9th Annual State of the South African
L&D Industry Report 2012
Marius Meyer & Guy Blackbeard
7 March 2013
@SABPP1
Thanks to our Researcher
Penny Abbott, Head of HR Research Initiative
of SABPP
South African challenges
1. World competitiveness ratings
2. Unemployment
3. Arab Spring
World Competitiveness
Rating- IMD
Countries 2011 2012
B 44 46 -2
R 49 48 +1
I 32 35 -3
C 19 23 -4
S 54 50 +4
329 CRITERIA
Top 3 – 1. Hong Kong 2. U.S.A 3. Switzerland
How we’ll fix SA National Development Plan
Vision - 58million people in 2030
- an economy 3 times larger
- unemployment reduced to 6%
- nobody living below the national poverty line
- inequality significantly reduced.
Endorsed - by all political parties represented in parliament
- by cabinet
- private sector
- civil society.
Action - economic growth of at least 5% per annum over the next 18 years
- existing businesses double in size over the next 18 years
- new legislation to encourage entrepreneurs(lower costs at doing business)
- growth in infrastructure
- electricity & water availability and at reduced rates
- raise the quality of education and training
- affordable health care for all.
Top 10 HR priorities
1. Creating a high performance culture / climate
2. Leadership and management development
3. Skills development
4. Focus on corporate values, ethics
5. Industrial/employee relations
6. Customer service
7. Employee engagement
8. Change Management
9. Crafting and implementing HR strategy
10. HR policies and procedures
HR Survey 2011
Top 10 training programmes
1. Employee induction
2. Customer service
3. Leadership/Management
4. Safety
5. Product Knowledge
6. Performance management
7. New Equipment Orientation
8. Learnerships
9. Strategic Planning
10. Process/Quality Improvement
SCARCE AND CRITICAL SKILLS
Pos. Type of scarce and critical skills area Magnitude of scarcity
1 Industrial & Mechanical Engineers and Technologists 12 665
2 Medical Technicians 10 000
3 Training & development professionals 9 260
4 Metal fitters & machinists 8 340
5 Specialist managers 6 955
6 Agriculture & forestry scientists 6 175
7 Chemistry, food & beverage technicians 6 145
8 Electrical Engineering, draft persons & technicians 5 145
9 Social workers 5 000
9 Medical and laboratory scientists & technologists 5 000
10 Motor mechanics 4 205
11 Structural steel & welding trade workers 4 045
11 Advertising, marketing & sales managers 4 045
12 Civil engineering, draft persons & technicians 3 960
13 HR Professionals 3 855
14 Advertising, marketing & sales professionals 3 095
15 Production & operations managers 3 130 (DHET, 2011)
A.S.T.D Workplace Learning and Performance
Competency Model and Certification
New ASTD Competency
Model
Purpose of the Research
Information about state of the HRD
trends and benchmarks
Benchmark internal practices with other companies
Benchmark internal practices with international companies
Provide guidelines to improve HRD practices
Methodology
• Questionnaires electronically distributed to L&D managers.
• Data analysis of results.
• Comparison with 2003-2011 studies and international
benchmarks where possible.
Highlights over last 9 years
• Good track record: 2003 – 2012
• International and local credibility (ASTD)
• Triple publication model – report, articles,
books + conference papers
• Strong academic support – Unisa, NMMU,
NWU, UJ, VUT
• Annual trends & benchmarks – good multi-
year data for comparisons (facts vs fads)
Respondents
Years of experience in L&D
Highest qualifications
Sample
Agriseta 5%
Bank SETA 9%
CETA 7%
CHIETA 5%
Energy & Water SETA 5%
ETDP 14%
FASSET 2%
FOOD BEV SETA 5%
HWSETA 2%
INSETA 2%
MERSETA 12%
MICT SETA 7%
MQA 7%
PSETA 2%
SASSETA 2% SERVICES SETA
7%
TETA 7%
16 of the 21 SETA’s covered
Size of companies
Less than 100 14%
100 - 999 42%
1000 - 1999 10%
2000 - 4999 15%
5000 - 9999 4%
10000 and over 15%
Provincial breakdown
83%
0%
0%
2% 3%
7%
5%
0%
Gauteng WC EC NC FS L M NW
Training spend increasing
3.43
3.13
3.6
3.11
3.94
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
International benchmarks
Use of HRIS
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Comfort zone challenged
Knowledge management
(Managing organisational knowledge)
• 75% of respondents would like to be better trained
in knowledge management and learning
organisation concepts
• Formal knowledge management initiatives only
exist in about half the organisations, and that
• Around 30% of organisations use their HRIS for
knowledge management functions
Training needs analysis methods
(Improving human performance)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Questionnaires Focus Groups PerformanceManagement Data
Interviews Customer Complaints Other
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Correlation between popularity
and importance = 0.678 Training programmes provided % of respondents
who provide these
programmes 2011
Employee Induction 85.7
Computer/IT skills 83.7
Leadership/Management 81.6
Product Knowledge 75.5
Safety 75.5
Learnerships 71.4
Financial Skills 69.3
AIDS Awareness 65.3
Performance Management 63.3
Project Management 63.3
Strategic Planning 61.2
Wellness 61.2
New Equipment Operation 49.0
Professional Development 49.0
Team Building 49.0
ABET 46.9
Sexual Harassment 44.9
Teamwork 44.9
Diversity 42.9
Outplacement/Retirement 40.8
Basic Life/Work Skills 30.6
Creativity 26.5
Self-Directed Learning Skills 26.5
Foreign/Other Languages 18.4
Training importance 2010
20
10
Ran
k
2011
20
11
Ran
k
Change
in
ranking
Product Knowledge 4.2 5 4.6 1
Process/Quality Improvement 3.9 10 4.6 1
New Equipment Operation 4 7 4.6 1
Employee Induction 4.5 1 4.5 4
Safety 4.2 4 4.5 4
Customer Service 4.3 2 4.4 6
Leadership/Management 4.2 3 4.3 7
Performance Management 4.1 6 4.3 7
Ethics 3.8 4.3 7
Recruitment and Selection 3.9 4.2 10
More outsourcing of training
2007 20082009
20102011
47 46 47 48 39
53 54 53 52 62
Delivered internally Delivered externally
Training delivery methods
