Canadian HR Reporter

CANADIAN HR REPORTER CANADIAN HR REPORTER April 21, 2014 April 21, 2014 18 FEATURES FEATURES HEALTH AND SAFETY The secret to making training stick Expensive safety training sessions wasted without followup, fi nds IWH study By Trevor King I t's a scenario seen time and time again: Workers come back from a training pro- gram and show improvements — for awhile. But then routine sets in, work pressures push aside the new learning and peo- ple slide back into old habits. Within a few months, it's almost like that costly training program never happened. So how can organizations make safety training stick? If employers want to see continued improve- ments in workers' safety practices, they should add a few followup sessions that help workers build the confi dence to put their new learning to use. That's according to a recent study from the Institute of Work & Health (IWH) that looked at the eff ectiveness of ergonomics train- ing for offi ce workers. "A lot of organizations do train- ing by having a trainer parachute in, off er the training, then leave," says IWH senior scientist Ben Amick, who led the study. "We think that if you want to change practices, there has to be some followup to support em- ployees on using their new skills." e study compared the eff ec- tiveness of four diff erent ways of delivering ergonomics training: online, in-person, online with followup and in-person with fol- lowup. e good news? It doesn't matter that much whether train- ing is delivered in-person or on- line — both are about equally ef- fective, according to the study. e better news? Whichever format is used, it doesn't take much to make the training stick. Online versus in-person Amick's team recruited more than 400 offi ce workers from fi ve orga- nizations across southern Ontario in the municipal, education and utility sectors. Building on prior research, the team used an ergo- nomics training curriculum. Both the classroom and on- line training offered the same evidence-based, standard-com- pliant, nine-module content. Both took about 90 minutes to complete, though online learn- ers had the fl exibility to leave and pick up the training anytime they wanted during a three- to four- week window. Study participants were broken into fi ve groups. One group re- ceived only the classroom training and another only the online train- ing. e third group was given the classroom training plus followup, and the fourth group was given the online learning plus followup. e followup consisted of three half-hour group sessions that took place once per month for three months after the initial training. Supervisors of the two followup groups also took part in a 90-min- ute group session focused on ways to support workers. e fi fth group, acting as the study's control group, was given no training at all and instead was simply provided links to ergo- nomics information on Ontario's Ministry of Labour website. Measuring the outcomes e research team tracked several scores at several intervals — be- fore the training and at three, six and nine months after the train- ing. e team measured workers' knowledge about ergonomics, their postures, their workstation confi gurations, workstation ad- justments and the daily change in pain or discomfort. They also measured what's called "self-efficacy" — in this case, the confi dence workers had in their own ability to solve their workstation problems and help co-workers do the same. In most measures, the team found better outcomes with those who received training than those who didn't. "What that says is training mat- ters," says Amick. " at's good to know." Also, at the three-month check- in, the research team found scores for both the online learners and the classroom learners tracked pretty closely to one another. "So if you as a manager or a trainer have been wondering whether to off er elearning or in- person training, the answer is: Just pick one," says Amick. "You'd be fi ne either way." However, in the groups that didn't have the followup training, the improvements across many measures started to level off af- ter three months. In contrast, the two groups that received the fol- lowup sessions continued to make improvements. e only measure where dif- ferences were not found between the groups was that of pain symp- toms. is seems surprising but could have been due to the low level of pain symptoms to begin with, he says. e team also made a few ob- servations about learner behav- iour during the study. Though untested scientifi cally, the follow- ing notes may have some bearing on whether a training program is likely to stick: Self-effi cacy may be the key: Self-efficacy is the confidence workers have in their ability to apply their new knowledge. is should be a key objective in train- ing design, says Amick. "It has built-in momentum," he says. "In our study, the more peo- ple changed their workstations to reduce risk, the more confi dence they gained and the more actively they engaged in managing their health and offi ce workplace." Self-effi cacy may be a key fac- tor in the eff ectiveness of other types of health and safety training as well, though further research is needed on this, he says. Third session's the charm: A good group dynamic assist- ed in building confidence and self-effi cacy. "The group facilitator's role was partly to answer questions, as an expert in ergonomics," says Amick. "But, mostly, the facilita- tor's role was to build eff ective group dynamics. And, typically, it took about three sessions for groups to gel. What you want to see is workers talking with each other to solve problems." Supervisors play key role: Supervisors need to be reminded that people are watching them and they play a key role in model- ling health and safety norms. And contrary to the common view that it's diffi cult to fi nd supervisors willing to participate in training, Amick's team found the supervi- sors taking part in this study were more than eager. "If they see the benefi t for them, they'll take part," he says. Trevor King, a member of the research team looking into the eff ectiveness of diff erent methods of delivering ergo- nomics training, is a knowledge trans- fer ass ociate at the Institute for Work & Health (IWH). IWH is an indepen- dent, not-for-profi t organization that conducts research to promote and protect the safety and health of work- ing people. To sign up for its news, visit www.iwh.on.ca/e-alerts. result of a mental health issue are treated diff erently than those with a physical health problem. For ex- ample, while more than one-half (54 per cent) of employees said ac- commodation measures are pro- vided for employees with physical health issues, only one-third (32 per cent) believe this is true for employees with mental health is- sues, found the Conference Board of Canada. This lack of support is likely contributing to longer durations of absence and a higher rate of relapse or recurrence among em- ployees with mental health issues. For those with physical health problems, the return-to-work suc- cess rate is 83 per cent. However, for employees with mental health issues, return-to-work success is only 63 per cent, found the study. Only 56 per cent of employees with both a physical and a mental health issue successfully return to work. While most employees believe their success at work would be infl uenced negatively if they took a health-related leave of absence from work, this is particularly true if the leave is due to a mental health issue. Overall, almost one- quarter (22 per cent) of employees who had taken a leave of absence believe this negatively affected their career success — this rises to 31 per cent among employees with a mental health issue. The impacts on employees' careers can include long-lasting, persistent, negative views regard- ing their competence, limited op- portunities for promotions, fewer development opportunities, less pleasant tasks or jobs, fewer or less desirable shifts, and even the loss of their jobs (by being fi red, laid off or encouraged to leave the organization). e experiences of employees with physical and mental health issues and the support they are provided to better manage their conditions vary significantly. While this may be because of a focus on compliance with occu- pational health and safety legis- lation, Canadian organizations need to adapt to new realities. A failure to address mental health issues directly contributes to employee absences. Louise Chénier is senior research as- sociate at the Conference Board of Canada. She can be reached at (613) 526-3090 ext. 305 or chenier@confer- enceboard.ca. MENTAL HEALTH < pg. 14 Varied support Varied support Self-effi cacy is the confi dence workers have in their ability to apply their new knowledge. This should be a key objective in training design.

• Cover