Please use a monospaced font (Courier 12 point, for instance) to view this document. NATIONAL WORKFORCE ASSISTANCE COLLABORATIVE BUSINESS ASSISTANCE TOOLS DELIVERING COST EFFECTIVE SERVICES TO SMALL AND MID-SIZED COMPANIES A GUIDE FOR WORKFORCE AND WORKPLACE DEVELOPMENT PROVIDERS NATIONAL ALLIANCE OF BUSINESS NATIONAL WORKFORCE ASSISTANCE COLLABORATIVE DELIVERING COST EFFECTIVE SERVICES TO SMALL AND MID-SIZED COMPANIES By Terri Bergman and Scott Cheney SEPTEMBER 1996 NATIONAL ALLIANCE OF BUSINESS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This publication was conceived of and designed by Terri Bergman, who also oversaw its development. It was written and researched by Terri Bergman and Scott Cheney. Stephen Mitchell provided invaluable advice and guidance along the way. Brett Bixler contributed to the section on computer- based training. Louise Bertsche, Michael Puzia, and Gertrude M. Scott conducted the research on the Consortium for Supplier Training, and Michael Puzia helped draft the Consortium for Supplier Training case study. The National Workforce Assistance Collaborative and the National Alliance of Business would like to thank the people who agreed to be interviewed or provided information for the case studies: Business and Industry Services Center _ Michael Cervantes, Waste Management of Orange County _ Susan Gaer, Business and Industry Services Center _ Paul Garza, Business and Industry Services Center _ Kevin Gatewood, Gatewood Systems and Software _ Karen Klammer, Coast Community College District _ Ragu Nath, Business and Industry Services Center California Community College Workplace Education Program _ Robin Carvajal, San Diego Community College District _ Mary Schwalen, Teal Electronics Corporation _ Marian Thacher, San Diego Community College District Consortium for Supplier Training _ Glen I. Bounds, Dallas County Community College District _ Roy Carothers, Houston Community College System _ Glen Cheney, Semi/SEMATECH _ Carol J. Croft, SEMATECH _ Bill Emerson, GENRAD, Inc. _ Patti Glenn, Texas Instruments _ Joyce P. Helm, Personnel Decisions, Inc. _ Neil Hunter, Edwards High Vacuum International, Inc. _ Joe Louie, Intel Corporation _ Beverly McAndrew, TQM-BASE Council, Inc. _ Gerardo Moreno, Houston Community College System _ Jennifer Olivier, Control Systems International _ James P. Picquet, Dallas County Community College District _ Sandra Roberts, Northern Essex Community College _ Bob Stanion, SEMATECH _ Les Warren, Northern Essex Community College _ Susan B. Ziemba, Northern Essex Community College Lancaster Industrial Training Consortium _ Linda Brennan, Johnson & Johnson MERCK _ Greg Burkholder, Lancaster County Area Vo-Tech Schools _ Jan Elsen, Fenner Manheim _ John Evans, Jr., New Standard Corporation _ Steve Kelly, Electro-Platers of York, Inc. _ Doug Sisson, Jr., Clark Filter _ Judy Youngeberg, Lancaster Industrial Training Consortium Regional Manufacturing Technology Center _ Dennis Bona, Regional Manufacturing Technology Center _ Fred Cini, American Fibrit, Inc. _ Herb Fricko, Nippondenso Manufacturing U.S.A., Inc. _ Stanley Graves, Eaton Corporation _ Tom Longman, Regional Manufacturing Technology Center _ Paul Ohm, Kellogg Community College _ Jim Owens, Regional Manufacturing Technology Center We would also like to thank all of the people who provided information for the one-page summaries: _ Angie Asa-Lovstad, North Iowa Area Community College _ Jill Barrett, The Literacy Initiative _ Jack Benham, ETI _ Dennis Bona, Regional Manufacturing Technology Center _ Robin Carvajal, San Diego Community College District _ Gerry Ciavardone, The Human Resource Solution _ Donna Ennis, Georgia Institute of Technology _ Scott Epstein, Harford Community College _ Gabrielle B. Fardwell, U.S. Chamber of Commerce _ Joe C. Ferguson, Northeast Community College _ Paul Garza, Business and Industry Services Center _ Patti Glenn, Texas Instruments _ Manny Griego, Glendale Community College _ Morgan Hall, University of Maryland _ Karen Klammer, JobLink _ Judith Lashof, Vermont Institute for Self Reliance _ Ellen Laubhan, National Technological University _ Janice Lee, Ozarks Technical Community College _ Karen Maish, Gate Way Community College _ John Redmond, Front Range Community College _ Maureen Sheahan, Labor-Management Council for Economic Renewal _ Al Simmons, DeSoto County Literacy Council _ Olivia Steele, Massachusetts Department of Education _ John P. Taylor, Garden Village Professional Center _ Marian Thacher, San Diego Community College District _ Douglas Van Nostran, McHenry County College _ Judy Youngeberg, Lancaster Industrial Training Consortium Special thanks go to the people who recommended providers to include in the study and reviewed drafts of the publication: _ Priscilla Carman, Institute for the Study of Adult Literacy, The Pennsylvania State University _ Lynne Fry, U.S. Department of Labor _ Sandra L. Hodge, Cuyahoga Community College _ Ed Kowalski, Onondaga Community College _ Bertha A. Landrum, Maricopa Community Colleges _ Bruce H. Leslie, Onondaga Community College _ Inaam Mansoor, Arlington Education and Employment Program _ Arley J. Mead, Harford Systems, Inc. _ Robert P. Meyer, Work in Northeast Ohio _ Nancy Renner, Catonsville Community College _ Benjamin Schneider, University of Maryland _ Maureen Sheahan, Labor-Management Council for Economic Renewal _ Johan Uvin, Massachusetts Department of Education _ James Van Erden, National Alliance of Business This publication could not have been completed without their help. Finally, thanks go to Rosalyn Johnson, Cathy Stewart, xxx, and xxx for their editing, graphics, and production assistance. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 DELIVERY STRATEGIES 5 Learning Consortia 7 Walk-In Centers 11 Distance Learning 14 Computer-Based Training 23 Trained Volunteers 29 Conclusion 31 CASE STUDIES 33 Consortium for Supplier Training 34 Lancaster Industrial Training Consortium 42 Business and Industry Services Center 50 Regional Manufacturing Technology Center 58 California Community College Workplace Education Program 68 ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES 75 Learning Consortia - Training 76 Consortium for Supplier Training 76 JobLink 77 Lancaster Industrial Training Consortium 78 Massachusetts High Performance Manufacturing Consortium 79 Massachusetts Workplace Literacy Consortium 80 Learning Consortia - ISO 9000 81 Center for International Standards & Quality 81 ETI 82 Maryland Center for Quality and Productivity 83 NEPIRC ISO 9000 Network 84 Learning Consortia - Quality 85 Harford Quality Network 85 Learning Consortia - Labor-Management 86 Labor-Management Council for Economic Renewal 86 Walk-In Centers 87 Business and Industry Services Center 87 High Technology Centers 88 Institute for Computer Training 89 Regional Manufacturing Technology Center 90 Distance Learning 91 Front Range Community College 91 Lifelong Learning Center 92 Modern Manufacturing Video Conference Series 93 North Iowa Area Community College 94 Quality Learning Series 95 Computer-Based Training 96 California Community College Workplace Education Program 96 Library Learning Link 97 Read & Achieve Program 98 Vermont Institute for Self Reliance 99 Trained Volunteers 100 Adult Basic Education in Springfield, Missouri 100 McHenry County College Workforce Literacy Program 101 APPENDICES 102 Additional Resources 103 National Workforce Assistance Collaborative Advisory Groups National Workforce Assistance Collaborative Products and Services INTRODUCTION Service providers have always found it difficult to deliver assistance to small and mid-sized companies. There are just too few people needing services in these smaller companies to share in the costs of development and delivery. Most providers see themselves facing a choice between giving companies the services they need, but at prices they cannot afford, or giving them lower-quality services at affordable prices. This dilemma is true whether a provider is offering training, management consulting, or technology assistance. This Publication Is for _ Community colleges _ Universities _ Manufacturing technology centers _ State literacy and training programs _ State economic development and technology offices _ Labor-management associations _ Business organizations _ Trade and professional associations _ Business development centers _ Private industry councils _ Non-profit organizations _ Private consulting firms This publication is designed to help service providers find a point in between the two extremes, where they can deliver high-quality services cost effectively. While it may be impossible to eliminate the tradeoff between quality and affordability entirely, it is certainly possible to move to a point where services are more appropriate, and costs are reasonably manageable. This publication looks at five service delivery strategies: _ Learning consortia, _ Walk-in centers, _ Distance learning, _ Computer-based training, and _ Trained volunteers. Properly implemented, all of these can reduce the cost of services to companies. With some creativity, they can also provide companies with the valuable services they need. While there may be other ways to deliver high-quality services cost effectively, these five strategies offer a number of insights into how providers can both reduce costs and compensate for the negative side-effects that may be associated with cost reduction. Services Covered by this Publication Include _ Workplace literacy training _ Technical training _ Work restructuring assistance _ Labor-management relations assistance _ Management consulting _ Technology assistance Any service provider working with small and mid-sized companies should find this publication useful, including educational institutions, government programs, business and labor associations, and private organizations. With small and mid-sized businesses responsible for the bulk of America's employment and employment growth today, it is essential that all providers -- trainers and consultants -- find ways to help these smaller companies remain competitive. Cost Effective Strategies Both the words "cost" and "effective" are important components of the term "cost effective." It is easy to cut costs by lowering the quality of services; what takes skill is reducing costs while maintaining the effectiveness of services. Cost effectiveness cannot be measured by a straight comparison of prices, it must be measured by comparing prices per unit value, e.g., prices for an amount of knowledge gained, skills acquired, productivity increased, quality improved, profit raised -- whatever metric is relevant for the service being provided. Service Costs. The cost of services is made up of a number of components. For the providers, it includes: _ Time, materials, and capital costs (rooms, equipment) required for developing the services, _ Time, materials, and capital costs required for delivering the services, and _ Time and cost required for traveling to where the services are delivered. Companies receiving the services would cover all of these costs in the fees they paid the providers, plus they would incur additional costs: _ Time, materials, and capital costs involved in participating in the services, including participation in developing, promoting, scheduling, tracking, and attending, _ Time and cost required for traveling to where the services are delivered, and _ Salaries for replacement workers or lost productivity for time when employees are off the job participating in or traveling to the services. Therefore, reducing the cost of services to companies involves reducing one or more of these components -- the cost components for providers and the cost components for companies. Providers can accomplish this in a variety of ways: 1. Delivering the same services to a number of companies so that the companies effectively split the provider's development costs. 2. Delivering services to multiple companies at the same time so that the companies share the provider's delivery costs. 3. Having the provider deliver services from one location convenient to it, and the company(ies) receive the services in a different location convenient to it (them), in order to reduce travel costs for all involved. 4. Subsidizing the cost of services with government payments, outside grants, or contributions (cash or in-kind). 5. Making the services more efficient so that the provider's development and delivery costs and companies' participation costs are reduced. 6. Making the services more productive so that the provider's delivery time and companies' participation time is reduced. Service Effectiveness. The most effective services are those targeted to the specific needs of individual companies and their employees. Effective services also supply opportunities for those receiving the services to interact with the provider, participate actively in exercises, and practice what they are learning both during service delivery and when they are back on the job. Additionally, effective services are delivered by highly-skilled individuals, and at the times the companies need them. Effective Services _Target companies' needs _Target individuals' needs _Promote provider-recipient interaction _Encourage active participation _Support practice back on the job _Are conducted by skilled individuals _Are delivered when they are needed Most of the strategies for reducing costs listed above can have a negative impact on at least one of the characteristics of effective services. 1. Delivering the same services to a number of companies makes it difficult to target companies' or individuals' needs. 2. Delivering services to multiple companies at the same time compounds the problems discussed in item 1 above, by also reducing the provider's ability to promote practice back on the job, and making it nearly impossible to provide services when each company needs them. 3. Having the provider deliver and company(ies) receive services in different sites tends to reduce interaction between the provider and recipient, limit active participation, and make it difficult for the provider to facilitate practice back on the job. 4. One method of subsidizing the cost of services -- using volunteers -- may involve employing less-skilled individuals as providers. Other methods might substitute the goals of the subsidizing organization for some of those of the recipients, thus making services less well targeted to company and individual needs. 5. Making services more efficient so that both the provider's and the companies' costs are reduced should not have a negative impact on effectiveness. 