Assignment 4: Case Study Analysis

CIMT 720Advanced Instructional Design

Fall, 2010

Feng-Qi Lai

Case Analysis

Page 1 of 2

Log:  Date: Monday (Oct. 25, 2010)

 Time: reading 0:00 – 0:00 AM analyzing and writing 0:00 – 0:00 AM

proofreading 0:00 -- 0:00 PM

CASE ANALYSIS

Case 28 Natalie Morales: Managing Training in a Manufacturing Setting

Key information of the case

What it is: A case about solving training problems at Chipex Manufacturing, a large

semiconductor manufacturing organization with factories all over the US and

internationally.

Problem noticed: The technician certification process was not a standard process.

Training culture: You own your own development.

Certification Types: 1) factory-wide certifications required for every technician:

taking a class to get certified

2) area-specific/job-specific certifications: two steps – taking

a class or one-on-one training and obtaining sign-off from the

trainer

Training duration: 1) factory-wide: not mentioned in the case; however, it is

implied simpler and shorter.

2) area/job-specific: varying from a few weeks to 18 months

based on the complexity of the tool.

Proficiency levels: 1 through 4 from basic to expert

Supervisor’s perspective (Michelle): Supervisors see the importance of having

right ratio of lower levels vs. higher levels based on the needs;

however, some trainers and technicians are short-sighted and

taking a “more-the-merrier” shotgun approach. Since the

evaluation criterion is: the more certifications, the higher

qualification for promotion and salary raises, the result is: more

level 1s but difficult to get level 4s.

Trainers & technicians’ perspectives (Tran & Hector): They have different

perspectives: one is “let go” the other is “thorough” for training

certification. Problems include 1) not sufficient time for

training (training time vs. work time: taking training or doing

actual work?), 2) external certifiers are cut and internal trainers

become certifiers, so criteria for certifications are lowered

because the more certified, the more credit the trainers have, 3)

change of supervisors that results in inconsistency of the

priorities and it being hard for trainers to follow.

CIMT 720Advanced Instructional Design

Fall, 2010

Feng-Qi Lai

Case Analysis

Page 2 of 2

Summary of the problems in the case

Inconsistency among supervisors: There should be a consistent priority standard

for supervisors to mange the training vs. actual work; ratio of

lower level certifications vs. higher level certifications;

Instructions to trainers and technicians about obtaining

certification have to be specific and consistent.

Inconsistency among trainers: There should be a consistent training rubric for all

trainers. The evaluation of trainers’ training should also be

more thorough. How to evaluate trainers in terms of quality vs.

quantity?

Lack of knowledge about NEEDS: Needs for each technician should be analyzed.

Technicians only need to get trained in the areas where there is

a need for him/her to be trained. That means obtaining relevant

skills. The evaluation criterion of “the more certificates, the

better” needs to be modified. A valid evaluation system for

employees is needed.

Lack of a right motivational system: Trainers and technicians should not be

motivated to get more certificates but to do a good job. The

current policy implies possible potential of discouraging those

who are doing a good job but awarding those who may have

performance deficiencies but know how to play with policies.

Natalie Morales is a newly graduate student with an MS degree in Instructional

Technology, basically a novice designer. She never had real-world work experience

except for working with her professor as a GA on several jobs in the manufacturing

settings. She has only talked with three people (one supervisor and two trainers). She

needs to talk with more people to find the true problem with the training system and

process.