Ask HN: Has anyone experienced workplace training that made a difference?

58 points by smilesnd ↗ HN
My friend in infosec was asked to review a app that is suppose to train people to identifying and eliminating bias in the workplace. It made me wonder if things like sexual harassment training, sensitivity training, inclusion training, and diversity training actually makes a difference in the workplace.

75 comments

[ 5.2 ms ] story [ 134 ms ] thread
Unfortunately this type of training is like advertising- a good chunk of the money spent on it is wasted, but they can never figure out where or how large the percentage is (or needs to be). But we still have, and even live by, advertising.

You can't say it never worked even once for a trainee. It probably works with some of them. But for some it also kills productivity and incentivizes job flight when your trainees could be working productively and enjoying their jobs.

It's a bit like the death penalty- say for the sake of argument that having a death penalty on the books, in locale X, deters 10% of all murders there. Is 10% enough to call it a deterrent or not?

In terms of my personal experience, I learned some things in the compulsory sessions I've had to attend in various workplaces, but I don't suspect I'd ever have been a problem to my employers without them. A few people I've sat next to in this training still "offended" even after attending (or signing in then leaving) the courses.

In the end, I suspect it's mostly a cost-saving CYA measure, which mitigates damages when the company is inevitably taken to court ("You mean to say, Ms. HR director, that you never created a mandatory training program, not even a handbook?" "This is why, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, my client deserves 3x $50M instead of $50M, for the horrors he/she had to endure working at company X")

I agree about the CYA measure, but it seems the people that need the training the most are also the ones that never leave.
It has traditionally been about mitigating legal damages. In more recent years, it is being done for additional reasons: mitigate bad PR, reduce churn and for increasing diversity.
> I don't suspect I'd ever have been a problem to my employers without them.

I mean you can honestly believe this and at the same time someone has a completely different perception of you.

> for some it also kills productivity and incentivizes job flight

I've never heard of anyone leaving a job due to job training. I've heard and seen plenty leave due to a lack of it.

It's more than perception- if I had been called into unscheduled one-on-ones with management about incidents that happened, even where I feel like I did nothing wrong, that's a data point that matters. No one-on-ones after 25 years in industry, at least related to what you'd get training for, is a data set that you can rely on.

Imagine job training which is mandatory for staff but skipped by the upper-level executives, when it was one of their incidents that kicked off the whole reaction. Also imagine it is conducted in a very haphazard, incompetent, and counterproductive manner. One day a week for months, on all kinds of topics. Your deliverables schedule is not reduced but rather accelerated to make it even less enjoyable.

Anecdata is great, but those leaving (or avoiding) jobs that have that kind of managerial incompetence don't answer the surveys as "too much job training" even if that's what it was. There's no upside to making that your lead reason.

> I've never heard of anyone leaving a job due to job training.

I've seen lots of people quit because a company is too stuffy/sterile/formal.

Short answer: No. Shitty people will be shitty people.

Longer answer: No 30 minute exercise is going to instill in someone that the behavior they have had normalized throughout their entire life by those around them is flawed. I mean have you ever tried to tell a C developer there are alternatives?

Once and I have a scar from the fork to prove it.
There probably are a lot of people who aren't aggressively shitty but just inconsiderate of the feelings and disadvantages that other people have. I imagine it would work for that group.
> Short answer: No. Shitty people will be shitty people.

Where I've worked, shitty people get fired. They don't need to be tolerated.

Yes - when I was at BigTechCo, we had training to basically not write legally sensitive things in emails, and to schedule in person meetings with the right people. This habit has stuck with me.
can you expand on what you mean for legally sensitive and what is the context here?
The magic works of "let's sync offline" or "call you on your cell" are pretty good key phrases
Don’t create an unnecessary paper trail that will be found during discovery and used against the company by opposition’s legal team.
Why my company will only ever write on white boards.
Those chat services that delete(?) the messages after you hit a limit sound more appealing now.
This may be cynical of me, but: "When you're going to break the law, don't leave a physical record."

While I avoid engaging in such, I've directly observed it, and been on the receiving end -- what was done to me was illegal, but it was a 1:1 with no witnesses.

There's a useful purpose in mentioning this. Particularly for people newer and less experienced in the workforce: When co-workers and bosses won't email, IM, or otherwise write with regard to a topic. Nor address it in a group. When someone out of the blue invites you into an office, meeting room, or other private space to discuss it.

Ask yourself, "Why?"