6. Making services more productive so that providers' delivery and companies' participation time is reduced also should not have a negative impact on effectiveness. How providers can overcome, or at least ameliorate, these drawbacks is the focus of the rest of this publication. It includes: _ A discussion of each of the five delivery strategies -- learning consortia, walk-in centers, distance learning, computer-based training, and trained volunteers -- and how they are being implemented. _ Five detailed case studies of exemplary programs delivering high-value services at relatively lower costs. _ Twenty-six one-page summaries of programs following one or more of the five delivery strategies, along with relevant contact information on each. DELIVERY STRATEGIES This publication highlights five service delivery strategies designed to reduce the cost of services: _ Learning consortia, _ Walk-in centers, _ Distance learning, _ Computer-based training, and _ Trained volunteers. These five strategies were selected because experts in service delivery identified them as the key techniques used to serve small and mid-sized companies cost effectively. Each employs one or more of the cost-reduction methods identified in the Introduction. The chart below shows the cost-reduction methods that are necessarily a part of each service delivery strategy, though many providers have found ways to employ additional cost reduction methods in their programs. Cost Reduction Methods Employed by Different Service Delivery Strategies Cost Reduction Methods Service Delivery Strategies Serve Multiple Companies Serve Multiple Companies at the Same Time Have Provider and Companies in Different Locations Subsidize Costs0 Make Services More Efficient Make Services More Productive Learning Consortia _ _ Walk-in Centers _ _ _ Distance Learning _ _ _ Computer-Based Training _ _ _ _ Trained Volunteers _ None of these service delivery strategies is free. Many distance learning techniques and computer-based training programs require significant investments in technology and training, as well as up-front development time. Walk-in centers can require high capital investments and time for careful planning. Providers that want to work through learning consortia must first devote considerable time to forming and supporting the consortia. Even the use of volunteers, the least expensive of the service delivery strategies, requires an investment in training. Providers must keep these costs in mind, and weigh the expenses associated with these strategies against their benefits, before selecting any particular service delivery strategy. This calculation will necessarily be different for every provider and in every situation. The rest of this section looks at each of the five delivery strategies in turn. It defines them, and discusses how they are being implemented. It also discusses how they lower costs, the good and bad side effects of these cost-cutting measures, and what techniques can be employed to lessen the bad side effects. LEARNING CONSORTIA Cost Reduction Methods _ Serving multiple companies _ Serving multiple companies at the same time In general, a learning consortium is a group of companies that come together to learn from each other in order to develop new capabilities, build the skills of their employees, and increase the productive capacities of their enterprises.1 This learning can be targeted at the workforce or the workplace. A consortium's workforce development efforts concentrate on building the skills of the individuals in member companies (including management staff), while its workplace development efforts aim at improving the productivity and efficiency of the companies' workplace processes and strategies. Most learning consortia engage in both cooperative learning and collective learning. In cooperative learning, members interact, share knowledge, and learn from each other; they work together to build their productivity and competitiveness. In collective learning, members learn together from some outside authority; they pool their resources to purchase this outside expertise. Some consortia do not restrict their membership to companies, but also include other parties, such as labor, educational institutions, job training organizations, economic development agencies, or community organizations. However, even in learning consortia with broadened memberships, the cornerstone of the consortia remains making member companies more competitive. Implementation Learning consortia are "hot." When experts in service delivery were asked to suggest cost effective delivery strategies and to identify programs they considered to be exemplary models of these strategies, they identified more learning consortium examples than any other kind. Almost half of the program summaries at the end of this publication are learning consortia. If learning consortia are hot, ISO 9000 learning consortia are hotter still. While the program summaries include only four ISO 9000 consortia, many more were identified and were only excluded from the publication in order to limit repetition. The learning consortia identified for this publication were created around four distinct themes: _ Training, _ Quality practices, _ Labor-management relations, and of course _ ISO 9000. The training-focused learning consortia that were identified address a variety of subjects, including basic skills, technical skills, quality practices, and employee empowerment. The Consortium for Supplier Training, one of the training-focused consortia, was created to prepare small supplier companies to follow the quality practices of their large-company customers. In Illinois, the Industrial Training Program supports the creation of consortia by providing training grants to groups of small and mid-sized companies that have identified common training needs. Under this program, community colleges and business and industry associations have sponsored training consortia, and original equipment manufacturers have sponsored supplier training networks. The Harford Quality Network, the quality consortium identified for this publication, helps small and mid-sized companies adopt quality practices. The Labor-Management Council for Economic Renewal, the labor-management relations consortium identified for this publication, works with firms and union organizations to facilitate work restructuring and labor-management relations. ISO 9000 consortia are created with a single, clear goal -- getting member companies ISO-certified -- and usually have specified start and end dates. It is the clear focus of these consortia and the well-defined participation requirements, along with the demand for ISO certification, that make these consortia so popular. Assistance even exists to prepare people to deliver ISO 9000 assistance. EPiC's (Education Professionals in Consortium) ISO 9000 Training Program includes curricula, participant materials, facilitator training, and technical support providers can purchase and use to establish their own ISO 9000 training programs. Typical consortium services include training sessions, where new ideas and techniques are brought to consortium members (usually as a group); networking opportunities, where member companies have the chance to learn from each other; and individualized consulting services, where experts work one- on-one with member companies to help them address their own specific problems. In some consortia, service providers have functioned as conveners, pulling together the companies and helping them to define their purpose and coordinate their programs. In other consortia, the providers just deliver services to the companies, responding to the agenda the companies have set. Cost-Cutting Techniques Learning consortia are cost effective because the same services are provided to more than one company, usually at the same time. This spreads the costs of both development and delivery over a number of companies. Member companies may jointly contract for services, jointly develop services, or share their own existing services, usually training, with other members. Over time, they may build a library of resources all members can access. Service providers that work with consortia are able to build an ongoing relationship with the participating companies. This relationship lowers the providers' overhead costs by making it easier for them to reach the companies and inform them about any new services they develop. Frequently, the costs of a consortium's services are subsidized. A number of consortia have federal or state grants. The Labor-Management Council for Economic Renewal receives in-kind services from a labor union. The Consortium for Supplier Training, which is composed of large customer companies, developed training and prepared community colleges to deliver this training at its own expense -- the recipient firms only have to cover the community colleges' costs of delivery to them. Many consortia use community colleges or other government-subsidized educational institutions to deliver services, further reducing the costs that must be borne by recipients. Because ETI, a provider for ISO 9000 consortia, promises specific service providers that it will purchase a large amount of work from them, it is able to contract for the services at discount rates. The Labor-Management Council for Economic Renewal reduces contact hours -- and costs -- by focusing its services on members' "stated needs." Benefits and Costs There are a number of benefits from providing services through consortia beyond reducing costs. The process of working together as a group and learning cooperatively is extremely powerful. Members can share problems, solutions, and ideas with each other, thereby reducing the number of mistakes they make and shortening their learning curves. Consortium members can expand their access to resources by sharing curricula, facilities, and service providers or trainers. By combining their resources, members might also be able to research and design new programs that they could not develop on their own. With the leverage members gain by being part of a group, they can persuade providers to tailor services to meet their needs. The Consortium for Supplier Training provides its small supplier companies with a world- class quality training program, one that is accepted by multiple large-company customers. Many of the drawbacks associated with consortia stem from the fact that a great deal of the services provided are delivered to multiple companies at the same time. This makes it difficult to customize services to company needs, provide individualized attention, support recipients as they try to practice new techniques on the job, or deliver services precisely when they are needed by companies. In addition, some companies are uncomfortable participating in training or consulting sessions with their competitors, though this tends to be less of a problem than might be expected. Finally, and most importantly, the up-front costs associated with forming consortia can be very large, and the ongoing costs (time and money) of maintaining consortia can be challenging for both the providers and the companies. Innovations Consortia have adopted a number of techniques to counteract the drawbacks. Most consortia establish a balance between delivering services to a group of companies, and providing targeted consulting or technical assistance to individual companies. Many consortia conduct needs assessments of member companies before they begin providing services, and then help the member companies design and implement their own development plans. The Maryland Center for Quality and Productivity convenes industry sub-groups where participants in its ISO 9000 consortia can cover ISO standards particular to them. Even with their more generic programs, shared with most of the member companies, consortium providers frequently look for opportunities to incorporate information and materials specific to each of the companies into their services. Many consortium providers have found ways to vary their service delivery, in order to meet the learning styles of diverse participants. They employ group learning, one-on-one instruction, and self-led instruction. Some assess employees and create individualized workplans, tailored to each employee's needs. Effective Services Characteristics Key Advantages: _ Depends on provider's delivery strategy. Key Disadvantages: _ Depends on provider's delivery strategy. Some consortium providers even vary their schedule of services in response to companies' schedules. A number of the ISO 9000 consortia noted that the companies controlled the pace of the services. By going beyond group classroom instruction, establishing drop-in service sites, and delivering services and technical assistance to companies at their work sites, providers are able to adjust the schedule of some of their programs to meet companies' timetables. Providing some services at the company sites has also enabled a few of them to help companies apply new techniques on the job. Keys to Success _ Provide individualized as well as group services. _ Assess companies' needs and help them create their own development plans. _ Assess employees' needs and create individualized workplans. _ Incorporate individual companies' materials into training exercises _ Use a variety of instructional techniques to meet varied learning styles. WALK-IN CENTERS Cost Reduction Methods _ Serving multiple companies _ Serving multiple companies at the same time _ Making services more efficient Walk-in centers are permanent facilities, open at established hours, where companies and individuals can come in for services, when they need assistance, and at their convenience. The centers are self-contained sites, where materials, equipment, and individuals are available and ready to meet client needs. Walk-in centers may work with individual companies, and prepare to serve them, before the company employees come in for services. However, once that preparatory work is done, walk-in centers enable participants to receive services at the participants' convenience. Implementation Walk-in centers come in a variety of forms. The most comprehensive one identified for this publication is Rancho Santiago Community College District's Business and Industry Services Center. It provides an array of business assistance services at a single location, including a small business development center, business incubators, business ownership services, contract education, quality assurance training, and workplace learning. The center's workplace learning program is probably the component that best exemplifies the "drop-in" nature of walk- in centers. Here the center uses a variety of instructional techniques -- including computer-based training, audio-visual and audio tapes, and small group and individual instruction -- to provide companies and their employees with customized literacy and basic skills services. Both Glendale Community College and Gateway Community College operate large learning labs where individuals work through self-paced instructional modules on a variety of computer skills (e.g., word processing, spread sheets, data base management, graphics, computer assisted design). Instruction is provided through texts, and instructors are available at the centers to help students when they have questions. Perhaps the most innovative walk-in center identified for this publication is Kellogg Community College's Regional Manufacturing Technology Center. This center provides individualized, self-paced, instructor-directed training in the industrial trades. Here students work through individual training modules on specific skills under the guidance of experienced journeymen. Cost-Cutting Techniques Walk-in centers can keep costs low by providing the same services to multiple clients, thus spreading the costs of development and delivery over a number of companies. Costs can also be kept low through subsidies, which all of the centers highlighted in this publication receive. The Business and Industry Services Center receives government grants and operates some federally-funded programs. The Regional Manufacturing Technology Center was built and equipped with a combination of state, foundation, and corporate funding, and has received additional contributions from federal programs, the city, the community college, and corporations and vendors. All of the centers in the publication operate out of community colleges, which subsidize the costs of their services. Some