The 30/30 Plan stands for 30% reduction in time to proficiency in 30 days. This means is that at the end of 30 days there is a detailed plan for improving overall proficiency as well as getting new employees up-to-speed faster than ever. It’s really a quick start version of a full Learning Paths project. Unlike expensive and time consuming needs analysis and competency studies at the end of 30 days, you are ready to implement a new and faster Learning Path.

    A 30/30 Plan is used when an organization wants to determine what training is really needed and what new training needs to be developed. This includes identifying when elearning, classroom or blended learning should be used. It’s a cost-effective replacement for traditional needs assessments. competency studies and other research projects tend to be very expensive and take a long time to complete. It frees up more money for actual training.


    The basic difference in this approach. In a traditional needs analysis, you’re looking for problems to solve. You’re trying to answer the question, “what training is needed?” Often what results is what I call, “the usually suspects.” It’s a list of all the favorite course. When you do a needs analysis in sales, you always get a need for prospecting, cold calling, handling objections, making presentations, closing, and social styles. You can get a similar familiar list with leadership headed by things like team building and communications. Of course, this analysis can be much more detailed but they tend to look very similar.

    With the 30/30 plan we start with a completely different point of view. First we assume that in every organization there is a need to improve time to proficiency. We also assume that reducing time to proficiency will yield significant measurable benefit that are usually financial in nature. As we say, ”every minute employees are less than fully proficient is costing you money.” Now instead of having a problem solving project we have a process improvement project that allows us to get down to work immediately rather than waiting for the results of an assessment.

    Here’s what can be done in 30 days. First, we start by defining proficiency and measuring current time to proficiency. This is the desired level of performance for someone who is independently productive. This is different than a competency study which is looking at skills, knowledge and attitudes to determine what type of training or courses to provide. A proficiency definition is not a roadmap to training but a full description of the desired results.

    Next, we lay out the current Learning Path. In other words, what formal and informal training is happening today. Then we look for ways to drive out time, waste and variability in this learning process and restructure a new Learning Path that applies the principles of accelerated learning and just-in-time training. This new path must meet the requirement of being at least 30% faster. Our experience with more than 400 functions is that this target is usually the minimum reduction we see. Now at the end of 30 days, you have a clear plan for reducing time to proficiency instead of a list of competencies or recommendations for all the training you could build.
    So the next time you’re thinking about doing a needs analysis or competency study, think about the 30/30 Plan instead. It works better, it’s faster and it gets better results!




“More Cost-Effective than Expensive Needs Analysis and Competency Studies”






Copyright © 2005-2015 HeRoes. All Rights Reserved