As budgets continue to constrict, much-needed training programmes are being ditched in favour of keeping costs low. David Whitney explains how the savvy learning development team can add value to courses

In response to constrained budgets for 2009-10, most learning and development teams have focused on real and immediate needs and driving down costs. This has most commonly meant that career-critical training programmes have remained sacrosanct, attendances at external conferences require strong justification and the use of external training providers has been significantly curtailed.

Taking a leaf from their own training courses on customer relationship management (CRM), the most effective learning and development teams are proactively pursuing a dialogue with management to pinpoint key business aims and to understand how and where learning and development can add most value. Others are in a more reactive mode, justifying their budget share and very existence at a time when redundancies are being made.

In applying the 'real needs' test, many firms are looking more rigorously at the aims and objectives of proposed learning and development programmes and in defining how their success will be measured.

For example, the recent restructuring of Baker & McKenzie's programmes means delegates on many internal courses will soon be required to undertake significant pre- and post course work, including some online assignments. This will extend the period of learning and also allow for a better assessment of value added. Meanwhile, closer ties between learning and development and fee earning teams mean that more informative assessments of the impact of skills training on subsequent work are possible.

More or less training?

Views are polarised on this question. Where the imperative is for fee earners to win and transact business, firms have pared back course provision. Conversely, where the maintenance of key knowledge and skills is causing most concern, firms have increased the number of technical training sessions they run, often recording them for future e-learning use. This is one example of increased levels of learning and development recycling. Similarly, successful departmental training is now often rolled out firm-wide and, where possible, internal courses are rejigged for external client-facing (and potential fee-generating) use.

Many firms already use internal resources to provide much of their technical training between departments. This approach has become almost universal with very little technical training now coming from external providers. Some firms, including Berwin Leighton Paisner and Olswang, have expanded from department-focused to firmwide technical training programmes, for example, insolvency for non-specialists programmes. At Nabarro, the success of 'back to basics' contract courses led to the extension of the programme to clients.

Fewer firms used internal resources to the same degree for professional skills training pre-recession and, as a consequence, most innovations reported are connected to the recent trend in this direction.

Several firms have recruited specialist trainers to deliver internal skills programmes. More commonly, learning and development teams have used fee earners as internal experts to present specific topics, often working in tandem with a professional support lawyer or member of the learning and development team. Based on a survey of learning and development professionals, respondents report that the selection of appropriate experts, the preparation of supporting materials and the choice of presentation style can be a delicate and time-consuming process. However, delegates put a very high value on learning from a master.

At Ashurst, a proposed new learning and development format is "An audience with…" in which senior associates will be given the opportunity to put questions to and learn firsthand from leading partners about key skills and client handling issues.

At Nabarro, fee earner contributions to technical training programmes are assessed as part of a non-chargeable appraisal target.

Where firms have continued to use external providers, they are looking for specialist or high-end skills training that they cannot source internally. For example, Lovells has engaged a trainer to focus on advanced numeracy skills for lawyers who regularly encounter spreadsheets and financial models in their work.

Administration costs have been a target in many learning and development teams. In this regard, a number of firms are understood to be examining the recent outsource by Osborne Clarke of a range of its support services (including learning and development) to Integreon to see whether the potential savings and other consequences make sense for them both in the current climate and the long term.

New technology

To reduce training-related travel and accommodation costs, multi-site firms are increasingly using video conferencing and webinar technology to disseminate learning and development. Respondents report mixed results, success being dependent on the design and subject matter of the sessions and on the quality of the transmission.

Interestingly, despite a high level of enthusiasm for e-learning among many learning and development teams, the monitored use of recorded sessions by fee earners in some firms is very low.

However, as demonstrated by the recent learning and development and IT awards obtained by Ashurst ('The Long Goodbye') and Lovells ('TransAct'), innovative, high quality e-learning products can be produced both for internal and client-facing use. The trick is to make them relevant and appealing and to do so cost-effectively.

Learning and development teams are responding creatively to the necessities of the downturn, refocusing their activities on core business priorities, using and recycling internal resources wherever possible and streamlining arrangements.

While it is probably too early to identify whether particular responses will shape learning and development provision beyond the downturn, the greater collaboration with internal clients and resulting increase in mutual understanding that most participants report could have potentially far-reaching implications.

David Whitney is a professional development consultant and presenter. He can be contacted at [email protected].

Click here to subscribe to Legal Week's print edition