walk-in centers keep costs down by being more efficient. The Business and Industry Services Center is able to keep its costs down by bringing a number of related services together at one site where they can share resources and overhead costs. The Regional Manufacturing Technology Center is able to stock, and therefore purchase, fewer pieces of equipment because it does not have to train an entire classroom of individuals on the same machines at the same time. This center's most important cost-cutting technique, though, is tailoring instruction to companies' and individuals' needs; clients pay only for the specific skills required and mastered by employees. Benefits and Costs The greatest benefit of walk-in centers is their provision of "just-in-time" services. Clients get the assistance they need when they need it. Learning in these centers also tends to be active and hands-on, a boon for retention. The greatest drawback of these programs is that they frequently provide prepackaged services, with no customization to either companies or individuals. In addition, clients generally receive no assistance in applying new skills or techniques on the job -- service stops at the center door. In a couple of areas, the benefit/cost analysis could cut either way. Clients can receive one-on-one instruction from providers, or they may shy away from asking for assistance and have little or no direct interaction with the provider. Clients might have access to highly skilled instructors in the fields they are studying (i.e., the experienced journeymen at the Regional Manufacturing Technology Center), or they may find the center staffed with instructors responsible for covering a variety of subjects, in which their level of expertise varies. Innovations Most of the drawbacks discussed above can be mitigated. Both the Business and Industry Services Center and the Regional Manufacturing Technology Center try to customize their services to companies' and individuals' needs. Prior to the start of any workplace learning program, the Business and Industry Services Center assesses the company's skill needs and collects documents that can be used to customize the curriculum. It also assesses the skill levels of each student and develops individualized learning plans for each one. The Regional Manufacturing Technology Center works with companies to determine which skills are needed on the job at their work sites. It then assesses their employees and only has them work on the training modules required by both the company and the employee. Effective Services Characteristics Key Advantages: _ Delivering services when they are needed. Key Disadvantages: _ Not supporting practice back on the job. Glendale Community College works hard to keep up the skill levels of its instructors. Instruction on the courses and software packages are provided on a continuing basis, and customer service training is provided at the time of hire. Keys to Success _ Assess companies and individuals, and target training to specific needs. _ Prepare on-site instructors to provide assistance on every topic covered in the center. DISTANCE LEARNING Cost Reduction Methods _ Serving multiple companies _ Serving multiple companies at the same time _ Having the provider and companies in different locations The most all-encompassing definition of distance learning might be: Training programs in which the instructor and students do not share the same physical space. Many other, less encompassing definitions of distance learning exist. The United States Distance Learning Association defines it as: The delivery of education or training through electronically mediated instruction including satellite, video, audiographic computer, multimedia technology and learning at a distance. Mind Extension University defines it as: The use of technology, including cable television, satellites, videotapes, telephones and computers to send educational content to students, wherever they are. The broadest definition would include educational techniques ranging from books, audiotapes, videotapes, computer-based training programs, correspondence courses, telecourses, and Internet courses to audioconferences, videoconferences, and docuconferences (people collaborating on shared documents via computers). The more narrow definitions would sort out techniques that were not electronically based or grounded in technology. Because direct interaction with an instructor is a feature of effective services, a more interesting breakdown might be based on students' access to instructors. With most books, audiotapes, videotapes, and computer-based training, all of the instructor's knowledge is conveyed through the media. Students do not have the opportunity to ask questions or get detailed, personalized feedback on their work (though the products might include questions, followed by answers, the students can use to gauge whether they are mastering the material). Of course all of these media can be used as part of a class with an instructor who answers student questions and provides feedback, but in general, these products function as stand-alone education techniques. Correspondence courses, telecourses, and Internet courses involve delayed communication between instructors and students. In most cases instructors provide information to students, students then work on their own, and finally the instructors provide feedback to the students on their work. With correspondence courses, instruction is usually provided via a product, such as a book, audiotape, or videotape. Telecourses involve broadcasts to television sets. For Internet courses, instructors use Internet e-mail to send information, assignments, practice exercises, and tests to students, possibly supplementing this instruction with books and tapes. These instructional techniques provide no opportunity for students to ask questions of the instructors while they are instructing, but they may provide forums for the students to ask questions later, perhaps by phone, fax, or over the Internet. For some of these education techniques, particularly a few of the Internet courses, the most valuable instruction occurs through feedback on student work. Only audioconferences, videoconferences, and docuconferences offer instantaneous communication between instructors and students, though a limited number of students may be able to avail themselves of it during a single class period. This instantaneous communication may take place through two-way video and audio transmission, one-way video and two-way audio transmission, two-way audio transmission, or two-way computer access. It can also involve one-way video and audio transmission with access to instructors during transmission via phone calls, faxes, or electronic response pads that allow students to ask questions and respond to instructors' questions. The following chart shows the degree of access generally associated with particular distance learning techniques, though individual distance learning programs may offer more or less access to instructors than is depicted in the chart. Degree of Access to Instructors Generally Associated with Particular Distance Learning Techniques Access to Instructors Distance Learning Techniques No Access to Instructors Delayed Access to Instructors Simultaneous Access to Instructors Books _ Audiotapes _ Videotapes _ Computer-Based Training _ Correspondence Courses _ Telecourses _ Internet Courses _ Audioconferences _ Videoconferences _ Docuconferences _ In evaluating the value of a particular distance learning technique, it may be less important to focus on the level of technology required than on the degree of interaction between the instructor and students. The rest of this distance learning discussion focuses on the delivery methods that include some interaction with an instructor: correspondence courses, telecourses, Internet courses, audioconferences, videoconferences, and docuconferences. Implementation Organizations' Use of Distance Learning Techniques Instructional Method Percentage Used Videotapes 92% Audiotapes 50% Computer-Based Training 48% Videoconferencing 18% Teleconferencing 16% Distance Learning via Computer 9% "1995 Industry Report" Training, October 1995 Many distance learning techniques have been in use for years. Some of the more technological ones are still not widely used. A 1995 survey found that organizations' use of various distance learning methods to provide instruction to their own employees ranged between 9 percent for distance learning via computer, to 92 percent for videotapes.2 Today, computer and telecommunications companies offer a range of equipment that companies or instructional institutions can purchase to set up their own distance learning programs. To date, few, if any, local providers are using distance learning to deliver services to multiple small and mid-sized companies. North Iowa Area Community College, however, arranged for the delivery, via videoconferencing, of a couple of targeted training programs to single companies. Other organizations are using distance learning in ways that might be adapted for use with multiple small and mid-sized companies. A cooperative partnership -- composed of educational and economic development institutions, resource agencies, and technology communications organizations in northeast and north central Nebraska -- is in the process of creating a Lifelong Learning Center, which will provide a variety of educational services to local citizens and businesses, including access to two-way interactive video and audio classrooms and computer labs. The center is designed to connect northeast and north central Nebraska to educational resources throughout the state, nation, and world. The federal government operates a variety of distance learning programs. The Forest Service provides supervisory training via satellite dish transmission and the Federal Aviation Administration Academy delivers instruction via one- way videoconferencing and electronic response pads. The Office of Personnel Management offers correspondence courses, the Department of Defense uses the Internet to teach dependents on different continents, and the Government Accounting Office uses fiber-optic lines during training to see and hear people in different locations. The military, of course, has been mailing instruction on computer disks, videodiscs, and CD-ROMS to service people for over two decades. Distance Learning Resources _ United States Distance Learning Association. Nonprofit association promoting the development and application of distance learning for education and training. P.O. Box 5129, San Ramon, CA 94583, phone 800/275-5162 or 510/606-5160, fax 510/606-9410, e-mail shelley@usdla.org. _ AT&T's Center for Excellence in Distance Learning (http://www.att.com/cedl/). Information about AT&T products and services, a collection of articles on distance learning, and connections to universities that provide more information. _ International Centre for Distance Learning (http://acacia.open.ac.uk/). Database of references and abstracts for over 7,500 documents. _ University of Wisconsin's Distance Education Clearinghouse (http://www.uwex.edu/disted/home.html). _ Distance Education Online Symposium (DEOS-L). Listserv with approximately 2,100 participants from 51 countries. Send e-mail to listserv@psuvm.psu.edu with message: subscribe DEOS-L Your Name. _ Distance Education Resource Guide (1993). Directory of distance education programs at over 300 community colleges. League for Innovation in the Community College, 26522 La Alameda, Suite 370, Mission Viejo, CA 92691, phone 714/367- 2884, fax 714/367-3885, e-mail johnson@league.org. _ The American Journal of Distance Education. Disseminates information and acts as a forum for criticism and debate about research in and practice of distance education in the Americas. American Center for the Study of Distance Education, the Penn State University, 403 S. Allen Street, Suite. 206, University Park, PA 16801, phone 814/863-3764, fax 814/865-5878, e-mail acsde@psuvm.psu.edu. _ The Distance Educator. Provides current information on practical applications of distance education in business, industry, public education, and government. 8680 Navajo Road, Suite 102-152, San Diego, CA 92119, phone/fax 619/461- 0625, e-mail saba@cts.com. National organizations, such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Technological University are broadcasting seminars to local providers who, in turn, are bringing together local firms. Some large companies are using distance learning techniques to provide training to outlying plants. JCPenney, for example, widely recognized for its training programs, uses a mix of workbooks, classroom instruction, on-line performance support, videos, and coaching to lead its managers and associates through the company's structured training program. Satellite broadcasts, CD rom, and on-line messaging are used to update managers' knowledge and skills on an on-going basis. Texas A&M University has been providing distance learning opportunities for large companies since September 1994. The university provides classes for Texaco at its main campus in College Station, TX, and uses videoconferencing to deliver the same classes to Texaco sites in Houston and Louisiana. Texaco employees at the distant sites have the opportunity to interact with the professor, as well as with students in the other sites. Mind Extension University offers courses and degree programs from more than 30 regionally accredited universities and education providers. Instruction is primarily delivered by cable television, satellite, or videotape, though some courses use audiotapes or computer software. The university uses electronic bulletin board and voice mail systems to allow students contact with professors or classmates at anytime. The Going the Distance project, another telecourse provider, furnishes distance learning degree opportunities for adult learners via a network of public television stations and 25 colleges in Nebraska. The Telecourse People, a group of six producers/distributors of multimedia course packages, is one of many companies offering high quality video and audio programs for use in conjunction with textbooks, study guides, and other supplemental materials. They market these materials to schools, colleges, universities, government agencies, and businesses for them to use as part of their instructional efforts. Their materials may be delivered through broadcast and cable television, Instructional Television Fixed Service (ITFS) systems (transmission of television signals between fixed locations for educational purposes), satellites, learning centers, or videocassette checkouts. A number of colleges are beginning to offer courses to students over the Internet. Honolulu Community College and Kapi'olani Community College have created courses for which remote students receive instruction over the Internet, have weekly problem-solving sessions with the instructor, and may contact the instructor via e-mail at other times. Front Range Community College has created an innovative "cybercollege" where students anywhere in the world can take courses on demand and receive support services using a personal computer and modem. Some 200 students participate in these classes each semester. While the system is ideal for delivering courses directly to business and industry participants, few such partnerships have been established. Cost-Cutting Techniques The most obvious way distance learning cuts costs is by reducing the time and other expenses associated with travel -- for the provider and/or the recipients. The Lifelong Learning Center expects that its telecommunication delivery methods will allow it to serve small numbers of learners in remote locations simultaneously, thereby engaging the critical mass necessary to keep costs low. North Iowa Area Community College used the Iowa Communications Network to deliver training in "flexography" from the Graphic Arts Technology Center in Clinton, IA, to its campus in Mason City, IA, thus saving the 30 individuals in the program ten hours of round-trip driving for each day of the training. Additionally, many distance learning efforts involve sharing the same materials with multiple recipients (which spreads out development costs), possibly at the same time (which spreads out delivery costs). North Iowa Area Community College has started to build a library of training options, including tapes of satellite downlink sessions and computer- based and multimedia-based training programs. Benefits and Costs When providing instruction to individuals spread out over large geographic areas, distance learning can have significant benefits over traditional training programs. Courses do not have to be put together as marathon cram sessions; they can be broken up into reasonable modules and delivered over longer periods of time. Because there is no need to worry about coordinating participants' travel schedules, new classes can be put on line relatively fast. And since the provider does not have to bring all of the recipients back to one site, follow-up classes can be put together more easily. The process of linking up individuals across distances can have value as well. An Oregon state-wide baccalaureate nursing program reported that nurses who became "electronically acquainted" with other nurses elsewhere in the state were then comfortable calling them for advice. In another distance learning program, linking students in remote sites up with other students gave them "virtual classmates" with whom they could interact (through e-mail). Some distance learning techniques provide participants with the opportunity to have information repeated as often as needed. A videotape, for example, can be rewound and replayed if it is not understood. Downlink sites for the National Technological University's Modern Manufacturing Video Conference Series own the rights to the broadcast videotapes, and can replay them at any time. Distance learning programs can afford access to the most skilled providers in the world. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Quality Learning Series pulls together some of the biggest names in management in the country. Much distance learning lets students control the schedule of delivery, increasing the likelihood that instruction will take place when it is needed. This flexibility in scheduling is also beneficial for employees with irregular schedules, such as those who travel frequently or do shift work. Of course distance learning has its drawbacks. Having instructors and students in different locations can limit the interaction between them. This problem is compounded when an instructor is teaching large numbers of students. While some distance learning techniques are inherently active (e.g., computer-based training), most provide passive learning experiences. Instructors reaching out to very diverse participants cannot customize materials to companies' or individuals' needs. Because instructors are not on-site with the students, it is difficult for them to help the students practice new skills on the job. While travel costs associated with distance learning programs can be much lower, design, delivery, and support costs can be much higher. Most of the more interactive distance learning techniques require a considerable up-front investment in technology. Video broadcasts tend to amplify poor teaching techniques. Instructors will need training (technical and instructional) to use technology effectively, and a wide variety of support staff will need to be prepared for their new responsibilities. In addition, most people suggest that it will also take instructors, and support personnel, more time to prepare and support distance learning programs than traditional classes. Distance learning technology is definitely a two-edged sword. On the one hand it opens up myriad possibilities for new and creative instruction. On the other hand it can overwhelm the instruction, with both the instructor and the students paying more attention to the media than the message. It can also fail. Computers crash. Internet and satellite links break off. Broadcasts delivered over cables can ghost or jump, and with some types of cable there is an audio delay. Some think that having students together in classes separate from the instructor is a benefit, others think it is a cost. All agree that these students are more likely to talk among themselves than they would in a traditional classroom situation. On the plus side, these students may help clarify points the teacher is making without disrupting the entire class. On the minus side, they may not be paying as much attention as they should. Innovations Research shows that distance learning programs are at least as effective as traditional instructional programs3 -- if they are implemented well. A good implementation requires: _ Building the program around the students. Setting it up to meet their needs. _ Providing students with access to the full range of academic and administrative resources. _ Consciously building interaction between the instructor and students into the program. _ Making the learning an active experience for the participants. _ Varying the activities over the course of a session so that the students remain engaged. _ Training the faculty. They cannot teach distance learning courses the way they teach traditional courses or they will not be able to retain students' attention. _ Providing instructors with the support -- administrative, technical, and instructional --they need. _ Making the technology as transparent as possible; helping learners forget that it is there. _ Providing a local instructor, in addition to the distance learning educator, when "hard skills" (e.g., technical skills as opposed to management skills) are taught. Distance Learning Instructors Must Be _ Dynamic _ Risk takers _ Visionaries _ Hungry _ Detail oriented _ Sensitive to learners _ Respected by other faculty _ Aware of the student community Distance Learning Instructors Must Have _ Sense of humor _ Thick skin _ Good self image _ Content knowledge _ Knowledge of instructional design _ A passion for student success Compiled by workshop participants at a National Council on Community Services & Continuing Education conference, October 1995. What makes distance learning programs effective is what makes all learning effective: interactive, participative, actively engaging instruction. Computer-based training requires active learning and usually provides students with immediate feedback. Many Internet courses are designed to provide one- on-one interaction between the instructor and the students. Docuconferencing also requires active engagement. The National Technological University consciously builds variety into its Modern Manufacturing Video Conference Series. Each session features a professional moderator, one or two subject matter specialists, and two or three manufacturers experienced with the process or equipment being highlighted. The university visits the manufacturers' sites before the broadcasts are aired to tape the processes or equipment in use. These case studies are then featured during the broadcasts. Both the National Technological University and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce encourage additional educational support at their downlink sites. Many of the university's downlink sites provide "wraparound" sessions, bringing local experts in to give attendees information on locally available resources and more opportunity for questions and answers. Some sites build on the satellite seminars with local workshops one week before and/or after the broadcasts. Some Chamber downlink sites build larger training events around Quality Learning Series seminars, including additional speakers, facilitated discussions, meals, and other activities. Using multiple media can make distance learning programs more effective. Some programs deliver pre-assessments and pre- training via computer before actual classes begin. This enables the provider to find out what the learning gaps are and bring everyone up to the same level before training begins. Computer newsgroups can be set up after classes have begun to maintain conversations among instructors and students and reinforce learning. Effective Services Characteristics Key Advantages: _ Using highly skilled providers. Key Disadvantages: _ Not supporting practice back on the job. Before jumping on the distance learning bandwagon it is important to conduct a cost-benefit analysis. Most distance learning techniques are not cheap. They frequently require delivery to large numbers of people to be cost effective. While distance learning has some distinct advantages, there may be less expensive instructional methods that are equally effective. Keys to Success _ Make sure the number of recipients you have will justify the high up-front development costs. _ Prepare instructors and support staff to use the media effectively. _ Use techniques to provide individualized assistance to participants -- companies and their employees. _ Encourage active involvement on the part of participants. _ Build variety into the program delivery. COMPUTER-BASED TRAINING Cost Reduction Methods _ Serving multiple companies _ Serving multiple companies at the same time _ Having the provider and companies in different locations _ Making services more productive Computer-based training is any training that uses a computer as the focal point for instructional delivery.4 With computer-based training, the computer provides training by serving as an electronic teacher or mentor. Computer-based training could easily be considered a form of distance learning, but because of its relatively wide-spread use and its unique attributes, it merits a separate discussion here. Most computer-based training uses one or a combination of the following techniques: _ Tutorial. Introduces new information that must be taught in a sequential manner. _ Drill and practice. Provides opportunities for practice when mastery of a new skill or information is desired. Should be used after initial instruction. _ Training games. Supplements other instruction. Used to provide motivating and engaging opportunities for practice after a skill or new information is taught. _ Simulation. Provides an opportunity for experimentation, and allows students to test assumptions in a realistic context. Used most often when practicing a skill in its real context is too costly or dangerous. Also used to model real-world situations in order to build realism and relevance into the training situation. _ Problem solving. Helps students develop skills in logic, solving problems, and following directions. Generally used to augment higher order thinking skills. _ Assessment. Places and then monitors students' progress within a curriculum. _ Demonstration or presentation. Supports the introduction of new information. Can be used as a review tool. Implementation A 1995 survey found that 48 percent of organizations use computer-based training to provide instruction to their own employees.5 Computer-based training can be quite elaborate. Many packages go beyond text-based instruction and incorporate graphics, animation, video, and/or audio into their programs. Good programs link assessment to instruction, so that students only take the training they need, and do not advance until they master each training objective. Computer-based training packages exist for both basic skills (reading, writing, math, communication), and more job-related skills, such as computer, regulatory, management, and technical skills. The IntegratorTM computer-based training series includes modules in mathematics, communication skills, interpersonal skills, and problem-solving skills using a functional context approach. This means that exercises are job-specific and have basic skills content taken directly from the workplace or occupational training programs. LexIcon sells computer-based training programs that use hypertext to link together job-related and basic skills instruction. Training modules on such topics as hazardous materials, total quality management, and communications are backed up with instruction on reading graphs or understanding difficult words and technical terms. Students work through the job-related instruction and only call up the supporting basic skills instruction, via hypertext, when they need it. Computer-based training can vary along a number of dimensions: timeliness, customizabilty, and instructional format. A Study in Contrasts _ Training Instruction. Bank loan officers receiving computer-based training instruction on filling out a new loan form would work through a sequential computer-based training package, separate from actual job performance. Upon completion of the training, the officers would be able to return to their work and complete the loan form correctly. _ Performance Support System. Bank loan officers being prepared to fill out a new loan form using a performance support system would not participate in a sequential training program. Instead, the bank would load the loan form onto officers' computers, along with optional instruction modules (the performance support system), and the officers would then call up instruction on specific aspects of the form as they were filling it out and had questions. _ Timeliness. All computer-based training provides great flexibility in when training is offered, though some is more flexible than others. For example, computer training instruction occurs separate from job performance, at times set aside during the work day or before or after work. Computer performance support systems, however, provide on- line support for actual work tasks as employees are doing their jobs (see the box "A Study in Contrasts"). _ Customizability. The degree to which computer-based training programs can be customized to company needs varies greatly. At one extreme are off-the-shelf packages where no modifications can be made. At the other extreme are customized programs, built from scratch, to company specifications, by professional computer-based training developers. In between are programs that allow companies to insert their own technical vocabulary in lessons or select the parts of a training package that are relevant to their needs, and authoring systems that let companies insert practice reading materials and create practice exercises from materials used on the job or in the employee handbook. _ Instructional format. Computer-based training can be offered as an independent study exercise, where trainees are expected to work through the instruction on their own, with little or no support. It can also be offered in a classroom environment, either at the company site or a provider's site, where trainees have access to an instructor who can provide them with assistance. A number of providers use computer-based training to serve multiple companies. The Literacy Initiative's Read & Achieve program provides computer-based, job-specific, basic skills training to company employees in Columbus, OH. An advisory committee of business representatives helped shape the Read & Achieve program, ensuring that the program met the business community's needs. The DeSoto County Literacy Council's Library Learning Link uses a wide area network to deliver computer-based training to eight northern Mississippi counties through libraries, businesses, community colleges, and Head Start centers. The Vermont Institute for Self Reliance uses a computer lab in a central learning center to provide workforce literacy training to three companies. The California community college system has developed a plan to help its Workplace Learning Resource Centers provide customized computer-based training to companies, while reducing duplication of effort. Community college workplace education providers in the state will use a common authoring system to develop customized computer-based training programs for their business clients. The modules developed will then be disseminated from a statewide library for other community colleges to use or adapt. Cost-Cutting Techniques Computer-based training can be very cost effective if it is used with a large number of individuals. The development costs for computer-based training are much higher than for traditional training, but delivery costs are much lower. The delivery costs can be virtually zero for a provider that just hands over a computer-based training package. For providers that also offer some instructional support, delivery costs are reduced because they can serve more recipients at the same time. Companies' participation costs are lower as well. Computer- based instruction requires less training time than instructor-led training. (The amount of reduction ranges from 20 to 80 percent, with 40 to 60 percent being the most common). This greater productivity is generally attributed to tighter instructional design, the option for participants to bypass content they do not need, and the opportunity for participants to focus on those sections of a course they have not yet mastered.6 All of the computer-based training programs identified for this publication receive some kind of subsidy for the services they provide. The Vermont Institute for Self Reliance is supported by a U.S. Department of Education workplace literacy grant, and a U.S. Department of Education grant helped start the Library Learning Link. The Library Learning Link now relies on state funds and volunteer assistance to cover the costs of ongoing support services, though revenue from business site license rentals is used to maintain and upgrade the system. Because California's computer-based workplace education program is being operated out of the community colleges, the state is underwriting some of the program's costs. Substantial public and private support was used to underwrite the development of the Read & Achieve program. The Literacy Initiative is in the process of patenting the Read & Achieve process, and plans to eventually make the program self- sustaining. Benefits and Costs In addition to being cost effective, computer-based training offers several advantages over other forms of training, including: _ Active engagement of the learner, _ Focus on only those skills trainees need to learn, _ Immediate feedback, _ Unlimited practice opportunities, _ Consistent, reliable instruction, and _ Flexible delivery schedule. There is very strong evidence that computer-based instruction results in an equal or higher quality of learning over traditional instruction.7 If the training is particularly content dense (many new concepts presented close together) or utilizes a hierarchy of skill acquisition (where current concept mastery is dependent on mastery of earlier concepts), computer-based training's integration of text, sound, graphics, and video facilitates the learning process. On average, people remember _ 10% of what they read, _ 20% of what they hear, _ 30% of what they see, and _ 50% of what they hear and see,8 so computer-based training's rich, multi-sensory delivery system can facilitate greater retention of new knowledge. There are two major drawbacks to computer-based training: 1) it frequently is not adequately customized to company needs, and 2) it may not provide individuals with the personalized attention they need. In addition, because development costs are higher for computer-based training, it is only cost effective if it is used by a large number of individuals. Innovations As discussed earlier, there are several ways to customize computer-based training to company needs short of developing an entire program from scratch. At the very least, providers can supplement computer-based training with work-related materials. The Read & Achieve program analyzes the skills required for specific jobs and departments, and then uses only the appropriate subset of skills from its larger computer-based instruction system as the base for each company's program. The California community colleges will be using an authoring tool to develop customized computer-based training, but will then save money by sharing their work with each other and not duplicating what others have done. Personalized attention is also possible. Most computer-based training provides some degree of individualization. Pre- assessments guide individuals to the training they need. Ongoing assessments determine whether they have mastered concepts or whether they need further instruction. The tireless nature of computer-based training allows individuals to repeat instructional units as often as necessary. In addition to this computerized personalization, many providers offer human assistance. The DeSoto County Literacy Council assigns a literacy tutor or community college teacher to work with each business using the Library Learning Link. The Vermont Institute for Self Reliance employs a literacy instructor at its learning center to provide instruction to those using its computer lab. Effective Services Characteristics Key Advantages: _ Encouraging active participation. _ Using highly skilled providers. Key Disadvantages: _ Not supporting practice back on the job. Keys to Success _ Make sure the number of recipients you have will justify the up-front development costs. _ Customize programs to company and individual needs and contexts. _ Provide live instructional options to back up computerized instruction. TRAINED VOLUNTEERS Cost Reduction Method _ Subsidizing costs Trained volunteers are used to provide workplace training services in a number of ways. In most instances, volunteers are used to supplement the work of paid professionals. These volunteers usually provide one-on-one or small group (three to five students) tutoring to students who have missed classes, are having trouble grasping particular concepts, or started training with lower skills than their peers. It is becoming more common, however, for trained volunteers to be the primary, or sole, instructional provider in workplace settings. Implementation While most trained volunteers who provide workplace education come from community-based organizations, some universities, community colleges, and adult education systems have large and active programs for volunteer tutors. Trained volunteers are most commonly used as part of a workplace delivery strategy for basic-literacy or English-as-a-Second-Language (ESL) services. These programs have a long history within the volunteer social services community. The movement of volunteerism into the workplace literacy field, however, is a more recent phenomenon. Both Laubach Literacy Action and Literacy Volunteers of America, Inc., two major national literacy associations, actively support workplace literacy efforts. When asked to identify volunteer literacy programs offering workplace instruction, Laubach Literacy Action was able to generate a list of 181 programs in 37 states, while Literacy Volunteers of America, Inc., reported 176 affiliates. In addition, Laubach Literacy Action maintains a Center for Workplace Literacy, which works directly with companies that have a need to improve the literacy skills of their workers. Literacy Volunteers of America, Inc., recently published LVA Works: A Guide to Workplace Education to help its affiliates develop effective workplace education programs. While literacy is the most common need addressed by trained volunteers, there is no reason volunteers cannot be used to deliver a broad range of workplace education instruction, provided they receive the proper training, support, and resources. A number of executive volunteer services, for example, are starting to offer the services of retired business professionals to small and mid-sized businesses and nonprofits. In general, however, it may be difficult to find many individuals willing to volunteer their services in fields other than literacy. Cost-Cutting Techniques Using trained volunteers reduces the cost of services by subsidizing them. One of the major components of cost -- salaries -- is eliminated for volunteer staff. However, the use of volunteers is not free, as costs must still be paid for the training, support, and administration of volunteer services. Additional subsidies may come from other sources. The Springfield Adult Basic Education program uses state and federal dollars to cover the costs of its services, and the Ozarks Technical Community College provides space and advertising for its services. The McHenry County College Adult Education and Literacy program receives the typical subsidies inherent in being a public college program. Benefits and Costs Because the volunteers usually provide one-on-one tutoring, they can furnish participants with completely individualized assistance. This assistance involves continuous interaction between the volunteer and the student, entails active participation on the part of the student, and can be provided on an "as needed" basis. Because the volunteers work so closely with the students, they are also in a position to help the students apply their new skills to their jobs. The main drawback to this method of delivery is obvious: it frequently relies on nonprofessionals to deliver services (though it may use retired professionals), potentially lowering the quality of services clients receive. Innovations Both the Springfield Adult Basic Education program and the McHenry County College Adult Education & Literacy program try to build the skills and support the activities of their volunteers. In both programs, volunteers work under the supervision of paid instructors, one-on-one with students who need additional assistance. The Springfield Adult Basic Education program prepares its volunteer tutors with 12 hours of Laubach tutor training before beginning work, and with in- service programs scheduled for its paid instructors. Effective Services Characteristics Key Advantages: _ Targeting individuals' needs. _ Promoting provider-recipient interaction. Key Disadvantages: _ Not using highly skilled providers. The McHenry County College program provides volunteers with 16 hours of training in either general literacy or English as a Second Language. After this training, volunteers that express an interest in working in companies are provided an additional orientation -- which includes an on-the-job experience scheduled between classroom instruction -- to prepare them. Keys to Success _ Train Volunteers thoroughly. _ Provide instructional support to volunteers while they are working. CONCLUSION The five delivery strategies discussed in this publication highlight numerous opportunities for providers to serve small and mid-sized companies cost effectively. None are panaceas. Each has the potential for sacrificing quality to economy. Some, if used inappropriately, could even prove to be more costly than traditional service delivery strategies. In deciding which service delivery strategies to pursue, providers should consider a number of things: _ Their own capabilities, or competitive advantage; _ Their access to needed equipment and materials; _ Their customers' key needs, or the characteristics of effective services most important to their customers; and _ Their customers' ability to access different types of services. Providers should then look at this information in light of the benefits and costs of each strategy, in order to decide which approach, or mix of approaches, will best enable them to meet their customers' needs cost effectively. These benefits and costs, beyond the potential for reducing the costs of services, are summarized in the chart below. Benefits and Costs of Different Service Delivery Strategies Service Delivery Strategies Benefits Costs Learning Consortia -Opportunity for members to learn from each other -Opportunity to access training better suited to members' needs -Long development lead-time -Significant on-going support -Potential loss in customization -Potential loss in support at company sites Walk-in Centers -"Just-in-time" services -Hands-on, active learning -High capital investment -Significant planning effort -No support at company sites -Potential loss in customization Distance Learning All -Access to most skilled providers in the world -Can enable extremely flexible scheduling -Can allow for repeating training as often as needed -Significant development time -Limited interaction with instructors -Mostly passive learning experiences -Little possibility of support at company sites -Potential loss in customization Technology-Based -Can build links among trainees -High capital investments -High investments in training Computer-Based Training -Active engagement of the learner -Ability to repeat training as often as needed -Flexibility in scheduling -High capital investments -Significant development time -High investments in training -Potential loss in customization -Potential loss in support at company sites Trained Volunteers -Usually provide individualized instruction -Potential for providing support at company sites -Significant investments in training and supervision -Potential loss in quality Used with care and creativity, the five strategies presented in this publication could help service providers open up whole new markets for themselves -- small and mid-sized companies -- markets thought by some to be the key to America's future economic prosperity. The rest of this publication contains five detailed case studies and 26 one-page summaries of programs delivering high-value services at relatively lower costs. This information should give providers additional insights into how to set up programs like these themselves. 0While most of the examples in this publication use subsidies to reduce costs, only the use of trained volunteers requires subsidies by definition -- using volunteers subsidizes salary expenses. 1For more information on learning consortia, see the National Workforce Assistance Collaborative's publication Approaches to Forming a Learning Consortium: A Guide for Service Providers (Washington, DC: National Alliance of Business, 1996). 2"1995 Industry Report," Training, October 1995. Survey was of U.S. organizations with 100 or more employees. 3Hal Hunter, "The Opposite Sector," Training & Development, May 1995. 4For more information on computer-based training, see the National Workforce Assistance Collaborative's publication Selecting and Implementing Computer-Based Training (Washington, DC: National Alliance of Business, 1996). 5"1995 Industry Report," Training, October 1995. Survey was of U.S. organizations with 100 or more employees. 6Brandon Hall, Return-on-Investment and Multimedia Training (San Francisco: Multimedia Training Newsletter and Macromedia, Inc., 1995). 7Ibid. 8Keith Saft, How Not To Get Burned, When Lightening Strikes: A Practical Approach to Producing Interactive Media (Pittsburgh, PA: All Night Media, 1995).
