How the Role of the Organizational Trainer Has Changed in the Last Ten Essay

How the Role of the Organizational Trainer Has Changed in the Last Ten Years - Essay Example hanging working practices and a highly competitive business environment has called upon most organizations to hire employees who can handle these (Stwart, et al, 2005, p. 357; Hodson and Sullivan, 2007, p. 221; Holman, 2005, p. 1; Verburg, 2005, p. 50). Some skills, structure of knowledge, and working practices have been termed as irrelevant. Due to the significance that change comes with, there is therefore a great need for organizational trainers to live up to the challenge of helping people to not only unlearn some of the redundant skills, but also to acquire and relearn new ones. This is part of what has made the role of the Human resource Development to change from training to development. Therefore, the role of an organizational trainer (Human Resource Development) has changed in a number of ways. First, there is a rising interest being developed among organizational trainers in labor aspects such as long-term unemployment, inadequate skills, and equivalent opportunities. Secon dly, they are faced with the task of raising awareness on the significance of training, and continue with spreading the concept that, in the long run, it is the development of the labor skills and the learning culture that an economy’s long-term competitive performance and its enterprises are based on. Thirdly, the trainer is preoccupied with the role of coming up with nation-wide training techniques that should be determined by people, investors and national competencies. Fourth, there is the establishment of corporate mechanisms that should be determined by core activities leading to the development of non-core services such as instruction and consultancy. Fifth, the trainer should take part in organizational restructuring that include decentralization, empowering senior operating... Apart from accepting their position in organizations, trainers had a strong belief in the value of their training and were eager to invest in it. A trainee’s evolving career depended on the trainer’s finite range of knowledge and skills backed by wide experience. The provision of this early training set a pace for long-term professionalism such that, once people were trained, they were expected to exercise the contents of the training throughout their career lifetime. There was no room for more investment in training. These conventional views have been overtaken by time due to the change that has come with the twenty-first century. This change has not only made most organizations to cope with it, but has also caused individuals to affirm the fact that with time, their training becomes obsolete. New technology, changing working practices and a highly competitive business environment has called upon most organizations to hire employees who can handle these (Stwart, et al, 2005, p. 357; Hodson and Sullivan, 2007, p. 221; Holman, 2005, p. 1; Verburg, 2005, p. 50). Some skills, structure of knowledge, and working practices have been termed as irrelevant. Due to the significance that change comes with, there is, therefore, a great need for organizational trainers to live up to the challenge of helping people to not only unlearn some of the redundant skills, but also to acquire and relearn new ones. This is part of what has made the role of the Human Resource Development to change from training to development.