It’s certainly unsettling to think that the more dominant and successful an organism is the greater its chances of extinction. Perhaps this tenet is as at home in the business world as it is in the natural world. A mere five years ago it seemed that the people development market was ballooning faster than it could be tracked. Training providers and soft-skill experts were multiplying exponentially. Regardless of budget and time frame a single search generated masses of options for the overwhelmed development professional. Booking in training was akin to ordering Chinese Take Out;

I’ll have two of the customer service programmes and a side portion of diversity training please…does that come with a certificate?

Variety of providers was abundant, and the market for off-the-shelf training solutions was burgeoning with demand. 

In the wake of a deep financial crisis that spread malignant tendrils into almost every industry organisations are entering the New Year with a double dose of caution. Things seems to have changed significantly from the glory days of simply phoning and ordering training, and service providers are waking up with a headache to realise that their heyday may be over.

With budget cuts and manifold redundancies the pressure for organisations to deliver against distinct measurables is increasing, as is the pressure on training providers to adapt to the intricacies of the organisational cultures in which they work.

Word on the street is that the generic training is progressively being marginalised by providers who have their eye on the relationship and are willing to put in the time and research to develop something that truly lives up to specific organisational needs.

Organisations are placing more focus on how they embed their staff development in on-the-job experiences, improve real time feedback and internalise training delivery. This is being done primarily in 3 ways:

This is a learning and development model, according to the Princeton University Learning Process and is rapidly gaining popularity. It states:

• 70% of learning and development takes place from real-life and on-the-job experiences, tasks, and problem solving. This is the most important aspect of any learning and development plan.

• 20% comes from feedback and from observing and working with role models.

• 10% of learning and development comes from formal training.

Organisations using this model are placing less focus on product-based training solutions and looking more at how they can change they way people work to augment learning.

The top brass are increasingly being called on to lay out plans to sponsor change within organisations. Senior stakeholders are increasingly being held personally accountable for the success of development projects. 

The result is that external development companies are being more thoroughly vetted and have to be able to ostensibly display value from the offset to key decision makers who often have very distinct agendas and desired outcomes from training initiatives. 

As result a strong understanding of the minutiae of organisational strategy, desired outcomes as well as value for investment offered by external suppliers is more important than ever.

With less liquidity available in many organisations, cost effective means of developing staff are gaining popularity. When formal workshops are procured, they often now come in the form of courses such as Train the Trainer and programmes that focus on equipping internal trainers with the ability to deliver soft-skills training.

In these instances providers whose sole product is standardized soft-skill workshops may find that the value that they add is soon embedded in the organisation effectively making themselves redundant.

These shifts mark a significant point in the history of learning and development procurement. Throughout 2009 many organisations have been moved to pay closer attention to the measurable impact of each initiative, and through doing so are coming out the other side with a sharper focus on what they are looking for in external providers.

It seems that consultative development, which is marked by a long-term collaborative approach between supplier and purchaser, is set to be the new order. Whether it is the asteroid that leads to the complete extinction of product based-solutions is unlikely – there will probably always be a market for off-the-shelf-training, it is ultimately the size of that market which is uncertain.

The nature of the times calls for both providers and users of development services to be more resourceful in their approach. Careful consideration has to be given not only to how development services are sourced but also how suppliers of these solutions continue their own development and remain relevant.