CASE STUDIES The following case studies provide information on five different programs employing three of the cost effective service delivery strategies highlighted in this publication: learning consortia, walk-in centers, and computer-based training. The studies are designed to give readers an understanding of how the programs operate and any implementation issues they might face in developing comparable programs. Consortium for Supplier Training 34 Lancaster Industrial Training Consortium 42 Business and Industry Services Center 50 Regional Manufacturing Technology Center 58 California Community College Workplace Education Program 68 One-page summaries of each of these programs are also included in the next section. CONSORTIUM FOR SUPPLIER TRAINING Introduction The Consortium for Supplier Training (CST) was established in late 1992 by a handful of North American-based, quality-focused, global companies to improve the performance of their suppliers. To achieve this goal, the Consortium sponsors a network of supplier training centers (STCs) which offer a full complement of performance improvement tools -- including assessments, training courses in Total Quality, and implementation and follow-up -- to Consortium members' suppliers, as well as non-suppliers. A world class training system that accelerates supplier learning and improves performance. Vision Consortium for Supplier Training The Consortium was created in response to increased global market competition requiring improved product quality at reduced prices. The Consortium's member companies had found that they could not sufficiently improve product quality by using quality practices in just their own firms; they also had to promote quality practices in their suppliers. Rather than each member company investing in upgrading all of its suppliers, Consortium members sought a way to share the costs for and streamline the process of improving suppliers' performance. The process the Consortium uses to provide supplier assistance is: 1) identify supplier needs; 2) identify and/or develop courses and other services to meet supplier needs; and 3) offer the services as cost-effectively as possible through a network of recognized educational institutions -- community colleges, universities, or technical schools with active industrial outreach programs. Consortium for Supplier Training Supplier Training Centers _ Dallas County Community College District, Dallas, TX _ Duquesne University, Pittsburgh, PA _ Finger Lakes Community College, Canandaigua, NY (Rochester area) _ Mesa Community College, Mesa, AZ _ Monroe Community College, Rochester, NY _ Northern Essex Community College, Haverhill, MA (Boston area) _ Oakland Community College, Auburn Hills, MI (Detroit area) Program Description The Consortium currently consists of six full member companies: Bayer Corporation, Chrysler Corporation, Eastman Kodak Company, Motorola, Texas Instruments, and Xerox Corporation. There are also 12 associate member companies: AEG Transportation, Alcoa, Deloite & Touche, Duquesne Light, Kennametal, Medrad, Oberg, Price Waterhouse, Respironics, SEMATECH (a consortium of ten U.S. semiconductor manufacturers), Texaco, Inc., and Westinghouse. Consortium members pair with, or sponsor, educational institutions to serve as supplier training centers. These STCs then become the delivery point for services. The Consortium members' individual suppliers -- both present and future -- are the Consortium's target customers. In most instances, participation is voluntary for Consortium suppliers. A few members, however, require their suppliers to take specific courses. STCs offer three types of services: 1) assessment, 2) training (or other interventions), and 3) implementation and follow-up. The Consortium currently sponsors 11 courses, but expects to add more every year. Consortium courses typically last eight to 24 hours, and may be delivered in a variety of formats, including full-day, evening, or weekend sessions. Consortium members undertake rigorous procedures to guarantee the quality of the courses offered through the program. First, they control course content. Five of the Consortium members contributed quality courses they developed for their own internal use to the Consortium training effort. Consortium for Supplier Training Course Curriculum _ Using the Malcolm Baldrige Criteria to Improve Your Company's Competitiveness _ Introduction to Techniques for Phased Process Quality Improvement _ Utilizing the Six Steps to Six Sigma _ Manufacturing Cycle Management - A Systems Overview _ Design for Manufacturability _ Introduction to Total Quality _ Partnering _ Problem Solving _ Performance Based Equipment Training _ Business Process and Cycle Time Management _ ISO 9000 Second, they ensure the skill of the STC course instructors by training and certifying them. Consortium-approved master trainers use strict, standardized guidelines, created by the Consortium based on members' own internal company guidelines, to certify the instructors delivering courses through the STCs. The Consortium categorizes its 11 courses as "required" or "elective." All STCs have to have someone on staff trained to deliver each of the required courses. And, while they need to offer all elective courses at least once a year, they may use an instructor from another institution for delivery. This enables the STCs to focus their attention on those courses that meet their customers' needs. STCs may offer the Consortium training courses to the public as part of their regular course offerings, but member companies' suppliers may be notified and given priority for registration. Although the Consortium focuses on quality-related services, some of the STCs have taken the initiative to integrate other course offerings into the program to help supplier companies become more competitive. All STCs have assessment tools to identify a range of activities companies may need to undertake to become high performance workplaces, including workplace literacy and skill training programs, installation of new technologies, and adoption of new workplace processes and workforce practices. Results The Consortium for Supplier Training benefits member companies, supplier companies, and the educational institutions that serve as supplier training centers, as well as the local economies where the companies are located and the nation's overall competitiveness. The primary benefit for member companies is an improvement in the performance of their suppliers. This improvement enables them to increase customer satisfaction and gain a competitive advantage, without each of them individually having to undertake the training of every one of their suppliers. Texas Instruments (TI) is a representative example of a Consortium company. TI has over 14,000 suppliers in the U.S., approximately 10 percent of which (1,400) supply 90 percent of all its materials and services. Of these 1,400 suppliers, 68 percent have fewer than 500, and 50 percent have fewer than 200 workers. These companies cannot afford to provide training to their employees on a continuous basis. The Consortium for Supplier Training was created to provide such companies with a cost-effective alternative for improving their performance. Supplier companies benefit as well. First, they do not have to participate in all of the quality programs developed by each of their customers; the customers have agreed on a single, common program. Second, the suppliers do not have to develop courses or hire expensive consultants themselves; they can send employees, as needed, to local STCs, or receive on-site training plus implementation and follow-up from STC consultants. Finally, and most importantly, the assistance suppliers receive helps them to improve their own performance, and thus their profitability. The educational institutions serving as STCs gain both products and markets. Consortium member companies supply them with high-quality, business- certified courses they can sell to all companies within their communities. Members also encourage their suppliers to attend these courses, and even take responsibility for promoting the STCs to their suppliers. Educational institutions' participation in the Consortium brings them prestige and recognition for providing high quality services. It strengthens their links with the business community, helping them target their courses to companies' needs and build a customer base to which they can offer additional products and services. The Consortium adopted Motorola's evaluation process and uses it with all Consortium courses. Participants are asked to rate their level of satisfaction in five areas: relevancy, learning, course design, instructor, and overall course. The responses from suppliers have been very positive in each of the categories, and have garnered the Consortium an overall customer satisfaction rating of 96 percent. History In February 1990, when the vice presidents of human resources in four companies -- Boeing, Digital Equipment Corporation, Motorola, and Xerox Corporation -- were meeting to discuss their companies' internal quality training programs, they began to raise questions regarding supplier training. While two of the companies (Motorola and Xerox) were required, as Malcolm Baldrige Quality Award recipients, to share information on quality processes, all of the companies were concerned about promoting quality in their suppliers. The vice presidents agreed to form a task force to examine the need for supplier training. As representatives of Quality-focused global companies headquartered in North America, our mission is to provide knowledge and methodologies to our suppliers which will enhance the quality of our products and achieve customer satisfaction. Mission Statement Consortium for Supplier Training Members of the task force decided to share among themselves, and with their supplier companies, courses and information that were neither proprietary nor gave away competitive advantage. Many of the courses they shared had been developed within the task force companies, and in some cases, were already being offered on the open market. From sharing training courses, the group moved to evaluating the courses, and then to endorsing a set of courses as the task force's standard. In 1992, the task force decided to form the Consortium for Supplier Training (CST) to manage the delivery of the training courses they had endorsed. Lawyers from each of the founding members hammered out legal agreements to ensure that antitrust laws would not be violated. Surmounting the legal issues was a time-consuming and arduous process. What resulted was a six-page membership agreement each company signed to join the Consortium. Structure Requirements for Full Consortium Membership _ Sign the membership agreement. _ Identify and qualify at least one supplier training center (STC) within one year. _ Allocate the equivalent of one person per STC as the "site sponsor." _ Pay for the certification of all courses installed at the sponsored site(s). Currently, the Consortium for Supplier Training consists of six full and 12 associate industry members, and seven supplier training centers. Full industry members sponsor supplier training centers and/or cover the cost of training instructors. Associate members do not have to sponsor an STC. They can participate with full members in sponsoring an STC and/or its instructors, or they can just contribute funds to a full member. Most of the supplier training centers are located near sponsor companies. Current members are planning to enlist new Consortium members from geographic regions where their own supplier bases are strong but where they don't yet have an STC, so that the new members can sponsor training centers in those areas. California, for example, is home to many of the Consortium members' suppliers, but there is not yet an STC in the state. Consortium Advisory Board Roles and Responsibilities _ Set the strategy and develop policies for the Consortium. _ Determine the instructor qualification process. _ Maintain Consortium by-laws and membership agreements. _ Establish supplier training center model specifications. _ Manage Consortium membership expansion and balance. _ Facilitate Consortium communications. _ Review STC performance provided by the training managers and facilitate independent quality systems reviews. _ Determine curriculum needs. _ Establish and maintain a standardized course evaluation process. _ Approve supplier training centers. The Consortium for Supplier Training is managed by an advisory board -- composed of five of the companies that are full Consortium members -- which is responsible for the strategic direction and oversight of the Consortium. This board represents the industry members and coordinates the network of supplier training centers. The responsibilities associated with being a Consortium member have evolved over time. Member companies now have to sign a simple one-page membership agreement containing the Consortium's vision and purpose and a commitment to establish a network of STCS and share curricula and materials. A more detailed list of responsibilities is contained in the Consortium's bylaws, which can be more readily amended by the Consortium's members. Originally, industry members were required to provide quality courses for the program and to sponsor a single training site. Now industry members do not have to be course owners, and a single industry member may sponsor more than one training center, or multiple industry members may pool resources to co- sponsor a single training center. Consortium membership still requires a substantial financial commitment. First, each Consortium company must supply a manager to coordinate activities with the STC it sponsors and with the Consortium. Second, each company must contribute towards the cost of certifying instructors for the courses offered by its STC. The Consortium operates under strict rules of conduct. Roles and responsibilities, some contractual, are clearly defined for all participants, including the supplier training centers. Criteria for selecting educational institutions as training sites and certifying instructors are strictly enforced to ensure quality. Each STC is required to employ an on-site program manager, and the centers must recoup their delivery costs from the fees that they charge. The Consortium for Supplier Training is not a static entity. The advisory board is taking on more decision-making and policy-setting functions, and new committees are being developed to manage the Consortium's curriculum and marketing functions. Supplier Training Center Roles and Responsibilities _ Be affordable. _ Have instructors "certified" in the STC curriculum. _ Apply tools and consult on implementation. _ Provide an adult learning environment. _ Handle all aspects of course delivery, staff, tuition, logistics, evaluations, course materials, production, and enrollment. _ Provide feedback using a common evaluation process. _ Meet all state and federal regulatory and non-discriminatory requirements. _ Adhere to all copyrights and licensing agreements. _ Provide open enrollment with preference to Consortium members' suppliers. The Consortium's curriculum and training delivery methods are under review. Currently all of the Consortium's courses have been developed by member companies, but courses from outside vendors are being considered. Consortium assistance has expanded from simply supplying