Texas Instruments


Published on

assessing training needs at texas instuments - the process followed

Published in: Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Texas Instruments

    1. 1. Ravishankar Duvvuri, MBA-HR, 2007-09
    2. 2. <ul><li>Founded in 1951 </li></ul><ul><li>Renowned for developing & commercializing semiconductor and computer technology </li></ul><ul><li>About 50% of world’s cell phones use TI technology </li></ul><ul><li>More than 35000 TI patents issued worldwide </li></ul><ul><li>30200 employees worldwide </li></ul>
    3. 4. Circa 1989 <ul><li>What we Preach – </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Assessing training needs rather than assuming we know the needs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Serious needs assessment before quick fixes </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Reality – In some cases time constraints demand quick fixes </li></ul><ul><li>Dilemma - How to assess the training needed to turn technical talent into instructional expertise & how to do it quickly? </li></ul>
    4. 5. Approaches <ul><li>Internal – Training managers liked the idea of training engineering experts to become instructors for new engineers </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Problem faced -Disparity in instructional expertise of engineers </li></ul></ul><ul><li>HR Department – Impressively qualified ppl in 5 branches </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Instructional technology </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Engineering training </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Computer Systems Training </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Management Development </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Support for site training & education administration </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Problem faced -Time constraint & demanding assignments for HR </li></ul></ul>
    5. 6. Solution- Three Tiered Approach
    6. 7. Objective Analysis of Internal Training Needs <ul><li>External T&D specialists engaged </li></ul><ul><li>T&D specialists gather information </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Mission of department </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Perceived training needs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Current & previous steps in staff development </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Roles, responsibilities & team arrangement of people in the branches </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Top Management </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Fund the effort </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Support by encouraging people to participate in study </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Data Analysis leads to Need Assessment Model </li></ul>
    7. 8. Need Assessment Model
    8. 9. Goals <ul><li>Test popular assumptions </li></ul><ul><li>Avoid premature generalizations about what the staff needed </li></ul><ul><li>At the same time, management team wanted to be responsive to engineer-instructor concerns </li></ul>
    9. 10. Step 1: List Of Typical Tasks <ul><li>Drawing on several sources </li></ul><ul><ul><li>ASTD models for excellence study (1983) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Instructional Technology design guide </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Various competency studies such as competency based teacher education </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Mgmt. team reviewed, added & reworded initial tasks </li></ul>
    10. 12. <ul><li>Specialist Team revised & reorganized tasks into 5 major areas of responsibility </li></ul>
    11. 13. <ul><li>Members from each of branches </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Reviewed the task list </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Added items </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Specialist Team & Members add more items during a 4-hour Round Table discussion </li></ul><ul><li>Intent : Provide opportunities to Professionals to define their jobs as they perceived them </li></ul><ul><li>Result : 117 item task list in 5 job function areas – basis for the assessment instrument </li></ul>
    12. 14. Step 2: Staff Survey <ul><li>Assessment instrument administered to all members of department </li></ul><ul><li>Respondents asked to rate </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Each task for its importance to their specific jobs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Their interest in more training related to their task </li></ul></ul>
    13. 15. <ul><li>Computer Analysis of Data : </li></ul>Result of the Analysis: Resulting task list considered representative of the entire HRD department
    14. 16. Step 3: Classroom Observation <ul><li>To make sample observations of experienced and new trainers </li></ul><ul><li>Focus of observation – Instructional Delivery </li></ul><ul><li>Methodology </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Alleviating anxiety by meeting with each instructor before observation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Assurance of keeping the results confidential </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Team of 2 observed each instructor for an hour </li></ul><ul><li>Met again with the instructor to provide feedback </li></ul>
    15. 17. Step 4: Structured Interviews <ul><li>Conduct confidential staff interviews – To ensure consistency between observation and survey findings </li></ul><ul><li>Purpose : To provide in-depth discussion of strengths & areas that require more training </li></ul><ul><li>Result of the Staff interviews were consistent with the formal needs assessment </li></ul>
    16. 18. Step 5: Final Report <ul><li>Results of needs assessment model judged for overall consistency at this stage </li></ul><ul><li>Executive summary outlined strengths & recommended areas for training in each of the 5 sections of the survey </li></ul>
    17. 19. Learning <ul><li>Needs assessment model was comprehensive </li></ul><ul><li>Top management support and inputs from personnel of each of the functional branches </li></ul><ul><li>Clear cut identification of instructor tasks ensured greater instructor involvement </li></ul><ul><li>Meaningful Feedback provided to the training personnel </li></ul><ul><li>Training departments should avoid the temptation of conducting training before conducting a thorough analysis of their needs </li></ul><ul><li>Kirkpatrick model can be used to evaluate training after the need assessment </li></ul>
    18. 20. References <ul><li>The Workplace Learner – William J. Rothwell </li></ul><ul><li>www.ti.com </li></ul><ul><li>Training & development journal, April 1989 </li></ul>