered learning as seriously. By "employees", do they mean end users or ASI employees?
I could see how this statement could be confusing. Our end users are client employees, so they might be thought of as who the statement is talking about. But with the high turnover rate in our client's labor force (particularly the military), I doubt that there is any credibility problem associated with technologically delivered learning. And our training staff is open to trying new things. So this statement doesn't seem to apply to them. I think the statement should probably be viewed as something said in haste after a meeting in which the folks in charge were voicing their concerns as "what if". I can assure you that there never was an acceptance study done that would have substantiated the concern.
14. What are the trainers' and master trainers' general reactions to training through "distributed learning"? Given the potential and popularity of distributed learning, have you ever considered using it as an alternative option for your current training practice (for either trainer or end-user training)? Why would you think it will or will not work for ASI?
In principle, distributed learning could be accepted. In practice, I doubt that it will be. When you distribute a learning resource, you open up the possibility of it being shared. You are dealing with a company that encrypts its training-related DVDs so that they can only be played on a few special DVD players. This doesn't sound as if distribution is going to fit into our security conscious mindset. In the answer to your question 12, I suggested that we aren't really happy with SCORM. Our problems with SCORM are applicable to the broader range of learning items that fall into the category of distributed.
I won't say that we'll never overcome our objections. I just don't think we will very soon.
Hello Nilay and Karen,
You may be a little late on the question asking time, but not late for the overall competition. And the blog will stay in place, although I will not be attending to it. So the information will still be available to you and other competitors. So welcome! And feel free to take advantage.
You asked about our vacation and personal leave day policy. It is not an accrual formula. Depending on how long employees are with the company, they get a fixed amount of yearly vacation time. Personal leave days are fixed at 2 per year.
Employees take one week of paid vacation during their first year of employment. In years 2 & 3, they get 2 weeks. In years 4 & 5, it's 3 weeks. After 5 years, they get 4 weeks of vacation time each year. But there's no accrual. They either take the vacation in a calendar year or they lose it. Also, vacations cannot stretch beyond 2 weeks without special consideration.
I don't know if we've ever figured out how much it costs to do a basic training session, as you asked in your 2nd question. What do you include in the cost? Is trainer salary included when we'd pay the person anyway? Do we count facility rental when we already own our facility or use a client's? Is there wear and tear on demo units? How do you anticipate the cost? And how much does a demo unit cost when it's fabricated from a process that would have been gone though anyway? I guess I just can't answer your question.
As far as the development of the training material goes, all of your descriptions overplay the teamwork aspect. Presume that a client is being handled by the Minnesota region although the client's most recent purchase was of a product designed by the Texas group. All Minnesota trainers fly to Texas for time working with the Texas master trainers. They all bring back the same copy of the reference DVD to Minnesota. Individual trainers get a workup on the particular students they'll have to train. They pick and choose what's relevant and develop training based on that. In other words, the final training product is the effort of an individual.
On the SCORM standards, they're public. The original standards were developed by a company called Advance Distributed Learning. It's a wide open Google.
I'll have more answers for you tomorrow
Sorry I didn't get to finish with Nilay's and Karen's questions when I was called into a conference. I think what follows addresses the remainder of their questions:
We don't have any incentives to maintain attention or motivation. However, we build in features that foster the components of Keller's ARCS model. Giving attention is an attendee's job. At the level where master trainers are training with field trainers, the understanding by the field trainers that their job will be to go to clients for the purpose of orienting the client personnel to the installation, operation, or service of our products keeps their attention pretty well. At the client end, knowing that their abilities to work with our products are relied on in life and death situations is highly motivating. When people understand what a product like ours does, (like the firefighting tanker plane screen discussed in an earlir post) they naturally strive for a 100% successs rate in anything we would use to assess their abilities.
Because we do not certify until competence at a level negotiated between our trainers and our master trainers has been demonstrated, we consider certifiction to be the equivalent of competence. We vary assessment to match outcomes. Their is almost always a live or simulated demonstration of performance component. In addition, many of the trainers are incorporating tests developed in Hot Potatoes for checks on conceptual understanding.
Asiclientrep,
1. How often do new products get developed?
2. How does that compare with the amount products that must be replaced as they become obsolete, or products that need updating?
Thanks for attending to my 11th hour questions.
..Jim
Jim,
The schedule of development of new product vs. old product update is a little hard to define. It depends on the division as well as on the rate of technology changes outside the company. And it's also a tough call on what we mean by 'new'. Borders between product lines are a little murky in terms of newness. What I mean by this might be described in an example from the software world. Whole category of product: word processor
Big changes over time:
From Wang to Wordstar to Wordperfect to Word. Are these changes "new"? Word processors still do the same thing, just different ways. Then look at incremental change from Word 2.0 to Word 2003. The new version does a lot more than the old one, but it has the same name on the box. So I have a hard time getting a handle on what you are asking.
There will be changes in our products that require new training about every 9 months. About every fifth training cycle, a change is serious enough to require the addition of about 50% more training time. A whole category of product may happen once every 7 - 10 years.
Post a Comment
<< Home