BUSI 444 Week 6 Training Project Example

Coaching Conversations: A Feedback Skills Training Project for First-Line Supervisors

Training Topic and Business Need

Westbrook Distribution, a regional wholesaler with 1,100 employees, promotes about 25 hourly employees to first-line supervisor each year. Most are promoted because they were strong individual performers. The company's engagement survey shows that employees who report to supervisors with less than two years' experience rate "my supervisor gives me useful feedback" far lower than other employees, and exit interviews frequently mention a lack of feedback and recognition. This project develops the training idea from the topic selection, a workshop that teaches new supervisors to give specific, timely feedback, into a complete program.

Noe (2020) describes training as most effective when it follows a design process that begins with needs assessment and continues through a supportive work environment, objectives, methods, transfer and evaluation. This paper follows that process and explains the reasoning behind the lesson plan that follows it.

Needs Assessment

Organizational Analysis

Westbrook's strategy depends on reliable service to its retail customers, which in turn depends on retaining experienced warehouse and delivery staff. Turnover among hourly employees is 34 percent a year, and the human resources director estimates that each departure costs about $4,000. Senior leaders support supervisor training, and operations managers have agreed to release new supervisors for a two-part workshop and to participate in follow-up.

Person Analysis

New supervisors are the target group. Interviews with eight recent promotions and their managers found that most had never been taught how to give feedback and that many avoided it, especially corrective feedback to former peers. Their managers confirmed that the problem was not willingness but skill and confidence.

Task Analysis

Observation and interviews identified the feedback tasks supervisors perform: recognizing good work specifically, correcting errors or unsafe behavior promptly, discussing repeated performance problems privately and following up to see whether behavior changed. Each task requires describing the behavior and its impact, listening to the employee's view and agreeing on next steps.

Learning Objectives

At the end of the training, given a realistic warehouse scenario, each supervisor will be able to:

• 1. Deliver specific positive feedback that names the behavior and its effect, in at least four of five role plays as judged by a trained observer using a checklist.
• 2. Deliver corrective feedback using the four-step model of behavior, impact, listening and agreement, completing all four steps in at least four of five role plays.
• 3. Plan and conduct a follow-up conversation within one week of corrective feedback, documented in a feedback log for each of three real employees during the month after training.

Learning Principles Behind the Design

Modeling and Practice

The core method is behavior modeling. Taylor et al. (2005) conducted a meta-analysis of behavior modeling training and found that it had substantial effects on learning outcomes and positive effects on job behavior, with larger effects on behavior when trainees practiced skills in scenarios, were given mixed positive and negative models, set goals for using the skills and worked in an environment where supervisors rewarded the new behavior. The workshop therefore shows video models of both effective and ineffective feedback conversations, has supervisors practice in pairs with an observer and ends with each supervisor setting goals for the coming weeks.

Learning From Errors

Feedback conversations rarely go as planned, so supervisors need to practice handling difficult responses. Keith and Frese (2008) pooled studies showing that error management training, which encourages trainees to make and learn from errors during practice, produced better transfer than training that discouraged errors, especially for tasks that differed from those practiced in training. Role plays will include scripted challenges, such as an employee who becomes defensive, and debriefs will treat mistakes as material for learning.

Spacing and Structure

Leadership skills develop over time. Lacerenza et al. (2017) conducted a meta-analysis of leadership training and found that programs were more effective when they used practice-based methods, included feedback, were delivered in multiple sessions spread over time and were based on a needs analysis. The workshop is therefore split into two half-day sessions three weeks apart, with real feedback conversations in between.

Delivery Methods

Noe (2020) compares traditional methods, such as presentations, role plays and behavior modeling, with technology-based methods, such as e-learning and simulations. The program uses a blended design. A 30-minute online module before the first session introduces the feedback model with short videos and a knowledge check, so classroom time can focus on practice. Sitzmann et al. (2006) conducted a meta-analysis comparing web-based and classroom instruction and reported that online instruction taught factual knowledge slightly better than classroom teaching and that the two were about equally effective for procedural knowledge, with blended approaches performing well. The online module therefore teaches the model's facts, while classroom sessions build the interpersonal skill through practice.

