I spent the day at Learning Technologies yesterday in london. I had a lot of great conversations across current customers, a couple of clients we're currently onboarding, and a few prospects. The thread running through all of it was the same: what is competence?
A particular prospect described their annual compliance training cycle. The content itself isn't the problem, It was more the delivery to their dispersed teams, and every single person needing to pull 12 hours out of their actual job to sit through courses that are by their own admission, largely the same as last year, and the year before and probably the year before that too… Multiply that across the organisation and you're losing thousands of hours a week to a process that compliance are perfectly happy with, so nobody has the mandate to change it.
L&D want to modernise it. Every year they try. Every year compliance signs off the existing content because it already pass's the audit, so out it goes again.
What we've found across the board is that the conversation moves along when you change what "proven" means. Risk teams are nervous about moving away from what auditors already accept, and understandably so. “if we don't run the training, we can't demonstrate compliance”. But there's a different thing you can demonstrate. Not "completed course on X date" but that someone is genuinely competent and confident with the policy.
I'd love to hear your take on this topic - How did/do you convince compliance/risk that proven competency in Cognexo is just as or more valuable than a copy and paste one size fits all course every year?
Comments 0