This is one of those cases where your intuition may catch on and manifest, first. If something seems "off" about a topic or line of communication, consider it more closely.

Also works when dealing with third parties. For example, if you are dealing with a salesperson who only ever "talks" about features. Especially 1:1. Best to verify what you're being told, elsewhere, and agree to nothing until you do. (And, if you can, find someone else to deal with who's more straightforward. Not "friendly", but direct and forthright in their communications.)

Sometimes I ask whether people are "Willing to put that in writing" (important verbally-negotiated deal terms).

If I get a no, that becomes part of the negotiation.

Any time there is an investigative event, whether a internal one, litigation, police, etc, written communication is a used to infer all sorts of things. Attorneys and others build careers out of sussing these details out of email.

Do some googling of “Enron email corpus analysis” or similar things for examples.

It’s very easy for someone to say even innocuous things that in a different context sound damning or infer a state of mind that may or may not be accurate, but can give someone a way to dig into more detail.

Not technical, but I was with a smaller company and we had two day offsite trainings for some managers (one of which was me) that I found very rewarding and impactful. Of course we were a more open and honest company than most so I think that played a huge part in why it helped.
Was this management training or "how to be the best you" sort of training?
It was a combination. We had someone come in who tailored the training specifically for our company. But it involved a lot of discussion between the different managers about issues and challenges at the company. Some actual problems were solved, which is something I think rarely comes out of these types of things.
Sure. At my first tech job where I was an intern, we had a general intro, which included harassment etc. One of their points "Perception is reality" has stuck with me for many years.

This is just one example. A lot of this material is useful not just for not getting fired, but also for getting along and getting stuff done better.

My last job was in a power plant and we had weekly safety meetings that covered everything from IT to First Aid and everything in between. I'm scared to death of being on ladders ever since they covered people falling and wrecking themselves on ladders. The first aid stuff more or less helped too, though I've not had to use it.

I think everything that stuck (actually made a difference) only stuck because of repetition. We had meetings once a week and eventually came back around to the same topics.

It might work for people who mean well but generally don't realize that their behavior is not acceptable. I knew an Eastern European gentleman who constantly complimented women on their appearances, whether or not they were conventionally attractive ("No, no, you are not fat! You are strong!"), which makes me think he meant well, but it still came off as creepy and weird.

Of course that guy kept losing jobs for it. :-/ I don't know if he ever really learned. So I dunno.

I had a similar situation on a bigger scale. I was once put on a project at a bank where they had to hire more then 100 people in 2 months span. The workforce ended up being made of 80% Chinese people. The best way to describe there English would to say it was rough if they even actually spoke English. They slowly started to pick up certain keywords like strong or efficient or repeat the same sentence to answer questions that sound similar which would sometime come out offensive. My recruiting agency solution to this problem was to have them sign a contract every 2 weeks or so stating which words or sentences they couldn't use any more, or have certain people train them new sentences or words to use so they wouldn't repeatedly show up in reports. It is one of the few training exercise I skip on the regular.
I've gone through some "company culture training." At first I thought it was a good way to waste two days and was resentful because it was required training. However, even with that poor mindset I gained several key insights from it and I'm glad I was forced to go.

With that experience in mind now I approach all company training in a more positive attitude. Sure most of it is useless but every so often there is something to gain so might as well make the most of it.

Well I recently went to a conference on the subject of disabled work place issues.

And the move to the social model of disability instead of the medical one was an issue that I had not really considered and I found interesting - I am disabled BTW (of the invisible kind)

I was once sent to a training where they suggested we consider that people interact in four specific different ways and tailor interactions based on the recipient. It has seemed useful in future interactions to have a few more examples to draw from than generic "tailor your pitch" advice, but it's also somewhat concerning when I think about it because it's company training which is basically encouraging you to assume, bucket and stereotype.
I've had multiple versions of training like that and I found it really useful. It definitely helps me as a technical manager. A good instructor will tell you that you only start with stereotypes when you have no better information. e.g., "engineers usually like it when you talk to them this way." But if you know that Sally hates it, then you don't do that, you do this instead...

I think that training like this is especially good for engineers because we tend to have a fixed way of interacting with people and often don't notice when it doesn't work. Being taught specific ways to recognize that and tailor your approach is very useful.

This actually is exactly one of those things that can't be taught by an app. Only a real person will say "your tone is off-putting, try saying it this way..."

