Sec 16 Training For Quality

TRAINING FOR QUALITY
1
INTRODUCTION
e to job responsibilities. In the past decade, however, there has been a shift in t
ding pace. All of these combined have made a strong case for shifting our approac
2
Sec 16 TRAINING FOR QUALITY
INTRODUCTION
dership training for the executives. Traditionally the training person or department w
nd education has extended throughout the organization, increasing the scope of activit
3
MANAGEMENT OF THE QUALITY TRAINING FUNCTION
ent of quality training in this environment. Some key components of this are :
ity for its implementation and effectiveness. This accountability and responsibil
4
matter may be internally sourced, or may be outsourced to external quality traini
5
cal expertise on quality, much the same as key sales professional would share thei
erstanding of who the customers are, what their needs are, and what the features s
ssociates on tools and techniques that they will never use. It was commonplace in
6
ses these key areas: quality awareness, executive education, management training, t
ement, planning, and control ;customer focus; measurement and data collection; rewa
7
ucation was treated in the same way as other quality training. Executives were ask
8
s do not necessarily need to know all of the technical how-to’s of a particular su
ge of the implementation time line.
ive professional one-on-one guidance.
9
ne.” Peer lecture adds a sense of reality to the quality subject matter. This is be
the materials, tools a plan to engage in a systematic quality education process.
d choose specific subject matter and applications which are the most appropriate.
10
rom first-line manager (just below the executive level) to supervisor. Individuals
n to include quality improvement tools. Additionally, they must be trained to be s
and analyze data and present the resulting information for decision making. for “
11
plan for quality has been developed and not implemented. The reasons stated are in
12
tes a segment of its overall training budget to training for quality. Identifying
13
ere is, however, one constant trend: quality departments and the training function
a learning barrier.
is deployed throughout the organization. These training professionals report dire
14
developing its own tactics and deploying them within their areas of responsibilit
lity system implementation as facilitator, team leader, or team member.
ffective supplement to their training efforts and already lean quality department
15
CURRICULUM DESIGN
ents of this process are:
aining) to determine how to best apply the training to their business environment
ledge. These learning events may take the form of problem-solving exercises, role p
16
CURRICULUM DESIGN
f instructions describing how to evaluate the content and design. The pilot testin
17
IMPLEMENTATION AND DELIVERY
ms, and facilities; the establishment of physical infrastructure and information t

.
structional techniques will be most appropriate for delivering the training. Train
18
as student contact time). Instructor-led delivery requires, on the average, 6 to 1
19
e within an organization. This decision usually depends on two factors: (1) the siz
tter knowledge and training skills, such as related to business process design and
training using hired facilitators, trainers, and consultants. One favored source
20
nt (learner) performs the job about which the training is provided under the supe
s needed for quality management tools.
instructional packages, or conducted with the help of trainers, facilitators, ment
21
ch method, however, requires a skilled instructor to plan, prepare, present, and fa
time
22
e of making learning easier and more effective. TBT includes computer-supported le
from which a student may learn.
hnology-based, and CMI can function independently as the manager of the instructio
23
tutorial, exercise and practice, instructional games, modeling and simulation, and
advanced subjects by groups of individuals who could not otherwise attend a learn
24
atories provide the means to achieve this. They are specifically designed for educ
25
ter teleconferencing. Over the past decade, three major developments have contribu
sectors
, empowered cross-functional teams, and self-directed work teams
d the collaborative implementation of projects within and among work teams.
as become a key strategy and, in many cases a prerequisite for achieving business
26
ically dispersed, or whose schedules conflict. Collaborative work practices allow
s learned, resulting in a specific work product. In either mode, participants can
27
ts is not obvious from casual observation; it has to be measured in terms of spec
, on-the-job application)
28
EVALUATION
quality. Good training begins with an accurate assessment of training needs, and t
ality-related training is to enhance the value of the products and services of th
29
EVALUATION
, since evaluations also must be continuously improved and adapted to changing ne
ually obvious enough to generate alarm signals to those directing the training pr
30
THE FUTURE OF TRAINING FOR QUALITY
quality occupies a special position in the spectrum of training activities, as it
ilding, meeting management, and team facilitation—as necessary methods and techni
solving methodologies will be complemented and enhanced by artificial intelligenc
-quality analysis, activity-based management, and the like).
31

Sec 16 Training For Quality

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Deskripsi Asli:

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Sec 16 Training For Quality

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

TRAINING FOR QUALITY

matter may be internally sourced, or may be outsourced to external quality traini

s do not necessarily need to know all of the technical how-to’s of a particular su

ge of the implementation time line.

ive professional one-on-one guidance.

the materials, tools a plan to engage in a systematic quality education process.

n to include quality improvement tools. Additionally, they must be trained to be s

lity system implementation as facilitator, team leader, or team member.

ents of this process are:

ms, and facilities; the establishment of physical infrastructure and information t

as student contact time). Instructor-led delivery requires, on the average, 6 to 1

s needed for quality management tools.

instructional packages, or conducted with the help of trainers, facilitators, ment

ch method, however, requires a skilled instructor to plan, prepare, present, and fa

e of making learning easier and more effective. TBT includes computer-supported le

from which a student may learn.

ically dispersed, or whose schedules conflict. Collaborative work practices allow

s learned, resulting in a specific work product. In either mode, participants can

ts is not obvious from casual observation; it has to be measured in terms of spec

ality-related training is to enhance the value of the products and services of th

, since evaluations also must be continuously improved and adapted to changing ne

quality occupies a special position in the spectrum of training activities, as it

solving methodologies will be complemented and enhanced by artificial intelligenc

-quality analysis, activity-based management, and the like).

Anda mungkin juga menyukai