Posted By Robert M Edwards We recommend to our clients a mixture of accredited and in house training, but for Health and Safety training the recommendation is always for accredited. The reason for this is the standard for the external accreditation provides a benchmark for quality and content. As such the accreditation can then be used in the event of the employee disputing the skills trained or there being a performance issue. No matter how good the in house training facility without external accreditation it will not be viewed in the same class. In some areas in house training works well (providing it is resourced properly) but we find more and more training in house is being done last minute. With no or free resources by people who have never been taught to train themselves the results are variable. It is often false economy. The time it takes to write a course, taking into account in house trainer time, research and resources often exceeds the cost of the external delivery. The majority of in house trainers are over stretched with mutiple conflicting roles. Very often on this site requests are made for a variety of resources because there is no training budget available. The return on investment for most of the in house training is not calculated and a lot of the problems we resolve are caused by training missing the mark. In our view it is a job like most, best left to the professionals. Excellent training relevant to the job role actually improves profit for the business, reduces error and accidents, and aids self development.

Posted By Geoff Burt I'd like to join in this discussion but first would someone please define 'accredited training'. Geoff

Posted By Geoff Burt That's my understanding as well Stuart. Which is where the problem begins. We have a contributor to this thread saying that all H&S training should be delivered by accredited organisations/trainers. The direct cost of accreditation is substantially over £1000 and if you add the time to be spent in gaining that accreditation the cost is very much more. Add the need to pay the accreditation body for delegate certificates and ongoing fees and you put it out of reach of the smaller consultancies and more importantly you take it out of reach of the smaller companies. And in the real world it is the smaller companies who provide the most employment. So what are the advantages/disadvantages to be accredited or providing accredited training. Training to a standard - we were accredited to a well known plant scheme and I can tell you the standards are not that exacting. We left because we had no faith in either the accrediting body or the lecturers they employed. In another case we were called in to undo the problems caused by the lecturer of a very well known accredited training body - not IOSH but a very similar organisation. My personal experience is that some (not all) of the accredited companies employ consultants at the lowest daily rate they can get them for, provide them with a set of ready made up slides and let them loose - the only criteria being they must be IOSH members or a similar qualification. Quality of lecturing does not come into it as long as the documentation is seen to meet the requirements. As Stuart said it is the quality of lecturing that is important and too often accreditation organisations forget that single important simple principle. So, back to the point, it is not necessarily the case that accredited training is better than in-house training. You know your own H&S issues far better than an outsider. If outside training is required don't assume the larger organisations can do it better. Get someone in with a good track record who can provide details of satisfied clients. Geoff

Posted By Tony Overbury Steve One argument would be the case in which a recognised training standard had to be achieved. By this I am thinking of the following examples: * First aid at work; * DGSA qualification; * ADR Vocational Certificate. There will obviously be many other examples. Hope this helps. Tony

Posted By Ethne D'Arcy Obviously I have to say that accredited training is the best but I also agree that in-house training has its place. However why not contact Linda Stanley, Course Approval Officer at IOSH, and talk about having your in-house courses accredited? That is possibly the best of both worlds? Ethne

Posted By Robert M Edwards Some of the answers above indicate the troubled profile presently 'enjoyed' in training. We have found that all occupational areas require a different approach and generally those at board and senior management level require training to be linked in to their own business objectives. The idea of training being delivered by in house professionals in Health and Safety but who may happen to have training skills but might not is potentially damaging to their own professional credibility. Our involvement in training is focused on the reduction in risk at all levels within the business. We use accredited courses and professional experienced trainers who have walked the walk as well as taught. They have a variety of qualifications to train but also have a real understanding how people learn and how best to embed the learning in the workplace. They resource the training properly and use state of the art technology tools. We pay for the best so our clients are better prepared to control the risks in their own business and to forward plan.

Posted By Dave Wilson Good thread!! Safety professionals and teaching, Some are great, some are not so great some are awful. Some organisations accredit courses because it gets thenm inbcome, interesting in that IOSH dont require a formal teaching qualification. Suppose a lot of H&S teaching consultants would be out of a job if this happened. Would be interesting to compare what the pass rates are for organisations who teach NEBOSH etc and you would then know which organisation was good. That said if you go to the more reputable organisations then this will cost more! but at least you are guaranteed some level of success. Ask what the pass rate is and the level of experience and qualifications that they have, remember not what the level is in the organisation but the ACTUAL person who will deliver.