Workplace training in general can obviously make a difference. My technical skills have improved as a result of such training. Non-technical training has also helped me not to kill people or end up in prison (e.g.relating to safety cases for aerospace systems and legislative compliance). With respect to the softer subjects you mention, the (albeit limited) training I've received hasn't changed my own behaviours fundamentally, but has certainly made me understand what to do when issues arise in the workplace (e.g. how to deal with a colleague who is displaying inappropriate behaviours. I've had to deal with this once).

Whether an app is the best way to provide such training is a different question.

Whether an app is the best way to provide such training is a different question

This. I have received excellent workplace training, but never through an app. Actual human instructors can do things that apps can't like discuss the experiences of individuals in the class, or respond to questions about subtle nuances in behavior.

Doing training via an app is IMO, a way for the company to check off that you've been trained, whether or not it was useful. Online training is good for those things that don't require much thought like fire safety or office ergonomics. It's all but useless for things like harassment training.

It doesn't matter if it actually makes a difference. These sorts of training seminars are marketed and sold to executives so that they can claim that they've done something about a problem. Whether or not they work is completely immaterial to whether or not companies buy them - all that matters is how it looks in various lawsuits.

"We've had racial sensitivity training and fired the offending manager" can be the difference between settling a discrimination lawsuit relatively cheaply and getting taken to the cleaners in a civil case with legs.

True, but miracles do happen. We might find a unicorn in all this.
I don't see how, as there's no selection criteria. The product being purchased is the the sale itself and the proof you made your employees go, not the content of any training.
No, it’s CYA. Les non-dupes errent.
I’m in cybersecurity and recently had to go through employee-wide security awareness training. It was great and well done. However there was nothing forcing you to pay attention and you could skip through slides, so who knows how effective.
Our security training vendor requires whitelisting multiple domains and the installation of Adobe Flash. How do I trust a vendor whose implementation requires poking more security holes in my systems?
A lot of security companies are like for-profit colleges. They aren’t at all what they say, they’re incompetent, and they make the world a worst place. Hopefully their time will end soon enough.

Just look at what Symantec did to Google for proof of that (sorry don’t have a link, but, haha, just Google it).

I've been to sexual harassment training, sensitivity training, and some management training retreats. I agree that some organizations may use them for HR compliance or to defray lawsuits, but they can help. I found these trainings helped me understand the impact of effective leadership. Although not always the most interesting trainings, they can and do make a difference.
I did see a video that explained how to correctly handle high pressure gas cylinders, which did teach me some critical things on not getting myself or others killed.
What leaving them unchained against a wall is not a good idea?
recently had a security basic seminar. "basic" in the sense that we learned how to do all kinds of code injections and how to prevent them. Very useful
I had diversity training once that didn't suck. The HR presenter opened by showing three slides with pictures and asking the question "is this a diverse group of people?" for each slide

Slide 1: a group of ~20 white males in suits together in times square

Slide 2: three Kenyan olympic medalists standing together in uniform

Slide 3: a stock photo with a dozen men and women of various races and dress talking in an office conference room

The HR person then said "The answer to all of these questions is 'Yes.' here at company we value the diverse backgrounds, experiences, and perspectives of each and every one of our employees. We encourage all of you to offer your suggestions and feedback, and bring your unique perspective to bear in your work here."

I was blown away. Never once has HR made me feel more valued and empowered.

I imagine this perspective is quite rare. Apple's VP of Inclusion and Diversity had to deliver a formal apology after the following similar remark:

"And I’ve often told people a story– there can be 12 white blue-eyed blonde men in a room and they are going to be diverse too because they’re going to bring a different life experience and life perspective to the conversation."

(https://beta.techcrunch.com/2017/10/13/apple-diversity-head-...)

She departed Apple soon after, though I don't have the evidence to make the stronger statement that she departed because of the remark.

The current generation of Americans tends to assign imaginary meanings to random dictionary words. Some clinicians might classify this as a sign of mental illness, but this is an unpopular enough opinion that few would venture to voice publicly.
It seems odd to me that you single out Americans here. Do you have no experience with any other group? I have observed Europeans do this as well.
I'm not American and have little contact with Americans outside of the people I work with. In my experience Americans have set the tone for the sort of behavior I've described in my previous comment, although it's by no means limited to just Americans. For example, there are definitely some Russians who broadcast loudly about "diversity" and "inclusiveness", but these people themselves cite American sources in their rhetoric, and they aren't seen as generally in agreement with the larger Russian culture.
> The current generation of Americans

Which generation would you be referring to? Boomers, X, Y, or Z - or some other defined generation?

