Trainer Styles a Situational Approach

G.Bharath MBA (Human Resource Management) , Dip T&D (ISTD) New Delhi IJTD JOURNAL XXXII:4 OCTOBER – DECEMBER 2002

Trainer Styles: A Situational Approach

G.Bharath

The manner in which a trainer handles the participants’ queries and interactions during the training session has an immense effect on the whole training. Trainers need to adapt their approaches or styles depending on the situation or the entry behavior of learners. Though this entry behaviour may vary widely with a heterogeneous group of learners, a trainer is nevertheless expected to adapt the training style to suit all the participants. Hence, it is imperative for the trainer to develop some understanding about the ‘Readiness level’ of every learner so that s/he is able adapt the training style to effectively handle the interactions and as well meet the learner’s requirements. To effectively adapt one’s training style, the trainer should (1) know what factors determine the readiness level of learners (2) be able to judge the level of learners’ readiness (3) be aware of the response styles that are at one’s disposal and (4) be able to choose the appropriate style depending on the situation.

The Readiness level of the learner will basically depend on two factors: (1) the learner-trainer knowledge gap and (2) the learner willingness. What are termed as sam, dhan, bhed and dand in ancient Sanskrit Literature can be used as power bases for the trainer. Sam, dhan, bhed and dand are Sanskrit words meaning treating as equal, reward, discrimination and punishment respectively. They are said to have been recommended as strategies by our ancient Epic Mahabharat and Kautilya’s Artha Sastra (the Science of Polity) for dealing with the opponents. The author has been applying the concept of sam, dhan, bhed and dand in training situations, as imbued from his early schoolteahcer. The author has built a model, which, he believes, will be of practical help to training practitioners. The article attempts to give some suggestions for evaluating the Readiness state of the learners in a classroom and recommends training styles/ approaches that would be appropriate for different Readiness states of learners. The author draws the inspiration for building this model from Situational Leadership Model of Paul Hersey and Kenneth Blanchard and he owes his gratitude to them for their book “Management of Organizational Behavior”.

Whenever I had some trying times in the classroom situation during my initial days as trainer, I used to invariably recall one of my admired teachers for the manner in which he dealt with difficult pupil. Every time, he wielded his cane for disciplining his pupil, he would at once rationalize such a behavior saying that he used dand (Sanskrit word meaning punishment) only as a last resort, when all other options sam, dhan and bhed (Sanskrit words meaning treating as equal, reward and discrimination respectively) had failed. Though, during the school days, this only seemed as some kind of justification my teacher gave to keep his image as that of an otherwise kind teacher, I started realizing the power of this concept when I took more or less a similar position as that of my

schoolteacher. Since as an andragogue, I did not enjoy the authority of a schoolteacher, I had to find subtler ways of applying sam, dhan, bhed and dand with my grown-up learners. When I found them working well, I developed innovative ways of handling learners and internalized them so well that I apply this ancient concept without any effort. I was finding myself adopting different styles, ranging from sam to dand depending on the learner’s state of readiness.

Trainers often find it necessary to adapt their approaches depending on the situation or should I say, on the entry behavior of learners. Entry behaviour can be described as the learner’s capability, the things he or she is able and willing to do before starting the learning event. Though

Indian Journal of Training & Development


96

this entry behaviour may vary widely with a heterogeneous group of learners, a trainer is nevertheless expected to adapt his/her training style to suit all the participants and if one is not adept in doing this, it would be glaringly spotted during classroom interactions. Hence, a trainer needs to develop some understanding about the ‘Readiness level’ of every learner so that s/he is able adapt his/her training style to effectively handle the interactions and as well meet the learner’s requirements.

