Evaluation Report
Evaluation Report Prepared for: “Introductory Certificate in First Line Management”
Evaluation Report Prepared for:
“Introductory Certificate in
First Line Management”
March 2005
by
Sheffield City Airport
Europa Link
Sheffield
S9 1XZ
Tel: 0114 219 1871
Fax: 0114 219 1872
Background
In 2004, Tees Valley Engineering Partnership (TVEP) approached MacFarlane (Leadership) Ltd with regards to developing a training programme for first line managers within the Engineering sector of Tees Valley.
TVEP prior to this, led research within the engineering sector, examining areas of need for training. Having discussed this with different engineering organisations, the common issue that came out was the lack of comprehensive, quality first line manager training.
It was evident that there was a genuine gap in skills training at first line manager level. Individuals within organisations are promoted from shop-floor positions into management with little or no training in how to be a successful leader & manager.
What was evident to TVEP was not necessarily the lack of theoretical training, but training that addressed the behavioural elements and practicalities of being managers – i.e. how do you actually behave as a manager & what do you do?
From the discussions with us at MacFarlane Ltd, we decided on an approach that would be “behaviour centred” – practical application based, not just theoretical. We wanted to provide a course that informed delegates but also helped change their negative behaviours - i.e. shouting at staff.
The solution was as follows.
The Approach
An observation we would make based on extensive experience is the lack of first line manager training is not just an engineering sector bound issue. This deficiency is across areas within both the public & private sectors. The need for first line manager practical skills training has become apparent across ALL industries, with MacFarlane Ltd increasingly being called upon to deliver the expert skills required.
The course thus selected, followed the professionally accredited route from the “Institute of Leadership & Management” (ILM). We felt that this offered a two-pronged approach – a professional qualification in addition to a specific, practical comprehensive first line manager programme.
The chosen course was the “Introductory Certificate in First Line Management”, accredited at Level 3 NVQ. The format taken would be a combination of a 2- hour course introduction; minimum 34-hours guided learning hours, individual tutor support with on-site mentoring, segment reviews and a final work-based assignment.
Support
One of the key features of the course was group & individual support for all the delegates.
This was not just confined to the guided learning sessions or the specified tutorial time. Each delegate had constant access to the course tutor by telephone & email. This enabled the delegates to contact the tutor throughout the course with regards to any issues they faced. Not only did it allow support after an issue occurred, but delegates were able to contact the tutor for support before taking a specific action, if they wished.
The support mechanism is not just confined to the course period – subsequently the delegates are able to contact the course tutor should they need further support. This is a key feature of the course.
The Course
To fit with individuals working patterns, the choice of half-day sessions gave greater flexibility to the course.
We worked on 11 x half-day sessions, on average once a month (subsequent courses have been once a fortnight). The half-day sessions were the “guided learning” time – the delegates worked on a mixture of peer feedback, theoretical input, practical application & individual coaching.
One of the key advantages of this approach was the peer feedback at the start of each guided learning session. Each individual fed-back on work done/challenges faced/positive actions/issues occurring. This gave the opportunity for ALL delegates to understand that their individual challenges were not necessarily specific to them alone. They soon realised how much in common they all shared, even though they worked in different organisations. At the start of the course, most of the feedback/advice was given by the course tutor, however this balance soon changed & delegates would advise/coach on how they had/would handle those challenges themselves. All the delegates agreed that this was an invaluable part of the process. It gave them immense confidence in their own ability & demonstrated to them that they all faced similar first line manager challenges.
Throughout the guided learning sessions, delegates were encouraged to question/challenge/participate in the theoretical input of the course. What was a key criteria of the course, was that it was not “chalk & talk” – MacFarlane Ltd has a keen understanding that individuals do not learn just by sitting & taking notes alone. It is vital that if the delegates are going to engage with the content & translate it into the workplace, they must have a keen understanding of the content – so delegates soon realise that their participation in the sessions is important to their learning.
