Clear & Present Danger.

(Are Standards Being Eroded By Too Much Flexibility..?)

Erosion, in whatever guise, is a process that for the most part takes place over a long period of time.  So much so that we barely notice it happening.  Whilst on occasion we might be fortunate enough to detect some early indicators, allowing us to take steps to stop it or slow it down, we frequently don’t see it until it’s too late to do much about it.

I’ve found that the same can also be true of standards; wherein a company finds that its products or services, once considered to be hallmarks of excellence, have suddenly become mediocre.  Often causing those in such situations to scratch their heads and wonder how on earth it happened.  Sadly this can often be traced back to too much credence being given to a drip feed of flawed demands made by a vocal minority; which subsequently results in a relaxation or abandonment of time honoured standards, A tiny bit here and a little bit there.

During my time working with The Training Foundation a significant survey was undertaken to gauge the opinions of those that had attended its award winning TAP Certification programme; which I have been privileged to deliver to nationally and internationally based clients for many years.  The primary purpose of the survey was to establish whether or not they needed to make any improvements to the existing format; in recognition of the fact that continued success can only come by virtue of remaining contemporary and relevant in the minds of the communities they serve.  The company also looked forward to obtaining some invaluable marketing material.

Whilst the outcome was exceptionally positive, which myself and others working for the the Training Foundation were confident it would be, there were a very small number of comments that possibly deserved some degree of consideration. There were, however, other comments that caused some degree of consternation. These were mainly around the seeming “Inflexibility” of the TAP Methodology.

I must confess that during my time working with the Training Foundation I have possibly heard such an opinion voiced no more than a dozen times; usually within the first day or two of attending the course.  I’m pleased to inform that for the most part that particular point of view had changed completely by the time the attending delegates had delivered their assessed training session; in that they quickly came to appreciate that the adoption of a highly acclaimed methodology didn’t mean they were required to surrender their personality.

Of the few that seemed determined to hold onto the idea that the TAP Methodology was restrictive or inflexible there tended to be a common denominator; namely the individuals were usually larger than life characters that relied heavily on their charismatic personality when delivering their training sessions.  Nothing wrong with that you might say.  And I’d be the first to agree.  Unless it falls short of measurably achieving the intended outcome.  After all, isn’t the best return on investment to have those in attendance leave with the skills or knowledge having been successfully transferred; along with the confidence to actively employ it?

During my time with these free spirits, who prided themselves on being able to fly by the seat of their pants, it became very apparent why they baulked at the idea of having to operate within any kind of structure.  It must have felt like they were having their wings clipped; or being constraining by seemingly being put into a box. Worse still it probably alerted them to the fact that their effectiveness as a trainer could also be measured; by virtue of the individual assessments that are an integral part of the methodology.

In truth it neither clips wings or constrains.  In the same way that knowing the rudiments or structure of music doesn’t constrain the likes of Joshua Bell (violinist), Joe Bonamassa (Guitarist), Daniil Trifonov (Pianist) and countless other talented musicians. Charismatic trainers without any form of structure can sometimes be likened to Air Guitarists; inasmuch as they can be highly entertaining and extremely captivating to watch but nothing more.  In reality there is no reason why we can’t have both structure and charisma; in that nothing would bore me more than having to sit through a training session that was high on structure but low on style. It is for this reason that the Training Foundation measure the performance of those attending their Training Delivery courses against three sets of criteria; namely Style, Structure and Balance.

It has been my experience that everyone who works for the Training Foundation fully appreciates that we all have to live in the real world; where daily demands, constraints and pressures abound.  When those who have successful completed the certification programme are faced with such challenges, upon returning to their workplace, they will all have to make a judgement call and decide what elements of the methodology to keep and what to drop.  No-one will be standing over them with a stop watch or measuring them against the criteria.  All the Final Assessment seeks to show is that when given the ideal conditions in which to work the person being assessed is able to embrace and measure up against a set of robust, time-honoured and proven standards.

Whilst every voice should be heard, especially when we have actively sought people to share their views, we must remain vigilant; ensuring that the levels of excellence achieved throughout the years of providing exceptional service aren’t eroded.   As you can tell I’m exceptionally proud of the TAP Brand, the thinking behind it and the colleagues I have worked with.  I therefore hope that those hundreds of companies who have thus far signed up to it, and the thousands of trainers who have actively embraced it, will continue to be a shining example to those who have yet to discover it