To effectively adapt our training style, we realize that we should (1) know what factors determine the readiness level of learners (2) be able to judge the level of learners’ readiness (3) be aware of the response styles that are at our disposal and (4) be able to choose the appropriate style depending on the situation. By the virtue of our position, we do enjoy certain subtle powers over the learners. What are termed as sam, dhan, bhed and dand in ancient Sanskrit Literature can be used as power bases for the trainer. This concept is said to have found mention in our great epic Mahabharat and later in Kautilya’s Arthashastra of fourth century B.C. and have been recommended as strategies for dealing with the opponents. Though I am not competent to comment on its efficacy today as war strategy, it has certainly been found to be of immense value in the training context. After discovering an analogy with the well-known Situational Leadership (Paul Hersey and Kenneth Blanchard 1969), Situational Approach to Training (SAT) model was developed by the author, centering on the ancient concept of sam, dhan, bhed and dand

Learning Potential:

In a classroom, we have a heterogeneous set of people, who bring along with them their education, experience, attitudes, expectations, needs and desires. The extent to which a trainer will be able to influence the learning of a learner will depend on:

1. Pre-training knowledge level of the learner in the training topic

2. Willingness of the learner to accept new knowledge.

It is said that knowledge, like water, finds its level. Stretching this analogy a bit, I find that formula for quantity of water flow in a conduit can as well be

applied to knowledge transfer. The differential pressure and the conductance/ resistance of the pipeline determine water flow. In the case of knowledge flow, knowledge differential between the trainer and the learner and resistance/ willingness of the learner are two vital determinants for the possible knowledge flow. We know that adults learn only when they feel a need to learn and no learning can be forced on to anyone. We derive this need for learning from our conscious and subconscious motives that manifest themselves in the form of attitude towards any specific learning. The attitude can fall in anywhere between the two extremes of ‘total willingness’ to ‘total resistance’ to learn. We can say, learning that can possibly take place is inversely proportional to the resistance or in other words, directly proportional to the willingness of the learner. We can also derive an expression for this learning potential as given in the Box 1.

The expression for Learning Potential is intended only to help better understanding of the concept and it may be too naïve of one to contemplate any further mathematical treatment, as knowledge flow involves a complexity of factors. But from the expression for learning potential, we can easily infer that learning potential is very high in the case of a learner with high knowledge gap and high willingness and

Mathematical expression for learning potential:

Knowledge flow is analogous to the water flow and a mathematical expression can be derived for the knowledge

transfer from the trainer to the learner Learning potential is directly proportional to the learner-trainer knowledge

differential and inversely proportional to the resistance of the learner. The resistance to learning is nothing but the

inverse of willingness.

Learning Potential α (kT – kL) α 1/R

α (kT – kL) / R α (kT – kL) W since 1/R =W

Where kT - the knowledge level of Trainer kL - the knowledge level of Learner (kT – kL) - knowledge gap between the trainer and the learner (� k) R - the Resistance to learning W - the Willingness/ conductance for learning



97

very low for one with low knowledge gap and low willingness.

Readiness State Assessment (a tool for evaluating entry behaviour of learners):

We can define the readiness levels of a learner, in a similar way, as Situational Leadership defines the readiness level of followers. The readiness will basically depend on these two factors: (1) the learner-trainer knowledge gap and (2) the learner willingness. Based on the ‘knowledge gap’ factor, one can be said to be either in a Ready or Refined state. If the learner-trainer knowledge gap is low, then the scope for learning from the trainer will be less and the learner can be said to be in Refined State. If the knowledge gap is high, then the learning scope also is high and the learner is in Ready state. Now let us bring in the Willingness factor. The level of willingness of the learner, either in Refined or Ready state, will determine the level of Readiness or Refinedness. Highly willing learner with high knowledge gap can be said to be in High Ready state, whereas one with low willingness and high knowledge gap is in Low Ready state. Similarly for a Refined learner, the willingness will determine whether s/he is High Refined or at a Low Refined level. Our efforts should be to maximize the learning and to achieve this we should focus our efforts on knowledge flow to the learners at Readiness state by creating a synergy with the learners at Refined state. The learner states are summarized in Box 2.

