By Andreas Gunawan Putra, 2 March 2000

Introduction:

This article is relatively based on current research being done in the hospitality industry.  In fact, it might raise a variety of comments, reactions, and responses and am prepared to accept those outcomes. 

I have been agitated by current literature review that proposes a kind of figures, different concepts of how �the best� way conducting TNA with heaps of sophisticated explanations that I personally doubt  if the model proposed is workable or even testable.  Indeed, the main problem of textbooks and or journals is predominantly �crammed with� theoretical framework and lack of empirical evidence. Researchers have been busy finding the most effective way conducting TNA and introducing a new integrated model of TNA, however, implementing TNA is left behind. Even researchers might have conducted their field study in order to create/make a new model, but they have yet given strong arguments how a model works. This has been an issue for quite long time and this article aims to challenge current training specialists and researchers to focus on the implementation issue. 

Training Needs Analysis

It is arguable that training and HR professionals always accentuate the significance of linking training to relevant results. Managers know exactly to come to a decision about whether or not to provide training for employees, and what type of training should be offered. Their decision has characteristically been based on the determination of training needs within organizations.  In other words, TNA is very critical time for building links between training and results because the first part of decisions are made regarding what training will be given in organizations. The �traditional� model of TNA which refers to three interrelated phases � needs analysis, execute and re-evaluation is workable in today�s environment. The other three sub-aspects such as organization, task and person analysis may be seen as very important to begin with and  managers may have already done it within departments . From this paragraph, the current model is okay but need to be supported by empirical evidence to ensure the model works. The explanation above can be described as follow:

Issues of  TNA

Employees have to realize their ability to perform which relates to their daily activities and what sort of training to support his/her performance. The heads of departments have also to evaluate their staffs and find out the appropriate training for their employees if necessary. The most common way to do TNA is distributing a questionnaire. 

My finding has supported this that every head of department has his/her own �diary� about individuals� performance and the effective way to start of with TNA is checking a �diary�. To make more valid, you may also distribute a questionnaire and conduct an interview with the potential staff. Therefore, managers will rely on three sources of information, which are performance appraisal, supervisors/subordinates and employees. From this basis you have sufficient information to design your training modules.  TNA appears to be seen as a snapshot of your future training programs and the issue is TNA should be updated correspondingly. From this paragraph, distributing a questionnaire, talking to the heads of departments as well as to your staffs, and reviewing performance appraisal will provide sufficient information prior to design your training programs. And TNA should also be flexible and adaptable.

TNA does not always derive from problems.  Training may not always the key to solve problems. For example, if there is a skills problem, therefore training will be the perfect solution. But there are many issues surrounding problems and training would be the last option. Thus, TNA will able to determine whether or not training is necessary. Perhaps more workload would be better option rather than send some one to attend training .  The field study has given me the opposite. Training is given due to a lot of demands within the hospitality industry. Employees need more training. There are not any problems or performance discrepancies. Staffs need training because they want to learn from his/her peers. Thus, the end goal of TNA is encouraging learning. From this paragraph, TNA comes from employees and learning is given the main reason.

Here are some common issues/problems of TNA:

1. A questionnaire is being regarded as an effective tool to accommodate employees� needs. However, managers tend to give a comprehensive questionnaire that employees might think this is too complicated  and  this could give you a low response
2. Language problem; some of your staffs may come from non-English background. Thus, it would cause language difficulties to fill out the questionnaire. I found this at the workplace.
3. Employees have said �so-what�. There is not any follow-up afterwards. Training is seen as a regular program and has nothing to do with the job.
4. Be objective; your employees may have illiterate problems. Instructions can be difficult to understand and questions may not correspond to his/her objectives. 
5. Dealing with casual staffs who do not care about training culture. This might affect your training programs as well as training results.
6. TNA seems  to be more informal and employees are able to express their needs to managers.
7. TNA may not be seen as an accurate tool to conduct training programs, but it is seen as a  valid starting point of information for managers to develop such a program. Quite often in the hospitality industry, training programs come from the head-office that may not correspond with employees needs. 

Conclusion

The discussion above were taken from my current field study and the main irritating issue to me is training theorists and researchers appear merely emphasize on models/diagrams/arrows about what we should cover to achieve the bottom lines. It is very �mechanistic� approach and burry in your mind that we are dealing with people. Too much �scientific� explanation may also not appropriate. I just simply argue that current TNA models are very good and need to be more tested in the workplace. Personally, I doubt that there are not any TNA models are more effective than a model that well developed accordingly. Therefore, TNA theory needs to be applicable. Otherwise,  TNA is heading to its grave.