An Assessment of the Issues Associated With Internal and External Training Provision

¶ … House and External Training

Most firms will pride some type of training and development for their employees. This may be provided formally such as dedicated training sections and development programs, as well as informally though peer-to-peer-based learning. Formal training may be provided in-house, or though external providers, each approach has advantages and disadvantages. Each will be considered separately.

In-house Training

In house training refers to training that is provided directly by the employer. For larger firms there may be a dedicated training department, which may be provided through classroom-based learning, on-the-job training and development, and may also be provided or supported though elearning (Jones, Beynon, Pickernell, & Packham, 2013). For smaller firms it is more likely to be task focused, with on-the-job training and support provided by peers and management (Jones et al., 2013).

By developing in-house training, there are many advantages. Firstly, the firm is able to control the way training and development are delivered. This includes the timing, as well as direct control over the content and quality of the training, and the ability to ensure the organizations culture is supported and maintained the delivery of the training (Buchanan & Huczynski, 2011). The main advantage is for a firm customize training for its own needs, which may optimize the value that is created when employees utilize their skills. Where firms have unique processes, internal process be a necessity, whether it is the way a hamburger is made at McDonalds or the implementation of a safety protocol at NASA; this knowledge and practice of skills cannot be provided by an external party. Internal provision may also increase flexibility in the method and timing of learning and allow a firm to respond quickly to training needs, increasing the ability of the organisation to adapt.

Disadvantages include the cost which may be associated with setting up and maintaining training programs. This may be cost effective for large firms with the ability to gain economies of scope and scale, but it may result in high overhead costs for smaller companies. The cost of providing in-house training may also present opportunity costs, especially if a firm is unable to afford high quality staff, or does not need a full time trainer. Even where there are experts, it is unlikely that a single person will be an expert in all areas of training required for all employees. This means that in-house training may not always provide the greatest level of knowledge. There is also the potential disadvantage that qualifications gained by the employees may not be recognised externally, and in some cases, where unique processes are utilised, may not provide value is moving to another employer.

External Training

Many of the advantages associated external training overcome the disadvantages linked to in-house training. External training may provide on demand services, so company does not have to invest in setting up and maintaining internal training services, and therefore reduce investment in one area, which may be invested elsewhere, this is not only use of financial resources, the consideration of other resources such as the use of office/production space. Furthermore, by utilising on demand services, there is a greater ability to ensure all trainers have suitable management skills for the subjects/skills they teach. For example, utilising an external trainer different teachers may be utilised for HR competencies, sales and marketing, and engineering, where the firm may not have found it viable to employ these different teachers (Jones et al., 2013). External providers may also facilitate a greater level of skills recognition, for example providing access to accredited training which may be utilised by the organisation to demonstrate the high calibre of their staff. With the utilisation of external training providers, the organisation also avoids the bureaucratic overhead associated with running a training division, including recruitment costs, and additional legal liabilities related to employment law for the additional staff.