(Discuss this Article! in AUGI's new Discussion Forums.)

As a corporate trainer, you have unique challenges and issues that are quite different from traditional classroom training. This month I’m covering the third installment of a successful strategic plan for you to follow in preparing and delivering successful corporate training. I will also cover in this issue the problems and pitfalls in a category that I call “Illusions.” These illusions prevent us as corporate trainers from meeting our goals and objectives. Watch out for these illusions.

The most effective corporate trainers focus the instruction on the design process and not on the features and functions of the software. Last month I covered the “Analysis” step, which is important to identify the true needs of the users and to determine where the pain exists in the current design process.

Process-based training
Process-based training incorporates four key features that are required for successfully implementing a productivity strategy. Let me address the second step this month.

Step two: the training process
Once the analysis is done, you need to match the current process with the techniques and processes that are incorporated in the current release of the software or the software with which the users are working.

Illusion #5: Upgrading the software is necessary to improve the productivity of the users in the company. This is an illusion. Most users never even tap close to the power they can use in the existing software. So if a software upgrade is not already the prequel to this process, then don’t even think of going for more upgrades or newer releases. Don’t ask for it. Focus on the product they have and will be using.

Through our first step (see previous article), you will have realized that there are many aspects of the software that the users are not taking advantage of. Just because they have it, it doesn’t mean they use it. In many cases, if there hasn’t been any formal training in a few releases, there are probably many features and functionality that even the power user is missing. We are all creatures of habit and we typically have found ways to get the job done, even if it’s not the best way.

When developing a training program, you have to look it from the point of view of improving the productivity of the users. There are two ways to do this.

Personal productivity solutions
Personal productivity solutions are methods and techniques that can be incorporated without changing the overall existing file, project, and organizational structure of the design and engineering department.

Company/departmental productivity solutions
Company/departmental productivity solutions are methods and techniques requiring organizational process and structural changes as well as individual training. This method requires buy-in from management. For example, consider when AutoCAD went from model space plotting to paper space, and then to layouts and then sheet sets. Each one of these was a major leap that changed the entire process of producing output to paper. This affects everything from printer set-ups to title blocks and scaling. These produce a fundamental change in the way the organization uses the software, not just the way the individual uses the software.

Which do you focus on and implement?
How you know whether to implement a personal productivity solution or a company/departmental solution depends on two key things—time and money. Since the company/departmental solution requires a fundamental shift in the way the drawing process is done, it will also take a commitment on the part of management and potentially other divisions of the company, including the IS department.

For example, an observation relating to time is that there is a large number of blocks that are inserted into every drawing. The current process is to use the insert command and browse to the folder where the blocks are located as drawing files. Even if the blocks were inserted into the template file, there would still be the use of the insert command. DesignCenter introduced a way to graphically insert blocks without programming. Yet the easiest personal solution would be to simply place all existing used blocks onto tool palettes. The more complex company solution would be to consolidate all blocks into drawing files and add dynamic parameters to give the blocks greater flexibility, and then place them on tool palettes.

Illusion #6: The biggest feature improvements are the ones everyone should be trained on as they provide the greatest productivity for the users in the company. This is an illusion. As I illustrated above, putting existing blocks on a palette increases productivity by reducing clicks and picks. Dynamic Blocks are “wicked cool” and very powerful, but rebuilding a block library is a complex and time-consuming task. It also affects those who are not on the current release. So company-wide IT issues are at stake, as well as users of older releases.

The immediate solution, implemented for less money and time, is the personal solution. It gets people more productive and requires less justification. When I look at the solution it will always revert back to reducing clicks and picks. Reduced clicks and picks save time and money, period.

Prove it!
If justification is needed, you may still need to write a benchmark. For this case of inserting blocks, you might write a benchmark that specifies how the user interacts with the software and how easily they would be able to find the specified detail block with a minimum of keystrokes versus how they are currently accessing blocks.

In either case, your benchmark specifications should include the real-world, tough design problems that you face every day. By making the benchmark a tough test, you will force the add-on software to confront your toughest problems so you can really see how much time saving you’ll be able to achieve.

Next month, we’ll look at the best practices on how to schedule and deliver the best training for the greatest retention.

(Discuss this Article! in AUGI's new Discussion Forums.)

Submitted by Matt Murphy, chair of the Autodesk Training Center Advisory Board (ATCAB). Matt is an Autodesk Certified Instructor (ACI) who teaches AutoCAD productivity seminars at ATCs, Autodesk University, AUGI CAD Camp, AUGI CAD Matinee, and private companies. He can be reached at matt.murphy@ACADventures.com.