Corporate Training Programs

Corporate Training Programs | Corporate Training Programs Planning Models

Corporate Training Programs Planning Models

There are multiple models that can be used for Corporate Training Programs planning. This post presents four models. They can be categorized in several ways, yet I have chosen to separate them as either linear or non-linear. The linear models include Tyler’s Model and Sark and Caffarella’s Model. The non-linear models include Knowles’ Model of Andragogy and Caffarella’s Interactive Model of Program Planning. Their attributes are compared in the following sections.

 

Linear Program Planning Models

Linear program planning models are those that follow a sequence of steps. The program planner starts at the first step and continues sequentially until the last step. Both Tyler’s Model and Sark and Caffarella’s Model are linear (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009). This is a key similarity between the two. One area in which they differ is their specificity.

Tyler’s Model is non-specific. It lacks some detail; however, that makes it flexible because it can be applied to many kinds of short programs. (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009). By contrast, Sark and Caffarella’s Model provides more detail, which would allow it to be used for programs of any length (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009).

Although both of these programs are linear, they have different starting points. Sark and Caffarella’s Model begins with an analysis of the context and the stakeholders. Stakeholders can have a great deal of influence over the program planning process. As such, this is an important first step (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009). Tyler’s Model skips this step and begins with the program needs (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009).

Assessing the program needs is a key component of both of the models. Tyler’s Model begins with this step, and Sark and Caffarella’s Model has it as its second step (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009). After the needs assessment, the two models are quite similar. They continue with the development of objectives and a plan. They both conclude with an assessment or evaluation of the plan (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009).

Linear models can be very effective. They provide a solid framework for program planning. Inexperienced program planners can use these models to ensure that they do not miss any steps in the planning process. Experienced program planners might feel too constrained by these models. As such, non-linear models might be a better approach for them.

 

Non-Linear Program Planning Models

Non-linear program planning models are those that do not follow a sequence of steps. The program planner starts at any point in the model and continues until the entire model is completed. Knowles’ Model of Andragogy and Caffarella’s Interactive Model of Program Planning are both non-linear models (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009). This is a key similarity between the two. One area in which they differ is their focus.

Knowles’ Model of Andragogy focuses on the learner. It is a cyclical model that continually returns to the leaner for validation (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009). Caffarella’s Interactive Model of Program Planning focuses on relevancy (Caffarella, 2002). According to Daffron, this leads, arguably, to the “ultimate model” (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009, track 2).

Although both of these models are non-linear, they are used differently. In Knowles’ model, a cycle of steps is completed, and the program planner can start at any step (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009). The key to this model is that each step cycles back to the learner. This is similar to Caffarella’s model because the program planner can start at any step in that model, too (Caffarella, 2002).

Both of these models are scalable. Each could be used for programs of any length. Additionally, each encompasses the salient points of program planning: context, needs, objectives, plans, and evaluations. Knowles’ model tends to emphasize learning programs (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009), whereas Caffarella’s model tends to be applicable to any kind of program (2002).

Non-linear models can be as effective as linear models. They provide a flexible framework for program planning. Inexperienced program planners might be somewhat overwhelmed by such flexibility (and complexity). Conversely, experienced program planners might feel liberated by such an approach.

 

Conclusion

This post has compared four different Corporate Training Programs planning models. They were grouped as either linear (Tyler’s Model and Sark and Caffarella’s Model) or non-linear (Knowles’ Model of Andragogy and Caffarella’s Interactive Model of Program Planning). Within each grouping, the models were analyzed in terms of their similarities and their differences. Additional information about their usage was provided as it relates to the experience of the program planner.

References

Caffarella, R. (2002). Planning programs for adult learners: A practical guide for educators, trainers and staff developers. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Designing and assessing learning experiences. [DVD]. Baltimore: Daffron, S.

Scott Fabel

Scott Fabel is a senior corporate training consultant with Computer Aid, Inc. He has over 18 years of experience working with various Fortune 1000 companies on Help Desk Implementations, Microsoft Technologies, Business Analysis, and Project Management. This includes both consultative services and customized training programs. He is HDI certified, PMP certified, CBAP certified, and a MCT. Scott has been teaching others business skills, professional skills, and technical skills for more than 13 years. He is a faculty fellow at the University of Delaware and is currently pursuing his doctorate in education for which his dissertation will focus on the benefits of corporate training and mobile learning. He speaks three languages and was recently inducted into the International Martial Arts Hall of Fame. His communication skills, combined with his martial art skills, provide him with a unique combination for keeping his sessions informative, lively, and interactive.

Related Articles

Back to top button
Close
X

We use cookies on our website

We use cookies to give you the best user experience. Please confirm, if you accept our tracking cookies. You can also decline the tracking, so you can continue to visit our website without any data sent to third party services.