If you see a bright advertisement for «personal growth training» and go to this training, it is not at all obvious that you will get to the training, and not to the disgrace, and that there you will be offered personal growth, and not a mixture of cheap advertising, empty calls, easy mysticism and heavy esotericism. Trainings are of high quality, but they are different — amateur and base, see Allegedly trainings of supposedly personal growth
High-quality, really good training is training done professionally and corresponding to advertising claims.
Sometimes it seems to people that by going to a good training, they will immediately solve all their problems. Sometimes it happens, sometimes it doesn’t, and it doesn’t always have to do with the quality of the training.
Training is not a magic wand. As a manager with 30 years of experience, I know that training an employee is not a quick matter, but with training it goes faster. Even if the trainings suggested where your strengths and weaknesses are, this is only the beginning of your work on yourself. Then you can work on your own or under the guidance of a specialist, assistant coach, which will be better, but if you went to the training and think that everything has happened to you now, this is a mistake. This can be compared to the fact that you came to the doctor and said: doctor, lose weight on me, but I myself will not do anything. Of course, good training, anyway, even if you do nothing, gives very serious, strong, real results. But if a person actively works at the training and after it, for example, writes down what new thoughts and ideas he heard, what obligations he takes on, at least elementary in the evening to go to bed on time, what skills, exercises he will train, then the results will be in two -three times more than those who just attended a good, high-quality training.
Criteria for quality training:
- relevance,
- novelty of the material
- the novelty of the exercises.
- audience satisfaction,
- people really use what was given at the training.
- training personality,
- demand.
- compliance of the material with the theme stated in the advertisement.
The quality of training depends on many factors. Most of them are under the control of the coach (leader), some are beyond his control and competence. See Circumstances Affecting Training Evaluation and Audience Inquiry and Training Focus
The main factor determining the quality of training is the personality and professionalism of the trainer (training leader). Key features of good training:
- The training was made by a well-known, experienced, authoritative leader, or the leader of a well-known, authoritative Training Center.
- The host has the appropriate professional education and relevant certificates.
- On the website or in the advertising booklet, the objectives of the training and its main topics are clearly and in detail described.
- At the training, you get a well-prepared handout, the trainer uses well-prepared slides and presentations.
- The trainer knows the subject, behaves confidently, does not get confused in concepts, does not jump from topic to topic, and observes the time limit. See →
Question: Should the trainer explain to the participants what he is doing with them and with what help? (of course, provided that he himself knows) Should I say that now we are using «body-oriented therapy», and now there will be an exercise from «dance movement therapy», and then we will continue with an exercise from «authentic movement»? Should I say that now we are using the technique from «Gestalt therapy talking with an empty chair», and now we will deal with «trance states from Ericksonian hypnosis», and we will finish with the technique from «NLP anchoring»?
Answer: The fact that the coach should do this is usually (according to observations) very anxious people who are concerned not with getting the result, but “no matter what happens”.
Other participants in the training, who need the actual result, are not very interested in the names of the methods. And if the coach comments on any of his actions, naming the methodology and the author, he will perceive it as training rubbish. And he will formulate a claim to the coach: “We did not pay for these scientific comments.” On the other hand, if an interested person approaches the coach during a break or after a session and asks methodological questions, then, in my opinion, a good coach can and should answer them in detail.
If it is important for you to figure out how to choose the training that suits you, see the corresponding article …