Rank: Super forum user 
|
Good point from 'confined' about aiming to dispel misperceptions about OS&H. As he/she says, if people tell you after your presentation or training session that they found it interesting, enjoyable, better than expected and/or useful (ideally all 4 of these views though even 2 of them counts as good), you will know that you have done reasonably well.
To echo yet again one of my pet themes on this forum, do avoid boring people with details of OS&H legislation. Apart from OS&H people, most audiences/trainees simply need to know that OS&H laws exist, plus the gist of what relevant sets of regulations require, why and by what means.
Another way to engage people is to take opportunities to get them to think how OS&H principles and practice can apply equally well outside work - in the home, during leisure activities and on holiday, etc. This reminds me that one of the best and most enjoyable presentations I've seen about the 1974 Act was one given some years ago in Manchester, mainly/wholly to OSH professionals. Instead of following the usual format of relating the significant sections of the Act to workplaces and work activities, the speaker related them to the various aspects of planning, travelling abroad and enjoying a holiday.
Another of my pet themes is that IOSH people should take appropriate and available opportunities to be ambassadors for OS&H and try to dispel the misperceptions held by people generally, many of which it could be argued are perpetuated by various forms of media plus politicians, etc. One way of doing this is to ask non-OS&H people at the start of a training session or seminar for their thoughts on what they think OS&H is about. Some may be bold and say it's a burden, bureaucratic imposition, masses of paperwork including printed risk assessments for every conceivable situation and activity irrespective of risk, etc. If people don't respond with comments you'll probably get some knowing nods if you summarise the commonly held misperceptions. Irrespective of whether you've had responses or not, your next step is to say that you intend during your presentation/session to challenge and debunk the misperceptions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Graham Bullough wrote:In my experience another aspect of delivering very similar presentations and training sessions on different days is that some audiences can be very receptive and positive while others are less receptive and/or in a few cases can be slightly disruptive, especially if they have been compelled to attend. Also, the responses from trainees on feedback forms about even the same training session can vary considerably. It seems that my colleagues have had similar experiences and conclude that the variations arise from a variety of factors which reflect the myriad characteristics and attitudes, etc of audience members/trainees rather than any shortcomings on our parts as presenters/trainers.
Whilst I agree that the same presentation / training session can be given a differnt response by different audiences, I disagree that it reflects any shortcomings on behalf of the presenters / trainers.
A good trainer / presenter will read their audience throughout and therefore adapt how they deliver the presentation / training accordingly. You can give the same message in slightly different ways according to how the audience is reacting. That in my opinion is what makes a good presenter / trainer - one that can adapt to each audience.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
That should have read:
...I disagree that it DOESN'T reflect any shortcomings on behalf of the presenters / trainers'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Clairel - In response to your comments, I'll suggest that how presentations and training sessions are received tends MORE to reflect the many different attitudes and characteristics of recipients than the shortcomings of presenters/trainers. Also, as none of us is perfect, all presenters/trainers will have shortcomings to some extent - just hopefully fewer in the case of experienced ones who, among other things, will be more likely to 'read' their audiences and adapt accordingly. However, in the case of mixed reactions from audience members, how far should one adapt to a minority who are less receptive while the majority are receptive? It's impossible to please everybody all the time.
After training sessions my colleagues and I look through the feedback sheets for the overall pattern of responses. Even when we've done what we thought were good sessions with good trainees who joined in the various group and interactive exercises and generally got a majority of 'good' sheets, we're not too surprised if we get one or even several sheets which are less than 'good'. Though we do consider if and how we should tweak future sessions, I think that getting a majority of positive responses and no 'inadequate' or 'poor' responses tells us we've done reasonably well.
Another tip for those giving informal presentations is to tell audience members whether they're happy to take questions during the presentation or would prefer to deal with them at the end. My own preference is for questions during such a session. This is because of the possibility that if one person hasn't quite understood something I've said, there's a fair chance that others might not have done so either.
Also, if a question during or after a session is difficult to answer in a short space of time or comprises too much of a diversion from the main theme, it's best to offer to have a face to face discussion afterwards rather than take up valuable time and/or bore the rest of the audience.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Do you ever give short answers Graham!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
did the fire alarm go off?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Nee - a good suggestion from you as to why my response at #46 was unusually brief, but it wasn't the case. Mind you, the fire alarm here at work (large civic office) did go off late yesterday afternoon and interrupted work. Fortunately the weather was fine and sunny and the evacuation comprised an impromptu break from work with an opportunity to catch up with various departmental colleagues. We weren't out for too long because the alarm was a false one as usual. However, from time to time my fire colleague reminds everybody against complacency - the next evacuation might well be due to a real fire!
Come to think of it, as other forum regulars might have observed, my response at #46 was almost certainly the briefest ever response from me! Also, while this topic is still in a slightly interrogative phase, you seem quite proud of your onion-less state Nee: Do you have any plans to obtain any onions in the foreseeable future?!! :-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.