courses to offering hands-on technical assistance as well. Some of the STCs are experimenting with delivering courses via video, CD rom, or other distance learning techniques. If successful, these could lead to a total restructuring of the Consortium's delivery mechanism. Finding ways to expand the Consortium's reach continues to be a priority. Members are looking into ways to encourage, or possibly require, their suppliers to participate in training. They are also beginning to look into providing training for their second and third tier suppliers (their suppliers' suppliers). The Consortium has developed marketing materials (brochures and a video) targeted externally to supplier (and other) companies to encourage them to participate in Consortium programs, and internally to colleagues in their own companies to encourage them to promote the programs to the suppliers with whom they work. Keys to Success The Consortium for Supplier Training is a cost-effective delivery strategy for all of the players involved. Member companies share the costs of developing training among themselves, rather than each developing duplicate training courses. Supplier training centers receive high-quality training courses, and are prepared to deliver these courses at little or no cost to themselves. And supplier companies pay nothing towards the cost of training development, and are able to share the costs of training delivery with other companies sending their employees to the same sessions. The Consortium identifies training needs within the supplier community, and develops courses to meet those needs. Working together, member companies ensure that the training courses they offer meet the highest standards in the world. The Consortium continually evaluates the training sessions being delivered, ensuring that both content and delivery are kept up to standard. We believe what we are doing is the right thing for U.S. business and the Consortium companies, and that it will make a difference for industrial training in this country. Patti Glenn Texas Instruments Community colleges and other educational institutions provide an ideal training distribution system, with the potential of reaching 80 percent of the member companies' combined supplier bases. Delivery schedules are flexible, established to meet the needs of the local supplier companies. Consortium companies provide direct, often personalized, marketing to their suppliers, and the STCs may give these suppliers priority in enrollment. Educational institutions receive multiple benefits from participation. In addition to the curricula and its associated training, they are provided with help in marketing their new line of services to local companies. They also can use their new business connections as markets for other products and services, and as a base for promoting economic development in their communities. Issues to Consider The Consortium for Supplier Training is an excellent example of how high- quality training can be delivered to small and mid-sized companies cost effectively. It is a collaborative venture that combines the knowledge base of a number of large companies with the delivery capacity of existing educational institutions. As a collaborative venture, though, it has its own drawbacks. Collaborative processes are time consuming and expensive. They require high levels of trust and commitment from all members. Working out agreements and defining roles within a collaborative may take several years -- several years before any of the collaborative's objectives can be addressed. The Consortium's main challenge today is to increase supplier company participation. In 1995, over 200 supplier companies participated in the training, with 12,000 individuals (from both supplier and non-supplier companies) trained. This is a considerable improvement over the Consortium's start-up years -- it trained only 1,100 individuals in 1993 and 1,400 in 1994 -- but far below the Consortium's goal. Consortium members could benefit from enlisting their colleagues as partners in recruiting supplier companies. Frequently, it is the company production managers who have the closest contact with suppliers and know what the suppliers' development needs are. The Consortium is just beginning to directly market these key "influencers" in their companies, educate them about what the Consortium is and can do, and encourage them to promote supplier participation in Consortium programs. Contact Patti Glenn Corporate Manager for Supplier Quality Improvement Texas Instruments P.O. Box 655303 Mail Station 8312 Dallas, TX 75265 phone: 800/882-6638 or 214/997-2400 fax: 214/997-2407 Finally, the Consortium must continue to work on demonstrating a link between participation in STC programs and improved supplier performance. It takes more than just attendance at training classes to improve performance -- the training concepts must be applied in order to alter companies' internal work processes. The Consortium's three phase program of assessment, training (or other intervention), and implementation and follow-up may be the recipe for success, but more companies need to go through all three phases, and more time needs to pass before this can be determined conclusively. LANCASTER INDUSTRIAL TRAINING CONSORTIUM Introduction Membership in the consortium allows us to share best practices with other companies and to provide input to the local learning institutions about our skills and training needs. Linda Brennan Johnson & Johnson MERCK The Lancaster Industrial Training Consortium is a membership organization of 22 manufacturing companies and six educational institutions working to develop both incumbent and unemployed workers. The consortium acts as a major resource for Lancaster County businesses by developing training curriculum, sponsoring technical training programs, coordinating resources between area educational institutions and companies, and providing a network for sharing information and expertise on issues related to workforce development. The level of unemployment in the Lancaster County area remains among the lowest in the country. The economic base of the county consists primarily of small businesses across a wide range of industries, including manufacturing, agriculture, and service. This broad economic base has provided the area with a stable economy which has remained strong during economic cycles and shifts. The Lancaster Industrial Training Consortium was formally organized in 1991. The Lancaster County Area Vocational-Technical Schools serves as the fiscal agent for the consortium, and the Ben Franklin Partnership Program, a state- funded foundation providing assistance to projects that improve the economic competitiveness of Pennsylvania, provides a large part of the consortium's financial support. The consortium is governed by an advisory board made up solely of industry representatives, and is staffed by an executive director. Program Description The 22 manufacturers and six educational institutions of the Lancaster Industrial Training Consortium seek to increase the capacity and quality of their training and information exchange. Business membership is limited to the manufacturing industry to preserve the consortium's focus. A number of the companies in the consortium are older, traditional companies that are making dramatic changes in the way they operate and train their employees. While the consortium is not presently seeking new members, it is re-admitting some companies that had previously been members, but had discontinued activity in the consortium for various reasons. The education members of the consortium include vo-tech schools, community colleges, and universities. The consortium's advisory board plans to conduct an annual survey of its members to determine training needs. The results of this survey will be used to plan consortium activities and set priorities for the use of consortium funds. The consortium's members and executive director will use the survey results to identify, develop, and conduct workforce training sessions that will have lasting value to both employees and the companies. I wear many hats in my position as Human Resources Manager, and I cannot devote my efforts full-time to training issues. The consortium members share their successes and failures. This feedback can help keep me from going down the wrong path. Jan Elsen Fenner Manheim Training is provided through a number of avenues. First, if there is sufficient interest among members, the consortium may choose to use its own funds to sponsor a workshop or seminar. A nominal fee may be charged for attendance at these events. Second, member companies may contract with one or more of the consortium's six education members to conduct training for specific in-house needs. A portion of the financial support from the Ben Franklin Partnership Program is designated to reimburse member companies for up to 20 percent of the cost of this contract training. Disbursement of the Ben Franklin funds is handled by the consortium, leaving the companies to pay the provider only for their share of the training cost. We were dissatisfied with the unanticipated politics between and within the various educational institutions with which we worked. Linda Brennan Johnson & Johnson MERCK Third, members are encouraged to share their own internal training with employees from other companies, for a per-person charge. By sharing training, the host company is able to defray costs, and the invited companies, often the smaller of the consortium's companies, gain access to training they might not be able to afford otherwise. Host companies bill participating companies directly. Sharing internal training has become such a valued activity that some companies schedule their internal training in consultation with other member companies. In 1994, the consortium arranged a full-day training conference for its members. Workshops were conducted by experts from within each member company on a variety of topics. These topics were selected from a list of training needs compiled from a survey of member companies. The conference allowed each member company to highlight some of its training strengths, and to learn from the experiences and expertise of other companies. The conference was particularly successful because all the training came from staff within member companies. The conference revealed the level and breadth of knowledge contained within the member companies. Because member companies had difficulty hiring qualified employees, the consortium developed the Lancaster Employment Advantage Program (LEAP), an employment preparation program for industrial maintenance occupations. In early 1995, a task committee of two companies, two providers, and the director identified core skills required for employment and developed the curriculum to teach those skills. Lancaster Employment Advantage Program The consortium and the Lancaster County Area Vo-Tech Schools have developed a series of pre-employment classes to introduce basic skills and work experience to potential employees. The Lancaster Employment Advantage Program (LEAP) helps individuals improve their knowledge and skills and increase their chances for securing gainful employment. Participants come from job training programs, voluntary walk-ins, and company sponsorships. The basic training, consisting of eight courses, prepares individuals for entry level positions in maintenance, machine operation, and machine setup. Individuals completing each course receive a continuing education certificate. Persons completing the eight basic courses and an additional 17 advanced courses receive a mastery of subject certificate and job placement assistance. Employers benefit by being assured that the graduates of LEAP have proven competence in basic workplace skills and have demonstrated positive motivation and a willingness to work. The eight courses last for 69 hours, take five weeks to complete, and are available both daytime and evening. The cost for the eight courses is $345. LEAP's basic package has eight skills courses, while the advanced package offers an additional 17 courses. LEAP is available to individuals who are unemployed, underemployed, or incumbent workers. The consortium's director is actively marketing LEAP to job training programs around the county. Results Since joining the consortium in 1994, Electroplaters of York, Inc., (with 100 employees) has offered four courses to upgrade the skills of 43 employees. These courses, on problem solving, troubleshooting, team building, and physics, were taught by the Lancaster County Area Vo-Tech Schools using Ben Franklin funds. The course results were impressive enough for the company to invest over $28,000 to create a training/conference room where classes could be conducted in a clean, quiet, and comfortable environment. As a small company, you get caught up in your own workplace issues. The consortium allows you to see outside those issues. Steve Kelly Electroplaters of York New Standard Corporation, a metal stamping firm which employs 350 workers (275 of whom are hourly), has been a member of the consortium since it started in 1991. New Standard has used the consortium and Ben Franklin funds to develop complete training packages in three areas: industrial electricity (14 mechanics trained), fluid power (ten mechanics), and programmable logic controllers (16 mechanics). New Standard credits the consortium with making the development of these training sessions possible, and with giving it access to faxes, phone calls, and mail notices about other companies' training sessions. Being a member of the consortium is one of the best things we've done regarding employee training and development. Doug Sisson Clark Filter Clark Filter, Inc., has been a member of the consortium for two years. In cooperation with the consortium and Millersville University, Clark has implemented a career planning program for its 95 employees. This program involves an assessment process, individual consultations, and a career planning workshop. Clark is also able to offer its employees access to training workshops that would not have been available had the company not been a member of the consortium. For instance, Clark's human resources manager has attended a training session on pay-per-skills, taught at and by Johnson & Johnson MERCK, and a session on calculating return on investment, taught jointly by Penn State University and the Lancaster County Area Vo-Tech Schools. In its first year in the consortium, Herrmidifier Company, Inc., made an $8,000 investment in training and consortium related activities, and realized a savings of $12,000 in reduced scrap --a savings it credits to the training. In general, member companies are taking advantage of the expertise and opportunities available to them through the consortium. They are sharing more of their internal training and are searching for more ways to strengthen their network. Members see the consortium as a vital means of improving the region's economy and competitiveness, which will benefit them all. History In 1984, the Lancaster County Area Vo-Tech Schools formed a business advisory committee to help upgrade its industrial training programs for high school students. The advisory committee was asked to help develop new curricula and identify new equipment that the Lancaster County Area Vo-Tech Schools should acquire. This process was so successful and satisfying for the companies involved that, in 1985, they sought to expand the Lancaster County Area Vo-Tech Schools' training services to incumbent workers. The companies saw in this effort a unique opportunity to create a program that responded directly to their needs. This program, originally called Custom Industrial Training, later developed into the Lancaster County Area Vo-Tech Schools' Workforce Development Institute. By 1991, the Workforce Development Institute had grown to a point where the Lancaster County Area Vo-Tech Schools recognized a need both for more providers to be involved and for the effort to become self-sufficient. The Vo-Tech Schools invited five new providers to join the effort, and the active members officially created the Lancaster Industrial Training Consortium. A proposal for support was submitted to the Ben Franklin Partnership Program and, with the funds it provided, the consortium began to make plans. In 1995, the consortium hired its first executive director. Structure Role of the Advisory Board 1. Create and review the consortium's mission statement and objectives. 