Retrieved from https://studentshare.org/other/1422557-research-report-trditional-training-methods
https://studentshare.org/other/1422557-research-report-trditional-training-methods.
Question: “Do the Green Belt requirements meet all the criteria of action learning? If so, explain how if not, explain why not.” The Green Belt requirements or set of competencies satisfactorily meet the criteria for action learning. One of the competency requirements for the Six Sigma Greenbelt is Apply Change Management Principles which involves team building and learning to work cooperatively within the team in order to eliminate conduct that maybe detrimental to the success of the team in working out solutions to an identified problem within the organisation.
In this stage of team building, team members uncover possible personal barriers and attitude barriers to productive teamwork like dominance, personality clashes, turning opinions as statement of facts, and trying to reach quick decisions for the sake of some accomplishment without going to the different process of working out the best possible solution to a problem. It is crucial that each member understands the role and responsibilities of the team and how each member should adjust with each other and work collaboratively as a team.
The Six Sigma emphasise the importance of defining and applying team tools like brainstorming, multi-voting and other group problem discussion technique. It also teaches the importance of using an effective and most appropriate communication technique to prevent problems that may cause misunderstanding and may disrupt teamwork. Fulfilling this Six Sigma Greenbelt competency area is very essential in action learning to foster teamwork and bring about a working relationship that will help the organisation come up with workable solutions to a real problem in the organisation.
Action Learning involves working in teams of 6-30 employees chosen from different divisions throughout the organisation to help find solutions to an existing problem in the organisation. If the team can successfully come up with a solution, the set up and operating cost of team building would be largely offset by the expected output which are implementable solutions of a problem or potential threat to the overall operation. It is therefore imperative that an ideally strong team be established at the engagement phase.
The next Greenbelt competency is the application of the DMAIC which means define, measure, analyse, improve and control. This calls for the identification of the statement problem, development of baseline and target goals and the analysis of gathered data. After the problem has been identified and the relevant variables had been considered, all input and output variables are measured and the relationship among variables is measured using applicable measurement tools. One of the measurement tools used is the cause and effect diagram showing the possible set of events that causes an observed outcome or outcomes that may have contributed to the identified problem.
The gathered variables are also tested for accuracy and integrity, and then analyse using applicable data analysis techniques. After the root causes of a problem had been identified solutions are generated and tested using solution models. All the findings and the lean-six sigma solutions generated are documented in a concise manner and submitted to management for review and implementation. The application of the Greenbelt competencies in Action Learning as a form of training will definitely bring about positive results and improvements in all members of a training team.
This training method should be more effective as all in the team experience realistic approaches and learned tested methods of resolving organisational and behavioural problems. References; 1. Noe, Winkler. 2009. Employee Training and Development .Traditional Training Methods, Lecture by Naomi Madsen. 2. Six Sigma Greenbelt: http://www.rabqsa.com/docs/downloads/TCD69.pdf 3. Gordon, S. E. 1993. We Do: Therefore, We Learn. Training & Development. Vol. 47, No. 10. 4. Pedler, M 1996. Action Learning for Managers.
London: Lemos & Crane.
Read More