Episode 7: Keeping training relevant under production pressure: Delivering effective training when uptime and deadlines dominate.  

Duration: 6m56s

AUSMASA Intro: Welcome to the Train-the-Trainer Podcast, proudly brought to you by AUSMASA, Empowering industry to develop essential workforce capabilities for today and tomorrow. 

Marc: Hi folks! Marc Ratcliffe with you again on the Train-the-trainer podcast and in this episode, we’re tackling a reality that trainers and assessors in mining and automotive know all too well: delivering meaningful training when production pressure is high. 

With me today is Michelle Dyson and Richard Jansen. How are you both today? 

Michelle: Good thanks, Marc.  

Richard: Yes, I’m also good and looking forward to attacking this topic, Marc. 

Marc: Well, let’s kick in then, shall we?  

When the plant needs to keep moving, when shift schedules are tight, or when vehicles need to get back out in the field, training can quickly be seen as something that gets in the way. What are your thoughts? 

Michelle: I agree, training can become squeezed, delayed, shortened, or treated as a tick and flick exercise. 

Richard: And that’s the irony. As pressure builds on production, the more important effective training becomes. 

Marc: All too true. 

Michelle: And when under pressure, the cost of poor decisions goes up.  

Marc: Yeah, mistakes become more likely, and shortcuts become all the more tempting.  

Richard: Communication gets compressed too and verification often gets skipped over, which is a real issue.  

Marc: And that’s exactly when competence matters most. So how do we keep training relevant, credible, and effective when operational deadlines dominate? Let’s start with you, Richard. 

Richard: First, stop positioning training as separate from operational performance. In high-pressure environments, training only gains traction when people can see how it supports the job.  

Marc: I guess that means linking learning directly to things like safety, quality, and less rework. 

Richard: Yes, Marc. For example, if you’re reinforcing a maintenance procedure, don’t frame it as just a compliance requirement. Connect it to equipment reliability, fault prevention, reduced callbacks, or fewer shutdowns.  

Marc: Okay. 

Richard: And if you’re training on inspection quality, connect it to catching issues early rather than dealing with failure later. 

Marc: That makes sense, Richard. So, in other words, make the operational value visible. 

Richard: I like that. 

Marc: Okay, Michelle, what are your thoughts? 

Michelle: I think it’s important to design for reality. If you know workers are unlikely to be released for long classroom training, don’t build an approach that depends on lengthy sessions.  

Marc: Yeah, you might have a shutdown maintenance window where training gets compressed into 15 mins between shifts, or an automotive workshop with cars booked back-to-back? So, what’s the alternative? 

Michelle: Use shorter, focused learning moments. Build micro-learning into shift starts, handovers, planned downtime, job observations, and task preparation. 

Marc: But this doesn’t mean watering the learning down though, right.  

Michelle: No, it means being smarter about delivery. A ten-minute targeted session tied to a real task can often have more impact than an hour of generic content delivered at the wrong time. 

Marc: It sounds like quality over quantity wins the day again. 

Michelle: Something like that, Marc  

Marc: Well, if I can add my two cents worth, I think it’s essential that we prioritise what matters most. Under production pressure, not every piece of content can be delivered in the same way. Trainers need to identify the critical knowledge, decisions, and behaviours that most influence safe and effective performance. So, we should focus on those. 

Richard: Marc, I think we could go a step further and ask ourselves questions like: What are the errors we most need to prevent? What are the tasks where people are most likely to drift from the standard under time pressure? And what must workers know or do correctly, even on a bad day? That’s where training effort should go. 

Marc: That’s solid advice, Richard. Now back to you Michelle, what other strategies can you suggest? 

Michelle: Another strategy is to embed learning into work rather than see it as a bolt on! 

Marc: You mean like using coaching during tasks?  

Michelle: Yeah, you could do that but also include questioning during observations, use the actual equipment, real job cards, real defects, and real procedures to facilitate the learning.  

Marc: Workplace learning is often strongest when it happens in context. 

Michelle: Agreed. Of course, there is a risk here. If training becomes too informal, it can lose consistency.  

Marc: And no one wants that. 

Michelle: So, the answer is not to abandon structure. Rather, the trick is to bring structure into practical settings.  

Marc: Richard, let’s get you in on this. How would you ensure structure in practical settings? 

Richard: Thanks, Marc. At the top of my list would be establishing clarity in the objectives, you know, ‘why are we doing this’ and then drill down on the expected outcomes. “This is what we are looking for”. Like Michelle said, if we can connect this to real routines the training becomes less abstract.   

Marc: Yeah, and it should still be delivered in ways that match the pace of work, right? 

Richard: Yes, and it also helps to work with supervisors and production leaders, not around them. If training is always seen as the training department’s problem, it will lose out when schedules tighten.  

Marc: So True, Richard. When frontline leaders understand what the training supports and help reinforce it, learning becomes part of performance, not separate from it. 

Richard: You get it. 

Marc: Now Michelle, do you have any final perspectives?  

Michelle: I can’t understate the importance of communication here. Be realistic and direct. Saying, ‘We need an hour because the package says so,’ is less persuasive than saying, ‘We need fifteen focused minutes on this because we’ve seen three repeat issues and they’re costing us time and increasing risk.’  

Richard: ‘Time is money’ as they say. 

Marc: And relevance earns attention. The best trainers understand that and can explain the value proposition of training clearly. 

Well, Michelle, Richard thanks for joining us on the podcast today. You’ve definitely given us plenty to think about. 

Richard: Thanks, Marc. 

Michelle: It’s been fun.  

Marc: There’s no doubt that training is an important partner to production. However, you may need to convince some of the key stakeholders of its operational value. Involve supervisors and production leaders early and tighten your focus onto the production pain points they advise. This will keep the training relevant and ensure it remains connected to real work activities. And don’t be afraid to be flexible in your approach. That shorter, focused burst of training, delivered just-in-time will likely have more impact than a long block of mandatory content. 

So, if you’re working in an environment where training is constantly competing with production, don’t give up, just choose your moments wisely. 

Because the real test of training is not whether it works when everything’s calm. It’s whether it still helps people perform effectively when the pressure is on. Bye for now.  

AUSMASA outro: This was just one resource in the AUSMASA Train-the-trainer suite of tools aimed at bridging the gap for trainers and assessors in the mining and automotive industries. Check out the other learning assets to take your training and assessment to the next level, including videos, scenarios, case studies, job aids, fact sheets and other podcast episodes.  

END.