| Just reacting with whatever bubbles up in my mind:
6 weeks is considered too long; i think this still true for 4 weeks.
Maybe the training could be done in 3 weeks if 1) the students are
carefully selected, 2) the students are given some preparation
materials, 3) the problem they're going to solve is carefully
selected and more or less fixed.
Money is not an issue if you solve a customers' problem! I guess
we could ask more and for instance plan some knowledge acquisition
at customer site (by student AND our KE).
By trying to do some more preparation before the training starts,
we could identify some oppurtunities.
Looks like this new training and the fellowship-program are converging.
Therefore, I would not call it a "training" anymore.
Hans de Hartog
|
| I agree with Hans' last statement. The shorter the course becomes and the more
it focuses in on a customer project, then it changes from a training course into
a project / consulting session.
Is the purpose to train lots of people in a BATCH mode or to target specific
customers in working a project ?
If the former then we need a lot of individual courses, joined by a
curriculum(?) The latter is harder to plan, because you have to ensure that
customers all want to do projects at the same time, to get people together into
a classroom for the training or they get the training at different times, then
you have to make sure that the instructors are available as required.
The original 13 weeks training was 13 weeks because it had content. To shorten
it to 3 or even 2 weeks does not necessarily improve the quality, but in fact
removes the content. Are we saying that the other training is not required or
can be picked up later ? If so then does DEC want to make this other training
available itself, or let the customers go elsewhere for it ? What do customers
really want and what do we want ?
Simon
|
|
I like this more practical approach of the Training Program :
- it will be more acceptable/defendable to (belgian) management.
- 4 weeks is shorter than 6 (needed a ES to figure this out :-) )
- their real-life problem might be (partially) solved.
- (+/-) free of charge help from Digital K.E.
- 10K$ should not be a problem
If I understand the proposal well, the follow-up fellowship will be replaced by
paid consultancy/project.
This creates commercial negociation-space, which didn't exist when we gave it
away for free.
I agree with Simon about the 13 versus 3 weeks training contents.
On the other hand, I got remarks from potential participants that they've
already followed courses which are in our curriculum, or are not interested in
certain parts of it.
So... we should offer other courses, as stand-alone ones, to cover domains which
are not in the 3-4 weeks training program.
To prepare/convice customers, or to train them in special topics (KA, NN, ...)
For example a General Introduction.
More or less the first week of the 'old' training program.
This training could and should be offered to management as well ,
to create awareness.
Maybe the title 'training' should be replaced then by 'seminar', but it might
fill a gap : the existing seminars attracts people who are knowledgable about
the technology, but are hard to sell to new-comers.
One last remark. About the tool-choice : is G2 to much of a niche, or are we no
good friends with Gensym anymore?
So far my 0.02 $
Luc
|