Trainers and Learning Environment

Two trainers will deliver each session: an experienced operations manager known for developing people, who gives the workshop credibility with supervisors, and a member of the human resources training staff, who manages the role plays and scoring. Both will complete a rehearsal of the full program and calibrate their use of the observer checklist on recorded role plays, so that scoring is consistent. Sessions will be held in a training room at the main distribution center, away from the warehouse floor, with groups of no more than twelve so that every supervisor practices several times. Scenarios will use realistic warehouse situations, such as a picker who repeatedly skips scanning or a driver who handled a difficult customer well, because practice that resembles the job transfers more readily than generic examples.

Accommodating Different Learners

New supervisors differ in experience, confidence and language background. Some were promoted after many years with the company; others are younger employees who now supervise former peers. Spanish and English versions of the online module will be offered, and role plays will let supervisors choose scenarios that match their own teams. Supervisors who find corrective feedback especially difficult can request an extra practice session with a trainer before the second workshop. Trainers will also watch for supervisors who say little in group debriefs and check in with them privately, since quieter participants may need a different way to share what they learned.

Transfer Plan

New skills must survive the return to the warehouse floor. Blume et al. (2010) showed across many transfer studies that motivated trainees and a supportive setting, above all encouragement from bosses and coworkers, went along with skills carrying over to the job. The plan builds that support in three ways. Before the first session, each supervisor's manager meets with the supervisor to discuss why feedback matters and which employees might benefit. Between sessions, supervisors hold three real feedback conversations and record them in a simple log, which they discuss in the second session. After the second session, managers observe one feedback conversation each month for three months and give their own feedback using the same checklist.

Evaluation Plan

The evaluation measures several outcomes rather than satisfaction alone. Because reactions say little about learning or behavior (Alliger et al., 1997), reaction questions will focus on perceived usefulness and intention to use the skills. Learning will be measured by observers' checklist scores in the final role plays. Behavior will be measured by the feedback logs and by a short employee survey, administered before training and four months later, asking how often the supervisor gives specific feedback. Results will be measured by voluntary turnover in each supervisor's team over the following year. Because supervisors are promoted throughout the year, those trained in the first half of the year can be compared with those awaiting training, providing a comparison group.

Costs and Expected Return

The program's direct costs are modest. Each cohort of twelve supervisors requires two half-day sessions led by two trainers, about 16 hours of trainer time including preparation, along with eight hours of each supervisor's time and the online module, which the training staff can build once. Including supervisors' wages, the cost is roughly $6,500 per cohort, or about $14,000 a year for the 25 supervisors promoted annually. If better feedback reduces voluntary turnover in trained supervisors' teams by even two percentage points, the savings across teams of about 20 employees each would be roughly $40,000 a year at Westbrook's estimated $4,000 cost per departure. The evaluation plan will show whether that return materializes.

Detailed Lesson Plan

Conclusion

The Coaching Conversations program addresses a documented business problem, new supervisors who do not give feedback, with a design grounded in the textbook's training process and in research on modeling, error management, leadership training, transfer and evaluation. Its blended format uses online time for knowledge and classroom time for practice, its spacing allows real practice between sessions, and its transfer plan enlists supervisors' managers. If the evaluation shows higher feedback ratings and lower turnover in trained supervisors' teams, Westbrook will have evidence that the program pays for itself.

References

Alliger, G. M., Tannenbaum, S. I., Bennett, W., Jr., Traver, H., & Shotland, A. (1997). A meta-analysis of the relations among training criteria. Personnel Psychology, 50(2), 341-358. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1997.tb00911.x

Blume, B. D., Ford, J. K., Baldwin, T. T., & Huang, J. L. (2010). Transfer of training: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Management, 36(4), 1065-1105. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309352880

Keith, N., & Frese, M. (2008). Effectiveness of error management training: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(1), 59-69. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.59

Lacerenza, C. N., Reyes, D. L., Marlow, S. L., Joseph, D. L., & Salas, E. (2017). Leadership training design, delivery, and implementation: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(12), 1686-1718. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000241

Noe, R. A. (2020). Employee training and development (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.

Sitzmann, T., Kraiger, K., Stewart, D., & Wisher, R. (2006). The comparative effectiveness of web-based and classroom instruction: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 59(3), 623-664. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2006.00049.x

Taylor, P. J., Russ-Eft, D. F., & Chan, D. W. L. (2005). A meta-analytic review of behavior modeling training. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(4), 692-709. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.4.692