Training Needs Analysis Training Course

Participants can connect a TNA scope to business priorities and operational measures.

• Business strategy translated into workforce capability and performance requirements
• Balanced Scorecard measures used to identify capability-related performance pressures
• Operating plans, audit findings and customer data as TNA inputs
• Defining the sponsor's decision, intended outcome and success measures
• Strategic initiatives mapped against affected roles, populations and locations
• Assumptions, constraints and dependencies recorded within the TNA charter

Participants can create a proportionate TNA charter for a defined business issue.

• TNA charter defining purpose, scope, questions, roles and timescales
• Problem statements written with observable performance and business consequences
• In-scope populations segmented by role, grade, geography and risk
• RACI matrix assigned for sponsors, subject experts and reviewers
• Sampling boundaries agreed where full-population analysis is impractical
• Scope creep controls built into approval and change processes

Participants can describe and quantify the gap between required and actual performance.

• Gilbert's Behaviour Engineering Model applied to workplace performance gaps
• Required performance specified through quality, volume, time and compliance measures
• Actual performance evidenced using operational data and manager observations
• Gap statements separating current results from agreed target conditions
• Leading and lagging indicators selected for performance diagnosis
• Performance variance analysed by role, team, tenure and location

Participants can determine whether training is an appropriate response to a performance problem.

• Five Whys analysis used to test apparent training requirements
• Fishbone diagrams structured around people, process, technology and environment
• Mager and Pipe performance analysis separates skill from environmental barriers
• Knowledge, skill, motivation and resource causes distinguished systematically
• Process failures, unclear standards and incentives examined before training
• Non-training interventions documented alongside learning recommendations

Participants can identify stakeholders and plan productive involvement throughout the TNA.

• Power-interest grid identifies engagement approaches for key TNA stakeholders
• Sponsors, line managers, learners and subject experts mapped explicitly
• Stakeholder expectations converted into analysis questions and decision criteria
• Communication plan sets updates, approvals, escalation routes and responsibilities
• Conflicting stakeholder accounts tested against operational evidence and standards
• Sponsor briefings establish access, confidentiality and decision-making authority

Participants can design an evidence plan using suitable qualitative and quantitative sources.

• Evidence plan links TNA questions to sources, methods and owners
• Primary and secondary data sources assessed for relevance and reliability
• Triangulation combines operational records, interviews, observation and survey evidence
• Sampling strategy defines participant groups, sample sizes and selection criteria
• Data collection sequence planned around operational access and decision deadlines
• Evidence register records source, date, limitation and validation status

Participants can conduct structured interviews that produce usable TNA evidence.

• Semi-structured interview guides built from defined diagnostic questions
• Behavioural questions elicit examples of successful and failed performance
• Probing techniques distinguish opinions, assumptions and observable evidence
• Critical incident technique captures consequential workplace performance episodes
• Interview notes coded against recurring capabilities, barriers and outcomes
• Closing questions test recommendations, priorities and implementation constraints

Participants can design and interpret focused surveys for capability and confidence evidence.

• Survey objectives matched to decisions rather than general learner satisfaction
• Likert-scale items written without double-barrelled or leading wording
• Knowledge, confidence and frequency measures selected for intended evidence
• Pilot testing identifies ambiguous items, missing options and response burden
• Response rates monitored by role, location and employee group
• Survey findings interpreted alongside stronger operational and qualitative evidence

Participants can gather valid work-performance evidence through observation and process analysis.

• Observation protocols define tasks, standards, behaviours and recording methods
• Work shadowing identifies workflow interruptions, workarounds and decision points
• Process maps reveal handoffs, controls, rework and role dependencies
• Time-on-task observations distinguish knowledge issues from capacity constraints
• Observer bias reduced through clear criteria and calibration discussions
• Permission, privacy and workplace safety requirements addressed before observation

Participants can identify and validate competencies required for priority roles.