That would be too bad if she got flak for that remark. It's a great point.
I'm surprised you appreciated it so much. To me it sounds like a classic education companies are doing in order to make people accept a workforce where cultural differences are quite big.

Personally I always worked better with people who are similar to me in behavior and attitude. It's always a challenge trying to work with people who are very different. I don't mean different race - I mean different personality to the degree that it's super annoying.

Because of unconscious bias, which you seem unwilling to attempt to change.
I appreciated it because it's correct and was willing to reject the pop cultural view that your value depends on your skin color rather than the content of your character.
I’m neither German nor a forklift operator, but this video answered every question I’ve ever had about why warehouse safety is such a big deal.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-oB6DN5dYWo

(Warning: bloody. Campy, funny, but bloody)

That is memorable. The shock value is part of the training, makes it stick with you more than if it was just a dry list of instructions.
As far as I know the science on those kinds of trainings suggests they are ineffective or actually produce the opposite of intended effect. I haven’t dived deeply into the science but here’s a good start. https://inequality.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/media/_m...
I thought the latest was that done wrong they’re not just useless but counterproductive; but that there are ways to do them right and have a positive effect?
(comment deleted)
I've been to several technical trainings, including one at my last company on iOS, and some Goldman Sachs training on slang, their proprietary in-house language. I got almost nothing out of either.

I don't think you can really learn how to code without just doing it. Someone may say it's a "learning style" issue, but I've come to believe learning style differences are overblown when teaching "method", e.g. cooking, dancing, programming, drawing, how to play an instrument. You can read all day about how to play a violin and still be garbage until you pick it up and play it.

Once I went to a sexual/workplace harassment training at a little college while I was doing my postdoc. The guy doing it was very experienced and down to earth (which helps). And one thing he said really stuck with me:

"This training is not about telling you not to harass in the workplace. You already know that. It's about learning how to handle harassment cases sensitively if they come to your attention."

Needless to say, workplace harassment does happen, so it's good to at least understand your institutional options, should they become relevant.

I work for Microsoft, and I've been consistently impressed with the trainings we get.

My first experience was the required business ethics training. It was a Netflix style (and netflix production quality) mini-series. I had originally planned to just let it run in the background while I did real work on a different desktop, but it honestly pulled me in. There was the occasional awkward line, but they had good actors who sold it. You actually care about the characters and their conflicts. The company just announced a second season, and there are honest to goodness water cooler rumors about it. Is John gonna get fired? What about the obvious chemistry between the two sales team members? Really, it was shockingly engaging.

Then I did the diversity in hiring training video. I rolled my eyes in advance of the inevitable American hyper-sensitivity (I'm in Europe, we do a lot of eye rolling at you guys lately)... And then actually learned a ton about unconscious bias in research, hiring practices to try and avoid it, and some of the things that would have tripped ME up. It definitely had an impact on how I interview candidates.

After that I had my first onsite training. An afternoon of diversity and inclusion, involving a group of improv artists trying out different scenarios/approaches, and leading frank discussion with the audience. I discovered that I've internalized a fair bit of racism in my home environment (as the victim), and it really made me think about how to create a more visibly safe environment for potential LGBTQ people on my team.

Training at MS has been fantastic; I'm honestly looking for some follow-up courses in our leadership series, and some others. So it IS possible to produce good, engaging, and meaningful corporate training courses.

All you need is the resources of Microsoft to do it. :)

Where did MS get the videos from? Can I buy/rent them?
MS makes their training videos, and they were amazing this and last year. I'm actually looking forward to training next year to see what happens in the story.
Yes! Microsoft's business conduct training was a fantastic drama miniseries. 10/10 would watch again.
This is such an ambiguous question, it's like what color should the garden shed be or the bike shed or the stable, you chose. Your title should summarize the question. Then it's not clear if you're talking specifically about online training.

Anyway -

Workplace training works, duh, how else do you learn to flip burgers.

Online workplace training only works for compliance issues. (Counter examples?)

You have to do it for compliance so just buy the app and do it. It'll help stop you being sued, so yes it works.

If you want to make a "difference", be a tourist in the third world, then work / volunteer in the 3rd world, then realise how broken NGO's are and set up a burger chain to move lots of money between the middle classes and the lower classes in the third world and be a good boss. There's a 10 year plan for you to make workplaces a better place.

Otherwise it's a compliance issue so it's a moot point, just do it. Whether it works or not is out of your hands, worry about the stuff you can change, like the people you work withs happiness.