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Classroom Text based Video based E-learning CD-Rom Satellite Webinars Blendedlearning
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
43% of organisations use e-learning
E-learning content
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
IT Soft skills Technical skills Industry specific Managerial Languages Other
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
We are changing with technology
The Evaluation of Training
Level Measurement Focus
1. Reaction & Planned Action Measures participant
satisfaction with the programme
and captures planned actions
2. Learning Measures changes in
knowledge, skills, and attitudes
3. Application Measures changes in on-the-job
behavior
4. Business Impact Measures changes in business
impact variables
5. Return on Investment Compare programme benefits
to the costs
Jack Phillips – Evaluation Levels
Evaluation
57 51
39 44
39
Chain of Value of Customer Frequency Difficulty of
Impact Information Focus of Use Assessment
Reaction Lowest Consumer Frequent Easy
(Learner)
Learning
Application
Impact
ROI Highest Client Infrequent Difficult
(Sponsor)
Characteristics of Evaluation Levels
Use of Evaluation at Each
Level
Sugrue & Rivera
Level 1, Reaction
91.3%
Level 2, Learning
53.9%
Level 3, Application
22.9%
Level 4, Impact
7.6%
Level 5, ROI
2.1%
Levels Target USA Target SA
Level 1 – Reaction
100% 100%
Level 2 – Learning
50% 100%
Level 3 – Job Application
30% 100%
Level 4 – Business Results
20% 20%
Level 5 – ROI
10% 10%
Evaluation Targets
1. Reaction & Planned Action 20% 20%
2. Learning 20% 40%
3. Application 20% 60%
4. Business impact 20% 80%
5. Return on Investment 20% 100%
Levels Usefulness Effectiveness rating
Evaluation Levels outcomes
Training evaluation - use of
ROI
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
We use specific software to assist in the ROI process
We ask Training Providers to supply us with ROI data or information ontheir training programmes
Our training staff have formal training in ROI processes
We calculate the financial value ROI for training programmes ourselves
We use ROI data when compiling training budgets for the following year
Our Training Reports to management include ROI figures
We calculate ALL the inputs costs of training programmes
We do pre- and post-assessments of training programmes to enable usto calculate the ROI
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
L&D Trends
(Managing the training function)
Talent Management
• 60% of organisations have a formal talent
management strategy
• Less than half of these (46%) rate their
strategy as effective
Purpose of coaching
Skills transfer (task related, technical skills)
40%
Performance improvement
25%
Behavioural change 17%
Individual transformation
(identity, meaning, career etc.)
18%
45% of organisations use coaching to support TM strategy
Basis for mentoring
Performance management processes
15%
Personal development plans 16%
Strategic skills development needs 16%
Business strategic needs 13%
Leadership competency model 11%
Skills audits 11%
Organisation culture needs 11%
Knowledge management model
7%
Key findings
1. Average training spend 3.94% of payroll on training (3.11% in 2010 and 3.6%
in 2009).
2. Over 95% of organisations have a computerised human resource information
system (HRIS) in place and use it for a variety of functions. (91% in 2009)
3. Training needs analyses are conducted using mainly performance
management data (68.9%), data from customer complaints (57.8%) and
interviews (40%).
4. The use of questionnaires for training needs analysis has dropped
considerably from 78% to 46.7%.
5. Outsourcing of training design and delivery continues to increase – 64% of
training is designed externally on average and 62% is delivery externally on
average.
6. Classroom learning continues to be the most popular training delivery method
(59%) with e-learning second at 20%.
Key findings (continued)
7. 45% of organisations evaluate at least some of their training using financial
ROI. (39% last year and 40% the year before). Most organisations (70%) use
between 2 and 4 of the Kirkpatrick levels in evaluating training.
8. 60% of organisations have adopted a formal talent management strategy. This
is also an increasing trend (53% last year and 49% the year before). These
strategies are rated Effective or Highly Effective by 46% of organisations (51%
last year).
9. 45% of organisation use coaching in support of their talent management
strategy. The same percentage use mentoring and 90% of those organisations
use both coaching and mentoring. Coaching seems to be regarded as more
effective than mentoring. Coaching is most often delivered by line managers,
while the use of external coaches is still not prevalent (13 – 15%).
Opportunities
• Redesigned questionnaire
• A stronger model of collaboration + independence
(ASTD/SABPP/NWU)
• Linking the study to a professional qualification (NWU)
• Broaden scope – SETA involvement
• Bridging the research-practice gap
• Multiple studies on trends (Masters and PhD)
• Supplementing the results with case studies (CIPD
model)
• Awards for best practices (ASTD/SABPP)
• Marketing, publicity, impact – NSDS III
A new tripartite relationship
Future opportunities for
delegates 1. Participant – complete the questionnaire
2. Champion – join the design team
3. Social partner – retweet the results
4. Sponsor – add your brand to the study
5. Researcher – do post graduate study
6. Implementer – contextualise and apply at
your company
Connect with us – [email protected] (Dr Penny Abbott)
Conclusion
We have made some progress on L&D
benchmarks in South Africa, but perhaps we
need some more focused work in elevating
the status and impact of learning. L&D in
South Africa compares well with international
norms.
Contact us on [email protected] to participate in 2013 study.
Visit SABPP or ASTD exhibitions for 2012 report.