Quality in training: you can make a difference

We had parliamentary elections in Slovenia recently; no wonder my post about quality in training (and what you can do about it) is slightly biased. But the point remains the same: in the world of Web 2.0, there’s no reason we should let vendors get away with mediocre delivery.

Read more in Fragments, the official NIL blog.

2 comments:

  1. I agree Ivan. I left a comment on the fragments blog as well

    I think that I will start a CCNP blog. I will send you a link when its has started.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree 100%. I also think that it is important to provide a feedback mechanism to your employer (if they are footing the bill). I've worked in large enterprises and they all have used the same training company for tech training (with a few exceptions for direct training from the vendor). This training company has a huge catalog of courses but the quality of their training is inconsistent. I've attended outstanding classes and very poor ones. They have a feedback mechanism, but it only for the training company. This means that we continue to send engineers to those sub par courses regardless of whether or not they "fix" the class.

    The lack of internal feedback also poisons the well for other training vendors. If our "primary training vendor" offers the course then we must use them. With an internal feedback mechanism it could open up the option of using a different vendor for classes that don't meet our training needs.

    ReplyDelete

You don't have to log in to post a comment, but please do provide your real name/URL. Anonymous comments might get deleted.

Ivan Pepelnjak, CCIE#1354, is the chief technology advisor for NIL Data Communications. He has been designing and implementing large-scale data communications networks as well as teaching and writing books about advanced technologies since 1990. See his full profile, contact him or follow @ioshints on Twitter.