Exploding Myths and Exploring Resonances to Exploit Opportunities

Those myths and uncanny resonances

                                                  Image source: https://uk.pinterest.com/pin/444167581972455024/

Some myths around learning in the workplace and uncannily significant resonances between overseas and local research uncover significant opportunities for both the people and the organisations involved in Supply Chain Management. 

3 Preconceptions About Workplace Learning

According to Taub, three preconceptions which need to be managed in order to remove constraints in the path of successful training implementation are:

1.          People don’t have time for learning

People will make time, given the right motivation. As adults we are willing to invest in our learning and development — but only if convinced that it will improve our work performance, advance our careers and/ or enrich our lives. So, if it is clear that the training on which we are embarking will help us grow, evolve and stay marketable, the time will be available.

2.          Traditional training methods, like classroom training and even online courses no longer work

Whilst it is true that people, especially Gen Y’s, learn from a great deal more sources than previous generations, formally based training is very necessary:

•       Where courses are based on registered qualifications delivered by accredited providers, the qualifications acquired are becoming increasingly important to the marketability not only of the individuals concerned but also the institutions which employ them.
•       Formal courses which are structured in accordance with sound learning principles promote strategic thinking and impart problem solving abilities which are key in the Supply Chain Management environment.

It is however important to keep in mind that speed, simplicity and easy access are key to the success to any form of learning and it is here perhaps that academia has much to gain from studying these characteristics of less formal learning.

3.          The HR/ learning function owns responsibility for employee development

Once responsibility for learning is shared between the learning function, managers and individuals by building and managing a mentoring culture that empowers those in the workplace to discover and connect with the right people, experiences and resources, this is where effective training begins.

(Taub, 2016).

Where Should Our Training be focused?
Having established what works for workplace training, we find that there is an uncanny resonance between research carried out in the USA and the Barloworld Logistics supplychainforesight survey.

In the USA the leadership and professional competency requirements for future Supply Chain managers were found to be as follows:

• Ability to negotiate and collaborate with value chain partners
• Ability to collaborate across functions
• Ability to drive or support diversity and inclusion
• Strategic thinking and problem solving
• Ability to manage global/ virtual teams
• Ability to persuade and communicate effectively
• Leading and developing others

(Melnyk, S. and Seftel, C.M., 2016: Quoting Deloitte’s Third Annual Supply Chain Survey 2015)

Looking at the 2015 supplychainforesight survey we find that, in order to achieve the key strategic Supply Chain objectives which were identified below, very similar competencies are needed:

• Identifying and managing change
• Growth and expansion into new markets
• Increasing flexibility, agility and responsiveness
• Sustaining existing areas of financial returns
• Introducing new products and services
• Using supply chain as more of a competitive advantage
• Investment in business intelligence

(Frost & Sullivan. 2015: 17)

We can see that the role of Supply Chain Manager is moving from tactician to strategist. This represents huge opportunities for organisations which, in order to take full advantage of them, need to position themselves through effective, focussed training.

How do you promote learner engagement in your workplace training?

How is your workplace training aligned to or company strategy?

What competencies are needed to make your organisation more really fly?

References

Taub, T., 2016 3 Big Myths About Workplace Learning. http://www.clomedia.com/2016/08/01/3-big-myths-about-workplace-learning/?utm_source=MyEmma&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=CLO%20Today. Accessed 4 August 2016

Melnyk, S. and Seftel, C.M., 2016. The Emergence of the Supply Chain Leader: The Metamorphosis From Tactical To Strategic. Accessed 16 August 2016

Frost & Sullivan. 2015: supplychainforesight 2015: Embracing change for a sustainable future. Barloworld Logistics, Johannesburg

The prickly Supply Chain Management training dilemma

Pacifying the sleepless Training Manager

Something which keeps Training Managers in Supply Chain Management from sleeping at night is to know when to carry out training in house and when it is best left to others. This article aims to provide more restful nights to those people.

The arguments

As with any insourcing vs outsourcing debate, there are a number of pros and cons on both sides when it comes to Supply Chain Management training.

Those supporting insourcing point to the variable standards of outsourced training, the financial instability of some private providers and the difficulties in assessing what is on offer. They argue that, by using their own subject matter experts, they can build training interventions which are not only targeted on the competency needs of their particular organisations, these interventions can also be tailored to their unique organisational culture. Their most compelling arguments are that only insourced training is flexible enough to meet their companies’ changing needs (very important for the uncertain environment in which we operate) and that it is only such training which can be used to transfer those skills which give the company its competitive edge.

On the side of outsourcing, proponents suggest that the formal qualifications offered by outsourced training institutions are essential to both employees and organisations as objective benchmarks of competency. The economies of scale achievable through outsourcing are also very persuasive and added to this is the question of the core business of the company: are we in the business of providing supply chain solutions or training?

The merits of each argument are what give Training Managers sleepless nights: it is suggested that the dilemma can be resolved by looking at it from a different starting point.

Strategy is key

The primary driver of the organisation’s training strategy is the overall strategy of the business.

