Handling difficult trainees: The shy trainee

(Image from: http://www.selfhypnosistherapy.com/overcoming-shyness.html)

In one of my earlier posts, I had written about handling nervous trainees. You might wonder what the difference is between a shy trainee and nervous trainee. A shy trainee and a nervous trainee are both difficult for an instructor – but for different reasons.

A shy trainee refuses to open up to conversation and discussion. He/She simply clams up and the instructor has no way of knowing what’s on the trainee’s mind, whether the content has sunk in, whether the trainee is comfortable or not, etc etc. Most of the time, a shy trainee is hesitant about expressing him/herself because of a fear of making a fool of him/herself in public. Shy persons are usually very concerned about what other people might think of them.

On the other hand, a nervous trainee is worried about learning it right. The instructor can usually find out if a trainee is nervous or not – body language and speech give it away. A nervous trainee is generally worried about whether they can learn and apply the skills correctly, and fear what might happen otherwise.

Shyness and nervousness in trainees are individually troublesome for instructors. A combination of shyness and nervousness is a perfect nightmare! It means a lot of work and patience is required from the instructor.

My thoughts on handling shy trainees:

• Identify the reason for their shyness. Is their shyness due to cultural barriers/language barriers/lack of confidence/learning anxiety ?

• Talk to them in private. Strike up a conversation and gently probe into what’s making them clam up.

• Compliment them on their work – without sounding patronizing.

• Never ever make them the target of your humour – even if you don’t mean to hurt them.

• Explain to them that overcoming shyness can actually increase the effectiveness of their training and enable them to perform better on their job. This is a very sensible reason for not being shy.

Repeat, Repeat, Repeat….

Personally, I think one of the most important principles of effective teaching/presentation is repetition. Sadly, this is also the most forgotten principle. Presenters are in such a rush to pack more and more content into their presentation that they do not allow time for repetition. The net result is that they “cover” a lot of material, but very little actually percolates into the listeners’ minds. Most of the material simply remains in the Powerpoint slides or handouts.

My own style is to reduce the amount of content in my presentation to make room for repetition of key points through various means. I would much rather present ten key ideas/concepts and have seven of them sink into my listeners, than present twenty key concepts in the same time and have none of them sink in.

Ultimately, what matters is what the listeners take home with them in their minds, not how much the presenter has "covered".

Understanding the trainee's learning style

Everyone has a different learning style..some people are auditory (learn by hearing), some are visual(learn by seeing) and some are kinaesthetic (learn by doing). When a person teaches others he will use the same method to teach as the method by which he learns. So a trainer who is a visual learner himself will tend to teach by using visual displays.

Now, during a training session, it is very useful to understand the learning style of the trainees so that the trainer can cater to them accordingly. A good way to understand a particular trainee's learning style is to ask a few questions at the beginning of the class, when each trainee introduces himself. Asking a trainee about his hobbies is a good way to get insight into his learning style.

Is learning fun ?

Learning is a process of change by which new skills or knowledge is acquired. Any change is stressful..it involves some pain. Unless a person goes through this stress, change cannot be created in his/her mind. And this stress is not necessarily a bad thing, as long as it is within limits. This kind of positive stress is known as eustress - as opposed to distress.

Should a trainer try to project the training class as a "fun" activity ? I believe not. A trainer should definitely not scare trainees by making the subject sound very difficult. At the same time, the trainees should get the message that they are not in the class for fun. Learning involves work and the associated stress. There is no running away from this. Trainees should be mentally prepared to accept this, and trainers should not shy away from pushing trainees so that they can achieve the learning outcomes.

How close is the result owner to the trainer ?

A few thoughts on different scenarios in training management and organization…

Simple, ideal case: Results owner = Trainer

When the trainer is directly the person who is responsible for the results expected out of training, it is the best possible scenario. The trainer knows exactly what skills are required of the trainee by the time the training is completed. So the training is squarely addressed towards transferring the skills to the trainee.

Example : This example is rather awkward but absolutely effective. Think of a parent trying to toilet-train a baby. The outcomes are clearly defined. Trainer knows precisely what skills are to be transferred to the trainee. Trainer is also the person who directly owns the results. If the training is not effective, the trainer is going to have a lot of cleanup to do ;-)

A slightly more complex case: Results owner is one layer away from trainer.

In this case, the results owner sends the trainee to a trainer and explains the expectations to the trainer. The trainer is tasked with transferring the required skills to the trainee, but is not directly impacted if the training is ineffective.

Example: A dog owner who takes his pet to a professional trainer for obedience training. The expectations are directly conveyed by the owner to the trainer. But if the training fails, the pain is for the owner and not for the trainer.

As complexity increases: Results owner is several layers away from trainer.

Example: A field manager sends his report (say a field engineer) for an internal training course within the same company. The trainer has developed the curriculum based on what the product design team told him. The field manager thinks the trainee is going to be fully competent to address field issues after the training. The trainee has some idea of what skills the training is going to offer, but not a very precise idea. The trainer has some idea what skills will help the trainee in his job after he completes the training. The training need from the field is not squarely addressed. This scenario is common as the organization’s size increases. To make the training very relevant and effective, the trainer, the product design group, the potential trainee, the trainee’s manager should all be completely aligned.

In the first place, is the trainee in the right place?

In many cases, the person who makes a decision on whether to send people for training has no clear idea about what the training will impart. The trainees themselves arrive without much idea about the scope of the training. This creates a lot of confusion and frustration for the trainer and the trainees. Imagine a situation where a trainer teaches a class with a complete mismatch in expectations between trainer-trainee..and imagine further how frustrating it would be for the trainer to ask his trainees for feedback at the end of the class.

The trainee and the trainee’s manager (whoever is paying for the training) should be completely clear on what the training will accomplish. Otherwise it is likely that the training will miss the mark..it will not squarely accomplish the objectives. Resources are wasted without achieving real business results.

Establishing a connection with your trainees

A great practice that successful speakers and trainers follow is to establish a connection with their audience early on in their speech. Abraham Lincoln was a master of this practice and succeeded in connecting with even hostile audiences that were fundamentally opposed to his policies. Establishing a rapport with your trainees makes them more receptive to you and hence makes the training more effective.

One might argue that establishing a connection with the trainees is not always possible. But the key is to remember that, unless you are a reclusive cave-dweller, you are connected with others in probably ways more than one. (Even reclusive cave-dwellers are on some social-networking website these days!) It is impossible to not find some common ground or connection.

In a training class that I attended recently, we had to do a role-play activity that taught us how to find common ground with your audience where none seems to exist. I was assigned the character of Winnie the Pooh (a stuffed teddy bear kind of cartoon character) and I had to pretend that I was addressing a group of Manchester United (English football club) fans to reinforce their support for the club. First, I had to convince the Man U fans that I had plenty in common with them or their club. At first this seemed so completely ridiculous that I had to resist the urge to laugh out loud. But when I put my mind to it, I realized to my surprise that there are a few ways in which Winnie the Pooh can connect with Man U fans. For example, Winnie the Pooh often gets into trouble, but always wiggles out because he has a good support system – a bunch of loyal friends. In the same way, Man U can always bounce back from defeat thanks to the unflinching support of the legions of its fans.

The exercise taught me that it is quite possible to identify with your trainees one way or the other, if only you put your mind to it. And it is a worthwhile thing to do, because it makes your audience warm up to you and be more receptive. This ultimately makes training more effective.