2. Review membership criteria and applications. 3. Provide guidance and direction for the consortium. 4. Facilitate communication among member companies. 5. Identify common training opportunities. 6. Respond to industry needs. 7. Perform an annual review of the director. 8. Identify opportunities to provide services to consortium members. 9. Review the allocation of resources, Ben Franklin funds, and membership fees. 10. Make recommendations regarding membership responsibilities and dues. The consortium is governed by an advisory board composed of four members, all of whom represent business, and are usually the human resources or training directors of member companies. The advisory board meets at least every two months. Advisory board members serve one-year terms, with one of the members' terms ending every quarter. This assures that the entire board does not turn over at the same time and provides consistency to the board's operation. The advisory board is authorized to make final decisions about allocating funds from the Ben Franklin Partnership program, but all other decisions are reviewed by the full membership of the consortium. The consortium hired its first executive director in January, 1995. The director is responsible for coordinating and facilitating the consortium's training efforts, conducting needs analyses for member companies and their employees, creating an evaluation tool for consortium training sessions, and helping companies calculate return on investment for the training they conduct. The director tracks the training needed and the training sessions offered by each company, helps match companies' needs with available training, and helps arrange for or develop training for those needs that aren't readily met. To a large extent the director's job is to facilitate the exchange of information between members. The director also works with the educational members of the consortium to improve their ability to effectively and cost-efficiently serve businesses and to understand training from a business perspective. She also helps coordinate referrals between providers if one is unable to meet the needs of a particular company. Director's Responsibilities 1. Chair quarterly meetings. 2. Coordinate training among companies. 3. Conduct needs analyses and assessments within companies. 4. Administer grants. 5. Recruit companies and educational institutions. 6. Ensure communications among companies. 7. Develop companies. 8. Convince companies of the viability of the consortium. 9. Network with other organizations, consortia, and associations. 10. Identify other funding sources as needed. 11. Report to the advisory board. 12. Make recommendations and draft action plans for the consortium based on individual company needs. The consortium meets monthly at one of its members' facilities. The consortium's budget for the 1995/1996 project year (PY) is $443,780, including $80,000 from the Ben Franklin Partnership Program and $363,780 consortium members donate in the form of cash, equipment, and in-kind support through their participation in consortium activities. The Ben Franklin Program has supported the consortium for four project years, with grants of $120,000, $110,000, $80,000 and currently $80,000 for PY 1995/1996. The PY 1995/996 Ben Franklin funds will be used for salaries ($49,200), subcontracts ($10,000), seminars ($7,300), and other expenses ($3,500). Historically, funding from members covered their own participation in consortium activities, but did not directly support consortium projects. The consortium instituted a membership fee of $250 in PY 1995/1996. The revenues from this membership fee are earmarked to support development of a resource library. Presently, the consortium is run out of office space provided by the Lancaster County Area Vo-Tech Schools. The director is paid through the Lancaster County Area Vo-Tech Schools, but is not an employee of the Vo-Tech Schools. While the director works closely with the Lancaster County Area Vo-Tech Schools' president, she reports to the consortium's advisory board. Keys to Success The Lancaster Industrial Training Consortium is successful because it has developed a battery of programs and services that meet members' training needs. Having member companies pro-actively share their training is considered to be one of the consortium's best features. While this feature was difficult to initiate at first, now that it is becoming accepted, members agree that it alone is reason enough to remain in the consortium. The LEAP program also is seen as a key consortium benefit. It was developed through the consortium, by industry representatives, to improve the work- readiness of existing and future employees in the Lancaster area. Because industry representatives helped develop the program, consortium members are confident that trainees will graduates with skills needed on the job. Consortium Goals Short Term (6 months): 1. Design and print a brochure. 2. Secure funding for companies interested in LEAP. 3. Conduct a survey of industry training needs. 4. Organize a committee to advise on school curriculum and equipment. 5. Update the training manual. 6. Promote LEAP through the chamber, job services, etc. Intermediate Term (12 to 19 months): 1. Evaluate LEAP. 2. Develop a structured evaluation of consortium training. 3. Increase the amount of shared training among member companies. 4. Increase peer exchange. Long Term (3 to 5 years): 1. Expand LEAP into areas beyond industrial maintenance. 2. Make the consortium self sufficient. 3. Develop a wider customer base. The resource library being developed for members' use will provide valuable training support for member companies. By using membership funds to create this library, the consortium is showing members an immediate and direct benefit from their financial contributions. The skills of the executive director are another key to success. The consortium's executive director has an extensive background in industry. She is a mechanical engineer, and spent 15 years working in Lancaster area industries. In her last job prior to becoming the executive director of the consortium, she was the production manager and quality control manager for a mid-sized manufacturer, where she also had responsibility for overseeing corporate training. She brought this company into the Lancaster consortium when she was still working there. As a representative from industry, and as someone who has been directly responsible for training within her company, the executive director is able to successfully bridge the gap between the business and educational members of the consortium. Another key to success is the creation of a market for training services, which the consortium fostered, in the Lancaster area. Educational members are competing with each other to provide services to the business members. This market has shifted more power to the companies, and has forced the educational institutions to create services that meet the needs of business. One characteristic that both business and educational members of the consortium agree is a key to success is the business-only policy on the advisory board. The lack of provider members prevents provider politics from diverting attention away from the consortium's primary focus on meeting industry needs and addressing industry concerns. Issues to Consider The consortium gives a group of companies the power to force schools to serve the companies' needs. Greg Burkholder Lancaster County Area Vo-Tech Schools The consortium's origins stem largely from the efforts of the Lancaster County Area Vo-Tech Schools, and the consortium has continued to evolve with significant support from the Vo-Tech Schools. As a result, the consortium is frequently, and erroneously, seen as a part of, or at a minimum, too closely tied to the Vo-Tech Schools. This has caused some confusion for both businesses and other educational members of the consortium trying to understand all of the consortium's activities and policies. It also diminishes the desired impression that the consortium is business oriented. During 1993 and 1994, the consortium experienced a decline in business involvement. Members attribute this to an increase in decision making roles for providers. The consortium became dominated by providers and moved too far away from being industry-led and industry-focused. Whether or not the consortium can continue to operate depends on whether it can achieve self sufficiency. This will hinge on how the members respond to the end of Ben Franklin funding in another year or two. Members have accepted the introduction of $250 membership fees, but fees of at least $1,000 will probably be needed for the consortium to be self sufficient. It is unclear whether members will be willing to pay such fees. Contact Judy Youngeberg, Director Lancaster Industrial Training Consortium 1730 Hans Herr Drive Willow Street, PA 17584 phone: 717/653-0407 fax: 717/653-0901 Finally, the consortium's ultimate success requires that both business and education members have the full blessing and support of their upper management. It remains to be seen whether members will commit the significant amounts of time and money needed to sustain the consortium beyond its period of subsidy. BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY SERVICES CENTER Introduction The Business and Industry Services Center (BISC) -- a self-supporting facility of Rancho Santiago Community College, the largest community college in Orange County, CA --provides one-stop assistance to the local business community. The center houses a number of programs for small and mid-sized companies, including the county's small business development center (SBDC), business incubators, business ownership services (BOSS), contract education, quality assurance training, and a workplace learning resource center. BISC specifically targets its services at the area's small and mid-sized companies, the number of which are growing rapidly. More than 1,000 manufacturing businesses have opened in Orange County since 1990, most by some of the 45,000 county residents who lost their jobs at aerospace, computer, or high-tech manufacturing companies between 1989 and 1995 (Orange County Register, October 8, 1995). The Business and Industry Services Center is a self-supporting facility of Rancho Santiago Community College with an emphasis on economic development. We provide entrepreneurs with a growth environment for newly formed ventures. We are the community's training and consulting partner in defining creative solutions through [our] programs of distinction. Mission Statement Business and Industry Services Center To better meet the business community's needs, BISC has developed numerous partnerships with, among others, the city of Santa Ana, Orange County, other county community colleges, the state Employment Development Department, and the local Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA) program and private industry council. While this case study provides information on all of BISC's services, it contains a more in-depth review of the Workplace Learning Resource Center and its particular services to the business community. Program Description BISC's services include: _ Workplace Learning Resource Center, a literacy and basic skills program featuring a multi-modal learning laboratory equipped with computer learning systems; _ Small Business Development Center, no-cost, individualized business consulting services for small to mid-sized businesses and entrepreneurs; _ Contract Education, a wide range of customized training services, delivered at the worksite on a fee-for-service basis; _ Quality Assurance, instruction on such topics as total quality management (TQM) and statistical process control for college students and local businesses; _ Business Incubators, an executive suite service for small businesses that require a supportive environment to grow and then move into the community; _ Business Ownership Services System, an intensive entrepreneurial training program for laid-off and/or unemployed individuals; and _ Labor Market Consortium, information on employment, sales, and economic performance from 98,000 employers in the county. BISC is generally open from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Each program housed within BISC, however, may establish its own service hours, depending on its clientele and training schedule. Some programs also offer courses, training, or consultations on weekends. The workplace learning resource center (WLRC) provides English-as-a-second- language (ESL), literacy, and basic skills services. It uses a variety of instructional methods, including computer-aided instructional software, laserdiscs, online learning resources, audio cassettes, video tapes, and written texts. The center currently has ten computer stations and, funding permitting, plans to add more in 1996. The WLRC gains most of its students through two channels. First, employees from companies contracting with the college and BISC for education and training services might use the center. Second, clients from various job training programs purchasing services from BISC may use the center. Contract Education Contract education offers a wide range of customized training and employee development services delivered at a company's worksite on a fee-for-service basis. BISC's contract training includes total quality management, statistical process control, customer service, supervision, and computer applications. The WLRC offers students the options of self-directed, individualized, and classroom instruction. Its schedule and instructional philosophy allow for immediate, just-in-time training, as well as long-term basic skills remediation. The WLRC is open for drop-in, self-paced services from 8:00 a.m. until 8:30 p.m., Monday through Thursday, and on Fridays from 8:00 a.m. until 2:00 p.m. In the mornings the WLRC offers small-group instruction for job training clients who are seeking positions as bilingual clerical support staff. Noncredit, continuing education General Educational Development (GED) classes are held at the WLRC every afternoon and on two evenings. Students who attend either the bilingual clerical or the GED sessions may also use the center on a drop-in basis during the remainder of the week. The philosophy of the WLRC is to build instruction around transferable literacy skills. As a result, the curriculum developed by the WLRC generally does not emphasize job-specific learning. Students not associated with a particular company who use the WLRC on a drop-in basis work with the