• Competency frameworks reviewed for role relevance and behavioural specificity
• Technical, behavioural and regulatory competencies differentiated for analysis
• Proficiency levels defined through observable performance indicators
• Subject experts validate critical competencies against current work requirements
• Competency gap matrices compare required and demonstrated proficiency levels
• Role profiles updated where capability expectations lack clear definition

Participants can break critical work into tasks, decisions and learning requirements.

• Hierarchical task analysis decomposes work into tasks, subtasks and decisions
• Critical tasks selected using consequence, frequency, complexity and risk
• Task steps linked to required knowledge, skills and tools
• Decision tables document rules, exceptions and escalation thresholds
• Error analysis identifies common mistakes, causes and control points
• Standard operating procedures compared with actual task performance

Participants can define learner groups and conditions that affect intervention design.

• Learner personas capture role context, prior experience and performance demands
• Audience segmentation differentiates needs by proficiency, role and risk
• Language, accessibility and digital access requirements assessed early
• Shift patterns and workload constraints shape feasible learning arrangements
• Prior knowledge assessed through records, assessments and manager input
• Transfer conditions examined through supervisor support and job resources

Participants can turn collected evidence into validated TNA findings and conclusions.

• Qualitative coding groups interview and observation data into recurring themes
• Evidence matrices connect findings to sources, confidence and implications
• Descriptive statistics summarise survey patterns, gaps and subgroup differences
• Outliers investigated before drawing conclusions from aggregated results
• Validation meetings test findings with sponsors, managers and subject experts
• Limitations and unresolved questions stated clearly within final findings

Participants can rank capability needs using transparent business and operational criteria.

• Prioritisation matrix scores impact, urgency, risk, reach and feasibility
• Compliance obligations and control failures weighted within scoring decisions
• Criticality analysis distinguishes essential tasks from useful development topics
• Quick wins separated from longer-term capability development requirements
• Resource estimates test affordability, availability and implementation capacity
• Priority decisions documented with evidence, assumptions and approval rationale

Participants can convert validated needs into measurable learning requirements.

• Mager performance objectives specify behaviour, condition and performance criteria
• Bloom's taxonomy selects cognitive levels appropriate to job requirements
• Learning objectives aligned with critical tasks and competency gaps
• Assessment criteria defined before selecting learning content or methods
• Knowledge, skill and judgement requirements separated within objective statements
• Prerequisite knowledge and progression pathways identified for each learner group

Participants can recommend learning and non-learning interventions suited to diagnosed needs.

• Intervention options compared against performance need, audience and constraints
• Formal learning, coaching, job aids and workflow support differentiated
• 70:20:10 model considered against evidence and workplace transfer conditions
• Blended delivery options assessed for practice, feedback and scale
• Manager-led reinforcement planned where behaviour change requires supervision
• Non-learning actions assigned to process owners, managers or technology teams

Participants can define evaluation measures that test whether interventions improve performance.

• Kirkpatrick model links reaction, learning, behaviour and results measures
• Evaluation questions derived from intended performance and business outcomes
• Baseline data gathered before intervention implementation where possible
• Transfer measures assess workplace application after learning events
• Control groups and comparison data considered for major interventions
• Evaluation schedule assigns measures, owners, timing and reporting routes

Participants can prepare a concise TNA report and decision-ready recommendation.

• TNA report structure presents context, evidence, findings and recommendations
• Executive summaries state decisions required, rationale and expected benefits
• Findings visualised through gap charts, heat maps and priority matrices
• Recommendation options include costs, risks, dependencies and delivery assumptions
• Business cases connect capability investment to measurable operational outcomes
• Presentation narratives anticipate sponsor questions, objections and decision criteria

Participants can build, review and present a complete training needs analysis for a defined workplace performance issue.

• TNA charter completed for a selected workplace performance challenge
• Evidence plan combines stakeholder, operational, task and competency data
• Performance gaps and root causes documented with supporting evidence
• Priority capability needs scored using agreed business and risk criteria
• Intervention recommendations align learning, workplace support and non-training actions
• Final TNA report presented, reviewed and refined against decision-maker requirements