Interviewer Would you say that staff in your organization are encouraged to take a ‘systems thinking’ approach?

Jane Well, we don’t explicitly encourage staff to take a systems thinking approach. But if you look at the content of some of the training programmes, a lot of it is geared towards them thinking about the implications of what they do outside their immediate area of responsibility. So, for example, our finance training is very much about getting people to think about how their decisions impact on the bottom line, the profit and loss account, and the implications for other departments. We also have one particular course that all staff in one of our divisions are expected to attend, and it’s designed to put people’s jobs into the wider business context, so that they can see the bigger picture. So, from that point of view, yes, to some extent we do try to get people thinking more broadly than their immediate remit, but it’s not a specific or an explicit aim.

Interviewer So, how would you describe the approach to learning and training across your organization?

Jane The approach that we take is that we divide training into job-specific training, and then more generic training, and we approach the two areas in slightly different ways. The majority of our training is job-specific and we get information on what this should be from what we call a bottom-up approach, where we look at individual training needs. This is normally triggered by the appraisal process, and the delivery of the training then tends to be driven by line managers. They’ll often provide that training on the job. So if people need to learn specific skills like design or marketing, that happens locally. Departments often find their own training providers and they have their own budgets to do that, so we take quite a decentralized approach in that way. The generic training would be related to skills that are relevant right across the business, like management skills, communication skills or IT training. It’s also training in response to any current themes that relate to particular business challenges. So, for example, at the moment there’s quite a big push on project management training because of the need to manage projects more effectively. This kind of training is often generated by senior management, so it’s more of a top-down approach, and the training itself is more centrally-driven.

Interviewer What are the advantages and disadvantages of doing things the way you do them?

Jane Well, I think one of the advantages is that because, primarily, we have a very decentralized approach to training it means that each division gets what it needs from the central training department. So we’re quite responsive to their needs and that’s a real advantage. Also, we provide a range of learning opportunities, not just courses. We have reading materials, DVDs, books, and also online links that people can use We’re trying to make training more selfdirected. Line managers don’t always have time to spend with staff, talking in detail and planning their training, so the more we can encourage people to take responsibility for their own development, the better. It’s also an advantage because it means staff take ownership of their own learning and, therefore, they’re much more likely to put more effort into what they’re learning – and that learning is more likely to stick and be transferred into their jobs. Disadvantages? Well, from our central point of view, one drawback is that we get stretched very thinly, because rather than being able to take a one-size-fits-all approach right across the organization, we end up customizing a lot of what we do for each division, which is great for the divisions, but it’s not always an effective use of central resources