Tracking Practical Skill Development:

Introduction 

The training needs of different assay labs are not the same. Necessary skills differ (and may continuously change) within and between assay labs. The minimum level of required skill and background knowledge is also different in different labs.  What do you think of this web site's approach to assayer training? What does you lab do different? What different challenges do you face? Your comments are welcome.

The training program discussed on this web site is designed for an industrial, rather than academic, setting. In this setting, economic constraints do not allow a leisurely (and perhaps broader) academic approach to developing assayer knowledge. Training designs emphasize approaches that rapidly turn non-technical "new-hires" into economically productive technicians. Assaying theory, complex concepts, assaying support skills (maintenance, troubleshooting, ect.), and non-routine tasks are shifted, whenever possible, to later (more leisurely) "advanced" training.

Within this economic context, several approaches to training are possible. The training approach featured on this site is structured for a medium-sized assay lab that places a premium on assayer adaptability, minimum training overhead, and skill diversity. All assayers must be able to handle routine ("basic") tasks. Once these skills are mastered, non-routine skills are added under the label of "advanced" training. Technical recognition and pay rewards tie to increased skill and broader responsibility. Team contribution and involvement is an integral part of all skill tracking and pay reward structures.

Reconciling flexibility and diversity with a standard pay scale led to a modular promotion structure. Work load patterns, combined with lean staffing, made it impractical to base promotions on a rigid, purely linear (identical) progression of skills. The solution was to link technical recognition (pay on a standard scale) to flexible blends of different skill modules. Some added skills are required for all people at a given level; others vary within a standard context. Standardized, comparable wage scales (tech grade levels) are sustained by crediting the quantity of equivalent advanced modules mastered rather than the exact identity of a module. Advanced module credits are interchangeable; the identity of the specific advanced skill modules mastered for pay increases is elective. Skill duplication is minimized; skill diversity above "basic" levels (tech II) is encouraged.
 

Training Hands-on  

It has been said that people don't really learn new a new concept until it has been repeated at least six times. For some students, if they attend lecture-style training sessions, this may even be an understatement. "Hands-on" training reduces the amount "repeat and review" cost; it insures that a trainee is generating economic benefits to a company at the earliest possible moment.

Hands-on training does have liabilities; training design needs to minimize hidden costs. Cost-effective structures must be in place to insure that errors generated by inexperience are prevented or caught and corrected. (Training is not an acceptable excuse for letting an error leave the lab!) Instructor labor is not free; it can impact cost twice. The lab pays the trainers wage and it must also pay for labor the experienced assayer might have applied to generating assays. Ideally, task training is organized and defined to allow trainers to sustain productive activity in parallel with their training function. However, in some labs, the challenge of balancing these and other "hidden" training costs often makes hiring experienced assayers (i.e., minimizing in-house training support) an attractive bargain.

An emphasis on hands-on training impacts the attitude of assayers. Hands-on creates a "current-action" focus among employees. "Get it done" pressures time spent on, "Why do it this way?"  Carried to far, this can lead to a kind of "tunnel vision" that ignores analytical error or opportunities for improved efficiency.

Advanced training adds an emphasis on assaying context, theory, and other support skills as routine productive skills improve. These additional levels of training are designed to enhance longer term economic values: i.e., assayers with flexible, accurate troubleshooting responses and progressive and "front-line" professional (accurate) support for developing process improvements. (Continuous learning also refocuses attitudes; bored techs aren't accurate techs.) This progressive training blend enhances overall support for assay quality, task diversity, and adaptability in a small laboratory setting.
 

What Is a Skillsheet?  

Employees continue adding skills in a module as time and opportunity permit. Once an entire module of skills is complete, the trainee asks his or here crew to "validate" the quality of the training as applied to supporting crew production (team approval). After validation, the trainee proceeds requests testing (knowledge Quality control) and recognition (pay) for successfully acquiring new skills within the context of the job description assigned to the next pay level.
 

Skillsheet Design  

Level 0

MSHA 5023 training -- Under U.S. law, 24 hours general mine safety training (classroom based), as well as 8 hours of annual refresher training, must be complete prior to entering the workplace. (Commercial assay labs, which are usually sited separately from mining operations, do not need to meet this requirement. They fall under less stringent OSHA regulations.) The MSHA module link below deals with (and extends beyond) the in-lab "Introduction to Workplace safety" portion of this requirement.

Level 1

Basic training: Initial training is task focused, on-the-job, and hands-on. Only skills that are clearly defined and necessary for routine operation are taught at this level. Training design aims for completing training in the core functions of all four basic modules in about one year. All training is within the flow of routine production assaying. (Some of the skills taught at this level might be considered "advanced" at other lab sites; "Basic", for the purposes of training, is defined as routine, task-defined skills.  "Basic" training in this approach can be stressful for employees with no prior laboratory experience.)

Level 2

Advanced training is entirely voluntary, broader, and more theoretical. Training emphasizes non-routine procedures and knowledge that builds "trouble shooting" support skills.  Advanced trained assayers continue to perform "basic" tasks, although minimum performance standards usually increase. Advanced training ads broader experience, knowledge, responsibility, and provides a freedom (as well as a mandate) to "make it work" regardless of circumstances.  (Task-oriented  basic assayers sometimes ask, "Why learn anything beyond current, known needs?" That misses the point; understanding and diverse method experience is a tool for overcoming the unexpected.)

 

Although company-set minimum times exist for crediting advanced modules, many technicians find that advanced qualification takes much longer than the minimum time. Transition to individual initiative and a "self-study" program of reading, observation, practice, and application can be difficult. Some advanced modules are difficult to complete unless the assayer takes supplementary outside college classes or other outside, formal training. Not all technicians feel the returns justify the effort. (Note: Certain skills labeled as "advanced" in this system might be considered "basic"  in other laboratories. Any skills excluded from basic level training because they are "non-routine" default to the advanced training program. )

Skillsheet Examples