At the end of the guided learning sessions, each delegate would have individual work to take back & work-on in their own working environments. We call this “work-work” rather than “home-work”. This was not written work or essays – it was specific actions that individuals would have to work on, that were key to their needs. i.e. dealing with a discipline issue with a member of their staff. They would be required to work on this between the sessions & then return to the following session & feedback on their achievements/issues. This gave a bespoke approach to delegates learning, rather than having to do a generic piece of work, that may not deal with a current challenge. It allowed each delegate to focus on their individual needs.
In the afternoons of the guided learning sessions, the course tutor would visit a delegate on-site at their workplace. They would then sit down & discuss their needs, any issues or challenges they had. This was part of the minimum 2 x hour tutorial time specified by ILM.
This allowed the course tutor the opportunity to see how the delegate worked & meet with their line-manager & feedback on performance.
It also gave the delegate time to bring up anything that they felt they did not want to share in the guided learning sessions. What became very apparent to the course tutor were the sense of pride & the levels of confidence that the delegates had in their workplace. The tutor was then able to reinforce the changes the delegate was making – instilling more confidence!
Assessment
To meet the requirements of the “ILM” course criteria, each delegate had to complete 4 x “Segment Reviews” & a “Work-Based Assignment”.
The segment reviews consisted of a series of short questions (no more than 4 x per segment review), that delegates completed after relevant segments. The segments chosen by the course tutor were specific to the delegates needs. We wanted to use these segment reviews to reinforce key learning areas that were highlighted by TVEP & the delegates.
Each segment review lasted only 10-15 minutes, and was completed after the relevant guided learning sessions. This course produced a 100% pass rate on ALL segment reviews (see results table) – with the external verifier from ILM confirming that all were above average.
In addition to the segment reviews, the delegates had to complete a 1000 x word “work-based assignment”. This allowed them to explore an area at work where they could influence change. They put this process into practice within their own working environments & then reported back. What was vital was that this piece of work was worthwhile, that it was not a “hoop-jumping” exercise. Each delegate was able to focus on a need within their own environment that they wanted to address. It was not a requirement that they completed this change, for the work-based assignment, but they had to look at what they wanted to change & how they were going to action it. All the delegates were allowed to choose their own topic & then confirmed it with their course tutor.
One of the concerns with any professional qualification is that delegates do not have the time or motivation to complete assignments. What became apparent was this motivation was not lacking from any of the delegates. All became keen to work on this change, as they understood the necessity of it within their workplace.
The course tutor agreed to work outside of the guided learning hours with the delegates. As part of the ILM course criteria, each delegate should have an additional 2 x hours tutorial time. As discussed before, each delegate was visited at work & given tutorial time on-site, in addition they then met as a course group, outside of the guided learning time, & worked with each other & the course tutor on their work-based assignments.
In addition to this time with the delegates, each delegate emailed drafts of the work-based assignments’ to the course tutor, who would then advise them on changes they should make to the presentation of the content. On average, delegates submitted their work-based assignment three times! This was an individual’s choice – not a requirement of ILM.
Delegates from one organisation, who provided 3 x delegates on the course, actually asked the course tutor to visit them on-site when they were working on their work-based assignments’ to help with changes to be made. The course tutor was able to work this into their diary to allow a couple of hours one afternoon.
Results
To gain the professional qualification, the delegates have to gain at least a 50% pass in all the segment reviews & the work-based assignment.
The delegates results were outstanding. This gave them an additional confidence, as some of them had not done a piece of written work since they had left school 20 years previously!
Below show the outstanding results:
|
Delegate |
Segment Review 1 |
Segment Review 2 |
Segment Review 3 |
Segment Review 4 |
WORK-BASED ASSIGNMENT |
Pass/Fail |
|
1 |
100% |
92% |
100% |
92% |
85% |
P |
|
2 |
92% |
67% |
100% |
100% |
66% |
P |
|
3 |
100% |
67% |
75/% |
83% |
68% |
P |
|
4 |
92% |
100% |
92% |
100% |
80% |
P |
|
5 |
100% |
83% |
95% |
92% |
87% |
P |
|
6 |
67% |
83% |
83% |
67% |
79% |
P |
|
7 |
92% |
83% |
100% |
92% |
84% |
P |
|
8 |
100% |
75% |
75% |
92% |
89% |
P |
|
9 |
100% |
84% |
75% |
100% |
87% |
P |
|
10 |
100% |
75% |
92% |
92% |
68% |
P |
ILM Feedback
All the delegates’ work was both internally verified (by MacFarlane Ltd) & externally verified (an ILM verifier).
