What's the point of having all these 50hr mandatory online training courses, when your division may be outsourced tomorrow or your business unit downsized, plus most of the training has nothing to do or is applicable to the work you're doing. It's this just an HR thing to make is seem like their doing human resources development?
14 replies (most recent on top)
LWD looks like a cult meeting videos. We were not given the mandatory 50 hours, so i have to ask - are there any limitations on what sort of trainings are you supposed to take?
There is a sh–load of interesting trainings, even on external platforms, which are still tracked by PLE and can aid you towards an industry standard certification (AZ900 announcment arrived today), which you can utilize once you get from T.
Why don't you leverage those mandatory 50 hours to build your way out?
And you are not utilizing the Mute and Minimize strategy?
This is the only way to watch LWD videos.
Hell, half the other training you can do the same, even the ones with a quiz. If you fail the quiz the 1st time, just open the transcript and search.
This is why the training with actual hands-on content like the CELLs or Nanodegrees are more valuable from an actual learning something perspective, but not necessarily valuable from a worth your time perspective.
LWD? And you are not utilizing the Mute and Minimize strategy?
Stop complaining. The training is for your future employer.
LDW training is cultish. Literally one year I recall the host drinking “kool aid”, not the sugar drink but some sort of concoctions, i.e. snake oil. I don’t need the company to tell me what vitamins to take, how to sleep, etc...
Next they will be telling me to dye my hair jet black, wear a blazer with blue jeans and to wear goofy socks like a grade school kid.
This company doesn’t care about empowering anyone to do anything. They care more about micromanaging the hell out of employees and treating them like children as a pathetic way to motivate employees to help them reach their bonus objectives.
In ATO the "Empower" series, (not mandatory, but "STRONGLY ENCOURAGED")... is a classic example of a feckless Leadership's response to overwhelmingly negative feedback on their own performance.
The training is a hastily produced, low budget, herky- jerky, and disjointed mish mash of management 101 mumbo jumbo.
Leadership has already been patting their own backs on how great a job they have done with this. What a joke.
1) to provide a pretext for senior leadership to pontificate about their leadership brilliance, without coming off as pompous and arrogant
2) legal CYAs
3) justify at&t University, especially after Ken F. retired
4) public relations
As you probably noticed, none of this benefits the employee.
A while back survey results indicated people weren't happy with the internal training choices. The company committed to allow more outside training until the cost and travel was deemed to much. The training organization pitched a solution that included virtual training that would allow the training and travel budgets to be cut. AT&T University was the result. It was called "best in class" by the PR machine at the time. A big reason you are required to take so much online training is to justify the development and continued cost of AT&T University. It is a check mark on your annual review but nobody is asking the question if the training is making employees better.
Management understands the marketplace, the company's culture, and the future needs of the business units. Your job is to follow their unfailing prognostications.
Mandatory coverages are generally not intended to help you learn anything.
They are legal and PR CYAs for the company, so it can claim it is educating you, and thereby reduce its insurance bills, because in any lawsuit, they can claim they trained their employees on that, so sue the individual, not the company. That, and it's a nice easy annual review checkbox to see which employees have completed it, and which balk, as employees who balk at mandatory coverages are likely to be balky in other areas that are harder to just look up but otherwise not pay attention to.
As for Leading with Distinction, that's just the Leader Leaders standing up in front of some Collaboration Zone "Leaders" (we're all "Leaders," you see) and feeling self-important enough to justify the C-Suite bucks they assign themselves.
Another Al Sharpton video? Not cool!
rebranded as nanodegee, in 50 Hrs, become an expert. ONLY AT&T
Leadership uses this to show they are educating their workforce. And every upper level has to do it because the one that doesn't will be noticed. And that's bad.