Readiness states of learners State Learner-Trainer

K- gap (� k) Willingness

(W) High Refined Low High Low Refined Low Low High Ready High High Low Ready High Low

Assessing the Readiness States of learners:

In an assorted group of learners, how can we evaluate the status of the learners? A brief entry-point questionnaire can help in assessing the knowledge level. Introductory icebreaker activity (Expectations Sharing) during the start of

programme throws an excellent opportunity to assess the Readiness state of his learners. We can ask the learners to structure their introduction to include specific details like: the learner’s background/ experience relevant to the training, reasons for attending the training and expectations from training. We can look for the cues like whether the learner has come out of one’s own interest or s-he has been ‘sent’ for the training. We should also be alert to the clues, learners keep giving during the training session about their state. A ‘Low Ready’ learner is usually indifferent and non-participative, whereas a ‘High Ready’ learner is inquisitive and shows eagerness to learn by participating, but at the same time exposing one’s ignorance. Refined learner can also be easily recognized during discussions. The queries/ doubts, raised by refined learner will show maturity of knowledge in the relevant field. While the intentions of a ‘High Refined’ one will be to enhance learning, the ‘Low Refined’ usually looks for opportunities to exhibit his/ her knowledge. There are many indications like the tone, body and verbal language that may give out the intentions of the questioner and with experience, we become adept at spotting such intentions.

To avoid misinterpretations, which are likely to happen in the early stages of practice, I would suggest that we maintain a diary to evaluate the accuracy of our assessments about the Readiness States of learners. Here, we have to honestly record our initial assumptions about the learner, the basis of such assumptions like cues from Intro talk, and whether the subsequent signals from the learner are confirmatory or contradictory to the assumptions. This practice will help us hone our assessment skills.

Different Styles – the trainer’s power bases:

With a heterogeneous group of learners, we are usually in a quandary as to what approach we should adopt to cater to a diverse training needs of the group. The variations in the participants’ knowledge and skill levels are referred to, in the training parlance as ‘entry behaviour’ and the literature on training does throw some light on this aspect. But the Readiness State Assessment for learners can be an effective tool for adopting the right style of handling the learning event. Readiness levels can be determined, though not



98

perfectly. But this assessment can help in shaping our responses that are effective in dealing not with only the knowledge level needs but the attitudinal needs too.

Unlike a manager, who is vested with some reward or coercion powers, a trainer is not vested with any legitimate powers. But still, when on stage, a trainer does enjoy certain subtle power over the learners. The attention power: the power to draw the attention of learners to the subject of our choice, regardless of their interests. sam, dhan, bhed, dand are the offshoots of this main source of this attention power. Sam means to treat eqaully. Sam power is the power by which we are able influence the learners and impress our views upon them by treating them as equals. We may do this by allowing the learner to express views, listening etc. Dhan or reward power is the power to recognize the learner by seeking learner’s views for concurrence, appreciation etc. Bhed or discriminatory power denotes the power by which we can draw positive or negative attention of the group towards the learner. Dand power is the power by which we can institute some kind of punishment on the learner. We can use any of these powers depending on the learner’s state and develop an appropriate style for dealing with learners.

High Refined learners (Low K-gap, High Willingness): They are learners with high knowledge (low knowledge gap) and high willingness level. This type of learner can possibly join the trainer in helping the knowledge flow towards High Ready learners. If we can channalize their knowledge, we will be able to generate a learning synergy and to enhance overall training effectiveness. Sam or treating as equals makes these learners participate better and contribute more to a learning environment. We can do this by adopting a friendly approach, involving them in discussions, seeking their views on queries posed by their peers.

Low Refined learners (Low K-gap, Low W): This type of learners with high knowledge and low willingness need to be handled tactfully. They tend to pose intelligent questions with an apparent intention of exposing the trainer. They are better

dealt with bhed or discrimination. The discrimination is exercised either by challenging their views in stead of succumbing to their negative opinions or by redirecting their queries to the High Refined learners by seeking their counter ideas. If this is not done, there is a possibility that the negative idea gets consolidated among the learners. Creating a debate among the learners by redirecting the query is a good strategy of discrimination as it averts an unwanted situation of trainer becoming defensive and learners seeing it as one of trainer versus learners.

