The design of every training course should be based upon an understanding of the knowledge, skills, attitudes and beliefs, which people need to enable them to do certain things, carry out specific tasks, and behave in certain ways. The design of the training will depend upon the identification of these needs, and the response that will be most effective in meeting these needs. Identification and analysis of training needs is called a Training Needs Analysis, or ‘TNA’. But why is this necessary?
A lot of training has been designed without taking the needs of the participants into consideration. Instead, other needs (perhaps national manpower needs, for example, or the needs of the training institution, or even of the trainer) were seen as more important or valid. Sometimes an effort is made to consider training needs, but the information collected is not sufficient, or not from the most appropriate sources. If the learners have not been involved, they may feel distant from the learning process, and demotivated. They may not understand the concept of the training and be uncertain about what they will achieve at the end. In short, the training is unlikely to be effective.
The stakeholder analysis carried out in the early stages of PCD is an important starting point, as it can help to identify the best sources of information about training needs. For example, people who already possess the right skills to perform certain tasks effectively can provide very useful information, as well as the supervisors or employers of the trainees. They are aware of new developments, difficulties and constraints. The potential learners are also key informants, since they know best what they are already able to achieve, and what they would like to do in the future. The team designing a course can collaborate with these stakeholders to build and structure a training event effectively.
Sometimes, Training Needs Analysis can be very exact. For many agroforestry techniques (tree planting, for example), there is a clear procedure. Through observation and interviews with skilled practitioners, it is relatively easy to outline the key tasks and skills, as well as the knowledge and attitudes required. The course designers can then identify the ‘training gap’ (i.e. the difference between the KSA already possessed by the learner, and the KSA required to perform the task) and this will be the basis or series of building blocks for the training. The information provided by key informants and stakeholders is vital.
Some situations are very complex. In a particular farming context, it may become apparent to farmers and extension specialists that land use management is becoming problematic, with degradation of the land and poor yields of crops. Appropriate technologies, integrated with existing practices, may enable farmers to increase their yields and the availability of food. One range of solutions or options could be the introduction of agroforestry practices. However, the farmers may not be familiar with these, and uncertain about what they should be growing to guarantee enough earnings and produce to feed their families. The extension specialists also may not be familiar with these practices, or may not know how to relate them to what the farmers are already doing. How will trainers design training courses for the different groups, meeting their different needs, in these circumstances?
In such a case, and there are many real-life examples of this, a more open-ended, flexible and dynamic process will be needed. A wider range of stakeholders may be involved, and their contributions may vary widely. A more participatory and open-ended approach will be very useful since it will establish a dialogue between trainers, learners, and other relevant stakeholders.