Training/induction new staff...a thing of the past?

Options
Londina
Londina Registered Posts: 814 Epic contributor 🐘
It's my impression or companies nowdays don't have the time to give new staff training or inductions to their way of doing and expect a person to know everything straight away? I mean, they are so impatient....I remember when I started my jobs there was always someone who gave me the handover of his/her work, now you start somewhere and the previous person is already gone!

Comments

  • Paul C
    Paul C Registered Posts: 193 Dedicated contributor 🦉
    Options
    I often wonder whether it’s a little trick to see how much extra you will do above what the last person did.....not telling you what's needed / was done before puts the pressure on the new person.

    I agree that people should have a decent handover & induction though. As a line manager I want people to be up to speed quickly so that I can get the best out of them & also keep them as happy and stress free as possible.
  • A-Vic
    A-Vic Registered Posts: 6,970 Beyond epic contributor 🧙‍♂️
    Options
    lol my induction was a pile of 500 files 6 filing cabnets no phone computer or idea, six years on still feels the same :lol: but hey at least i did get them files in order
  • Londina
    Londina Registered Posts: 814 Epic contributor 🐘
    Options
    Paul C wrote: »
    I agree that people should have a decent handover & induction though

    Exactly, I think it's essential to give time to new staff to "settle down" and let them gain good understand of the business first. Motivation is what makes people want to do well for themselves, the team and the company and managers should have the responsibility to provide a work environment that motivates. I learnt this in a management skills course when I was in a supervisor position and I noticed everyone actually worked better.

    Companies that don't provide training and rush people to do a job that it's not yet familiar to them will definately lose out.
  • blobbyh
    blobbyh Registered Posts: 2,415 Beyond epic contributor 🧙‍♂️
    Options
    Training and inductions are separate discussions and unless the former is being offered from scratch, it'll be expected you are alraedy sufficiently trained to do your job or you wouldn't have got it. Induction is honing those skills learned elsewhere into the common aim and good of the new employer.

    Depending on the seniority of the role, inductions are an excellent way to indoctrine new employees into the mantra of the business, understand it's strategies, staff heirarchy and most importantly, what it is that the business does. Understanding the roles and functions of other departments outside your own helps you know where you and your own department fit into the wider organisation.

    It's a shame that many companies now don't offer them but I guess as HR departments get younger and younger - with many of those being dare I say it, up their own arse highly precocious graduates? - maybe they don't see the need to involve new staff as much. Hire and forget. If the inductions costs are also allocated to their own HR budgets, they may also be more conscious of the down time spent inducting when the new worker could be working and part of someone else's?
  • Gem7321
    Gem7321 Registered Posts: 1,438 Beyond epic contributor 🧙‍♂️
    Options
    blobbyh wrote: »
    with many of those being dare I say it, up their own arse highly precocious graduates?
    *hits the like button*!

    I think when you apply for a job the employer expects you to already know what you're doing, otherwise why would you apply for the job? And a lot of the time people would rather keep quiet than admit they need additional training.
  • Londina
    Londina Registered Posts: 814 Epic contributor 🐘
    Options
    blobbyh wrote: »
    Training and inductions are separate discussions
    blobbyh wrote: »
    Depending on the seniority of the role, inductions are an excellent way to indoctrine new employees into the mantra of the business, understand it's strategies, staff heirarchy and most importantly, what it is that the business does.
    Gem7321 wrote: »
    I think when you apply for a job the employer expects you to already know what you're doing, otherwise why would you apply for the job? And a lot of the time people would rather keep quiet than admit they need additional training.

    yes true, training and inductions are not the same, a training is not always needed, for example if an experienced accounts assistant get another job for the same position, but an induction is always needed I think, no matter if the person has already experience or not in the role, still need to understand the new business and their way of doing, some companies take for granted that because they do one thing in a way, also other companies do the same. They need to understand where the new person is coming from.
    blobbyh wrote: »
    It's a shame that many companies now don't offer them but I guess as HR departments get younger and younger

    What about small companies that don't have HR departments? I think those are the worst, everyone is so busy with the own work that have no time to show the new person around, not even where the client's files are!! What about the hand over of responsibilities to the new person if the new job is to look after a porfolio of clients?

    Wondering why some companies nowdays don't see anymore this importance, the recession have badly hit them in that way too?...
  • blobbyh
    blobbyh Registered Posts: 2,415 Beyond epic contributor 🧙‍♂️
    Options
    I think you're confusing handovers with inductions, Londina. Just as an induction isn't the same as training, nor is it the same as a handover. Where a handover is required - as in the portfolio of clients - then yes, there should always be one to ensure continuity of service.

    If we're still talking about inductions, then they could vary from not being required at all (you're arguably unlikely to induct a cleaner, for example), to being a nicety for non-core employees (box packers or other low level production staff) to being downright essential dependant on the role (mid or senior managers).
  • Londina
    Londina Registered Posts: 814 Epic contributor 🐘
    Options
    blobbyh wrote: »
    I think you're confusing handovers with inductions, Londina. Just as an induction isn't the same as training, nor is it the same as a handover

    I know Blobbyh the difference between those terms, however one of those is necessary (dipends of the position) when you start a new job.
    Actually an induction is always needed I believe. In my past experiences I received and gave one to new staff, but recently I have assisted a decline of it and wondering if nowdays companies are exploiting the current job market situation, already they are paying less and expect more.
  • Londina
    Londina Registered Posts: 814 Epic contributor 🐘
    Options
    ps. a phrase that comes up often in job adverts...

    "you will be expected to hit the ground running."

    This sums it up!
Privacy Policy