Attention: Skilled participants!
In the initial situation of every HR training session, the first comments of the participants reveal to the experienced trainer the degree of their willingness to participate in this training.
How is it that despite a good training concept, the enthusiasm and motivation for an HR training is limited in one or the other participant?
What unspoken prejudices come with them into the training room? And how do I as a trainer best deal with them?
Let’s take a two-day communication training as an example. On the first day of the HR training, I usually don’t have to wait until we officially start to find out the level of motivation of my participants. Even the way they behave when they arrive, the way they choose their seats, the way they try to discreetly dismiss me and the way they are greeted tell me a lot about whether a participant has chosen this training himself or has been sent here, whether he likes it or not.
Since most people who are not very motivated find direct expressions of displeasure rather socially inadequate at the beginning, they tend to show their displeasure indirectly. They sit down in a corner if possible, avoid eye contact with me, are busy with their smartphones until the official start or quickly leave the training room after securing a suitable seat.
When I ask them about their expectations in the introductory round, I hear variations ranging from: “Yes, I haven’t thought about it yet, let’s see” or “I’ll let myself be surprised”. to: “I don’t even know why I’m here, my boss told me to leave.”
I find comments such as: “Yes, I’ve already been to 1,000 communication training sessions, my desk is full and now I still have to go here” or: “Can’t we shorten the lunch break, then we’ll finish faster?
My personal highlight was a participant in one of my trainings a few years ago who sat silently with his arms folded and his eyes lowered until it was his turn to introduce himself. Then he looked up grimly for a moment and said, “I’m not saying anything here!”
The more “skilful” my participants are, the more skilful I have to be in dealing with them too. A confrontation along the lines of: “There doesn’t seem to be the right working energy in the room here” or simply ignoring these vibrations will certainly lead to an escalation of the rejectionist attitude.
The reasons for rejection are manifold. One reason may be that the participants are already up to their necks in work and the training has an inconvenient time. Other reasons range from a lack of interest in developing oneself in the subject area, concern about wasting one’s time in a pointless activity, lack of knowledge about the purpose and goal of the event, to fear of being tested in a training session, possibly being exposed or judged in role plays.
The grim participant, for example, let out the background of his rejection after I had made good contact with him. In a previous training, he had experienced that the trainer at the time had drawn up a skills profile of each participant after the training without informing the participants, and the alleged weaknesses listed were still being held up to him by his manager years later.
In my experience, the initial uncertainties of the participants are a mix of different causes. Often they receive little information about the background, goal and benefits of the training from the management or HR department. Sometimes they are sent a training announcement. But what does the content actually have to do with them? Some people see the nomination for training as an unspoken criticism. Have they communicated so badly so far that they have to go to “detention”? Unfortunately, a qualified feedback or target discussion for training preparation usually does not take place.
Another cause can be negatively stored learning experiences of the participants from previous trainings or from their studies and school days. Often participants have also experienced that they cannot apply the learning content of the training in their everyday life because it simply does not fit into the departmental or company culture.
And an important reason for many is certainly the feeling of being controlled by others, which produces rejection and even rebellion. This can then express itself actively, for example in criticism of the training, the trainer, in discussions that are unproductive in terms of content or in disruptive behaviour. But it can also be expressed passively in apathy, seeking distractions, not keeping to break times, deliberately not understanding the tasks, etc.
Each of these forms of rejection, if unresolved, are destructive to the success of the training.
To avoid this, here are some recommendations:
Sensible participant selection:
Select participants for a training carefully. Should all employees in a department receive the same training? For me, this is already an indication to listen more carefully.
Training preparation:
In addition to content definition and training design, which are worked out by the client and the trainer, the selected participants should have the opportunity for a preparatory discussion with their manager. Especially in behavioural training, it is important that the participants not only assess their current behaviour themselves, but that they also receive a relevant external view from their work context, which they can then compare with the feedback from the training.
Coordination of content and methodology:
At the beginning of the training, sufficient time should be allowed for the trainer and participants to determine the content and objectives. Here, the planned training design should not be thrown overboard, but the participants should have the opportunity to get involved, to be picked up and to reflect on learning goals.
Freedom of choice: No one is forced. The participants don’t want to do role plays? There are other methods to practice communication. Content needs to be adapted? Trainers must be competent and flexible in order to offer the optimal learning content for the participants present on the topic, even at short notice.