27.06.2013 Views

Volume Two - Academic Conferences

Volume Two - Academic Conferences

Volume Two - Academic Conferences

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Andrée Roy<br />

determines if eLearning may solve some of the training problems encountered by SMEs. The<br />

conclusion and discussion will be included in section 5.<br />

2. Method<br />

Given the present state of knowledge on training in SMEs and eLearning, the method used for this<br />

article includes a census of the literature on training and eLearning combined with a qualitative and<br />

exploratory research approach, i.e. multiple case studies. The literature census covers more<br />

specifically how businesses evaluate the results of the training they offer and the eLearning tools<br />

available to do so. The case study method is well adapted in situations where theoretical propositions<br />

are few and field experience is still limited (Yin 1994). A multiple-site case study allows one to<br />

understand the particular context and evolution of each firm with regard to eLearning. Sixteen SMEs<br />

located in the Atlantic Region of Canada were studied, that is, four in each of the provinces of New<br />

Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland, selected to be sufficiently<br />

successful (at least 10 years in business) and representative in terms of industry and size, for<br />

theoretical generalization purposes. These manufacturing SMEs stem from various sectors, such as:<br />

textile, oil and gas, pulp and paper and processed food sector. Following North American research<br />

(Mittelstaedt, Harben and Ward 2003; Wolff and Pett 2000), a small enterprise (SE) is defined as<br />

having 20 to 99 employees, whereas a medium-sized enterprise (ME) has 100 to 499.<br />

Data were collected through semi-structured tape-recorded interviews, ranging approximately two<br />

hours each, with the owner-manager or CEO and with the firm’s HR manager or manager responsible<br />

for training. eLearning users were also interviewed in four cases. Interview transcripts were then<br />

coded and analyzed following Miles and Huberman’s (1994) prescriptions with the assistance of the<br />

Atlas.ti application. For reasons of confidentiality, fictitious names of individuals and firms participating<br />

in the study were used. As presented in the research results section, these firms range in size from 60<br />

to 485 employees and operate in industries whose technological intensity varies from low to high. All<br />

export except for one firm (M). The SMEs were regrouped in four eLearning profiles of increasing<br />

intensity, based on the extent of their awareness and use of eLearning (none, weak, average, strong).<br />

3. Literature census<br />

A business preoccupation is ensuring that all categories of employees possess current and up-to-date<br />

knowledge and skills. Having well trained employees is also a question of business performance and<br />

business survival. The recent technological advances, along with a reduction of their costs, allow<br />

businesses to reconsider training more easily including the method and tools of offering this training.<br />

3.1 Training methods<br />

Training method generally refers to the method that will be used in order to train the employees and to<br />

enable learning (Laflamme, 1999). The training method must be selected to ensure the training<br />

offered is effective, efficient, profitable, and interesting (Hansen, 2006). The objective of a training<br />

method being to facilitate the transmission of knowledge, know-how, and know-being (Laflamme,<br />

1999). Training methods can be formal or informal (Kotey and Sheridan, 2004; Tanova and Nadiri,<br />

2005). The informal methods are neither planned nor documented and are unstructured (Smith and<br />

Hayton, 1999; Tanova and Nadiri, 2005). In contrast, formal methods are planned, structured, and<br />

documented and are offered both inside and outside companies [(Shepherd and Ridnour, 1996;<br />

Tanova and Nadiri, 2005). Table 1 summarizes the different training methods identified by various<br />

researchers (Bazin, 1994; Fernandez, 1988; Laflamme, 1999; Meignant, 1997; Mucchielli, 1988;<br />

Sonntag, 1994). The methods are grouped according to whether they are considered to be<br />

affirmative, interrogative or active.<br />

Table 1: Training methods<br />

Affirmative methods Interrogative methods Active methods<br />

Lecture<br />

Presentation and discussion<br />

<strong>Conferences</strong> and seminars<br />

Job rotation<br />

Coaching<br />

Employment training<br />

Exercices and tutorials<br />

Mnemonic method<br />

Computer-based training<br />

Vestibule training (external)<br />

698<br />

Case studies<br />

Role playing<br />

Simulation and gaming<br />

Learning by doing<br />

External internship<br />

Creativity method<br />

In-basket<br />

eLearning

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!