A thorough assessment of the business performance needs and desired bottom line outcomes leads to the identification of the competency requirements for each division within the organisation.

We will find that many of these competencies are generic to the organisations which occupy each space in the Supply Chain for example logistics and transport, procurement and supply, manufacturing operations, warehousing and distribution. Included here is a very strong requirement for compliance with local and international legislative measures, industry standards and local regulations, often bringing with it the need for formal, externally accredited courses.

It may be argued that the common nature of these technical competencies should indicate that training towards them should be outsourced. There is however a powerful counterargument that says it is excellence in these basics which gives companies their competitive edge and that there is therefore a strong case for insourcing the “company unique” aspects of this training.

It is also true that organisations need to raise the bar in terms of rigour, evidence, and more structured and scientific approaches to identifying, assessing and developing leaders, a process which needs to start earlier in potential leaders’ careers. Leadership training may have its foundation in generic courses but it is the bringing of those competencies to bear in strengthening the culture of the company and achieving active participation of employees in the values of the organisation that can only be honed within the organisation itself.

The Supply Chain Manager’s solution- an exciting trend

A pillar of successful Supply Chain Management is collaboration – this principle applies as much to education and training.

There is an exciting trend developing: to address the problem of the unemployability of institutionally trained graduates and to enhance the marketability of their offerings, public and private learning institutions are collaborating with businesses to an increasing degree in both the design and sharing of responsibility for the delivery of programmes which blend theory with practical, workbased experience.

When combined with accurate assessment of each individual’s skills gaps, this integrated model offers an end-to-end designed learning experience.

Discussion

• Are you able to align your training strategy with your company’s overall strategy?
• To what extent have you quantified the balance of insourced/ outsourced training in your organisation?
• Are there providers in your area who have shown an interest in collaborating with your company?
• Are you in need of more information regarding education and training collaboration in the Supply Chain Management field?

Does training quality really matter?

Staring down the barrel

Implementation of substantially increased compliance criteria has exposed many in Supply Chain Management organisations to the risk of ruinous B-BBEE Scorecard downgrades. Training is however not necessarily the silver bullet solution. 

What’s the difference?

Since Skills Development is a substantial pillar of the B-BBEE Scorecard (yielding a potential 25 points) it could be argued that each organisation should simply be purchasing as much of those training products which yield the highest Scorecard points as possible.

Could the enrolment of targeted employees on this type of training be an unproductive waste of money?

Consider -

Recent research carried out on a South African 3^rd Party Logistics Provider showed that there is no correlation between what supervisors believe to be the competence levels of their team members, what those same team members perceive of their own competence levels and what those competence levels actually are in terms of a battery of objective assessments. There is no reason to suppose that this is any different for any other company in this industry - we don’t know what we don’t know as far as competency levels in our companies are concerned.

Many training products on offer address the needs of industry as it currently exists. A striking feature of Supply Chain Management is the staggering rate and magnitude of change in this field. This “new normal” challenges the competence requirements of organisations on almost a daily basis.

A common approach to training on the part of organisations and providers is to throw learners over the classroom and/or eLearning wall into the workflow in the hope that what they learnt will magically transfer to successful job performance. It doesn’t.

So, whilst we and the Government want to believe that meeting B-BBEE Scorecard Skills Development targets will transform our company, our industry and the country, this will not happen.

The Business Case

Whilst there is no doubt that B-BBEE Scorecard compliance is a ticket to the game as far as doing business in South Africa is concerned, such compliance needs to be structured in such a way as to meet the needs of the business.

So what are business needs?

A recurring theme in Barloworld Logistics’ supplychainforesight over a number of years has been that a lack of relevant skills has been a major constraint to business survival and expansion. There is thus strong correlation between the needs of business and B-BBEE Scorecard targets.

To answer the business case however, a more refined approach is suggested and these are the questions which need to be answered -

Do we know our current competency status? Is each job in the company defined in accordance with a competency profile? Do we have an objective tool to measure each employee against the competency profile of their job and thus identify the competency gaps which must be addressed to meet the organisation’s current competency needs?

Our company strategy - have we unpacked the competency requirements? In other words, do we know what competencies we are going to need in order to achieve our future goals?

If we know this, are we able to define what each area of competency actually means to us in terms of the knowledge, skills and attitude which will be needed to meet these requirements?

In order to begin this journey we need to develop an “exit strategy” for each current job -  a clear picture of the industry trends and technological developments which will transform that particular job and how each individual needs to be equipped to meet those changes.

This strategy will be achieved when everyone in the organisation is performing effectively in their jobs at every changing moment of need. That’s organisational competency.  It should be the driving reason why we do all we do what we do. By achieving this, B-BBEE Scorecard Skills Development compliance becomes an intended consequence, not a strategic objective.

Points to ponder

• Are we training for competitiveness or for B-BBEE compliance?
• Is our company’s skills development policy aligned to our long term strategy?
• Have we defined each job in terms of a competency profile?
• Do we have the tools to objectively measure the gap between the competency requirements of each job and the actual competency of each job incumbent?
• Do we know how the structure and responsibilities of each job must change in order to meet future customer needs?