High ready learners (High K-gap, High W): These learners with high interest to learn will be inquisitive but may be shying away from asking questions for the fear of giving out their ignorance. We should remove their inhibitions and sustain their motivation levels by using dhan or Reward copiously. Rewarding in a training situation is to turn positive attention towards the learner and recognizing one’s queries as important, appreciating his/her views etc. are some of the ways of rewarding. We may also attempt to intermittently check with such learners if they are catching on.

Low Ready learners (High K-gap, Low W): Though the knowledge level of these learners is low, they perhaps don’t really feel the need to learn and hence have high resistance. These learners exhibit their resistance by their overt and cover behaviors such as taking longer or frequent breaks, engaging in chitchats etc. They can be made to feel the need to learn by a kind of reminder that they would be left behind if they don’t come along. Though Dand or punishment is a tool largely used by pedagogues, we need to exercise them sparingly, particularly when certain learner behaviours become disruptive in a training environment. Giving mild reprimands, rough talks and expression of anger are some of the forms of turning negative attention towards this type of learners. We can also set out the rules of the game clearly at the start of the session to curb any indiscipline, likely to emanate from this kind of learners. Situational Approach to Training (SAT) can be better comprehended through a model given in Box 3.



99

Training Styles: A Situational Approach

High Refinedness

sam Treating as Equals

High Readiness

dhan Reward

High

W

Low

Low Refinedness

bhed Discrimination

Low Readiness

dand Punishment

Low High �� k (Learner –Trainer Knowledge Gap)

High Refined Low Refined High Ready Low Ready

Definition High knowledge High willingness

High knowledge Low willingness

Low knowledge High willingness

Low knowledge Low willingness

Trainer’s goals

To increase belonging and create learning synergy

To focus on shortfalls and to create positive attitude

To shed inhibitions and to encourage learning

To maintain discipline and to create a need to learn

Power base Sam Treating as equal

Bhed Discrimination

Dhan Reward

Dand Punishment

Ways Persuation Friendly approach Involve in discussions Seek views

Challenge Redirect queries to peers

Appreciation Recognition Empathy

Criticism Mild reprimands Express anger Contract setting

You may say the entire thing looks too theoretical. Would not any newfound idea, for that matter, look so until it is put into practice? Only experimenting and experiencing yourself can help you in gaining out of this idea. For the still-skeptics, I would only like to borrow the words of Hersey and Blanchard from what they say about ‘Learning to Apply Behavioral Science Theory’: ‘you learn to hit a baseball by stepping up to the plate and attempting to hit – by practice, by doing what you are attempting to learn. There is no way you are going to learn to hit a baseball by merely reading books or by watching great hitters… Much of what you read may have an impact on your knowledge and attitudes but becomes relevant only if you are willing to “try on” some new behaviors. If you are, we think you should

recognize that the first time you try on a new pattern of behavior in terms of attempting to implement behavioral science theory, you are going to feel ill at ease. We have to go through a period of “unfreezing” if we want to learn. Another caution is to be patient – give the new behavior time to work…The first time you attempt to behave differently on the basis of new theory, you probably will be less effective than you would have been had you used your old style of behavior (although in the long run the new style may have a higher probability of success). All of us have to recognize that, just like hitting baseball, applying behavioral science theory takes practice.’

Adapting your training style using the SAT model, like learning to apply any other behavioural science theory, calls for “unfreezing”,



100

practice and patience and with a bit of earnest practice, SAT model can help the trainer in making tremendous impact on the learners. It is not just to sell my idea that I say all this, but I say this with the conviction that if it can work for me, it can work for you as well.

References:

1. Paul Hersey et al, 1998. Management of Organizational Bahavior, Prentice Hall of India, New Delhi.

2. Swamy Someswarananda, 1996. Indian Wisdom for Management, Ahmedabad Management Association, Ahmedabad.

*******

Documents

Trainer Styles a Situational Approach