The key to the delegate’s results is the external verification process completed by the “ILM”. No delegate can gain the qualification without the External Verifier’s agreement.
The external verifier concurred with all the marks of the delegates. In addition the External Verifier made the following comments on the report to ILM:
“Evidence of a very well received training course – very good quality of work delivered.
A very good quality of training consultant used.
Excellent feedback from course members.”
In conclusion to these comments, the course has been commended to “ILM”.
Delegates Feedback
Towards the end of the course, one organisation asked their delegates for feedback on the course so far, following is the exact feedback they gave:
“The behavioural course we have been attending with MacFarlane Ltd, initially I was very sceptical & wasn’t quite sure what the course was about & where it was going. It is definitely not a chalk & talk course (more of a discussion & not at all intense) a very different way of learning.
After a few sessions I found the course enjoyable & still look forward to attending it. I have learned to be more positive & confident when talking to the client & own team members. The course covers Problem solving, decision making, briefings, meetings, giving feedback (positive & negative), psycho-geometrics (personalities) & the basic management process & as these sessions are mixed with different companies it is good to here other peoples views & arguments.
Not much could be done to improve the course as it is quite relaxed, flexible & informal.”
“My first impression of the course was that it would not benefit me in any way. However as time went on I found that the subject matter was getting more interesting and I found myself changing my approach towards the customers and how I respond to the client.
I feel the scheme is good for people in my position who need to approach the client with diplomacy but still need to be firm, with the final result of getting the job done.
The course has changed my behaviour in respect to understanding the clients’ point of view.”
End of Course Feedback
The following are the exact comments that delegates fed-back with at the end of the course. This was in addition to the previous unsolicited feedback from two of the delegates to their organisation.
If No – Why not? What could/should we have done?
No comments recorded.
What were the strengths of the course?
“It covered a wide spectrum of topics & issues. Sections & topics were not over-bearing or unmanageable!”
“The format & the way the course was delivered.”
“The methods in which were used to teach us to problem solve & decision make.”
“Good open discussions on topics. Everyone has opinions & it is good to hear others take part. Good to see other companies have similar problems.”
“Open discussions with other companies. Interesting to see/hear other people’s views & problems whilst at work & how they were dealt with.”
“It has taught me how to manage people & situations more effectively.”
“The informal way we were taught, backed-up by site visits and the way the tutor was always available on the phone or by email. THANK YOU!”
“Easy to understand ALL ASPECTS.”
What were the weaknesses of the course?
“Sometimes the sessions clashed with my work schedule.”
“I personally thought there were no weaknesses in the course.”
“No weaknesses.”
“None.”
“Not many choccy biscuits.”
“None.”
“None that I can see.”
“None.
How would you rate the course trainer?
“Excellent. The sessions were fun & enjoyable, lessons didn’t drag and weren’t boring.”
“Excellent. She had a definite way in approaching the work content & was very good as ‘weighing up’ all the individual personalities on the course.”
“Excellent. She is excellent at communicating to us & made us feel at ease.”
“Excellent, because I now realise that my approach to situations & meetings was wrong.”
“Excellent. Good humour – more talk than chalk.”
“Excellent. Very helpful & informative.”
“Excellent.”
“Excellent.”
Would you recommend the course to others?
“I would recommend this course to others.”
“Yes I would recommend the course to others, particularly those moving into a more managerial role from the ‘shop floor’.”
“I would certainly recommend this course to anyone moving into management.”
“Yes.”
“We did & you got more bookings!”
“Yes.”
“Yes.”
“I would recommend the course to others.”
