2014 Industry Report

2O14 TRAINING
INDUSTRY
REPORT
ABOUT THIS STUDY
Now in its 33rd year, The Industry Report Industrial Classications

is recognized as the training industrys
Respondent prole by industry (weighted per Dun & Bradstreet).
most trusted source of data on budgets,
stafng, and programs. This year, the 6/
@
,-4*/
0/;@ 0,E0/,
5'@
study was conducted by an outside F *0
D,0/0#
*
research rm May-July 2014, when 40 "*//,/@ 7*/
-,/@
members from the Training magazine */
,/@ ,0/*@
database were e-mailed an invitation B,* **
to participate in an online survey. Only A*+/0/1@ #
*'@
U.S.-based corporations and educational
/
institutions with 100 or more employees /0
1 @
were included in the analysis. Agencies of A 0/ 0 *,/5@
the state, local, and federal government #
* @
were not included in the analysis. #0E /1
The data represents a cross-section of # ,
/1@
industries and company sizes.
0D*/0/
"*,
0 '@
30
SURVEY RESPONDENTS B095@ /0@
Small companies 28%
0*+
/0/ 51
(100-999 employees) (// *'@ #E/:0
>@
Midsize 41%
(1,000-9,999 employees)
Large 31%
(10,000 or more employees)
Total respondents 998
About Survey Respondents:

Note that the gures in this report tBSFNBOBHFSTPSBCPWFJOUIFPSHBOJ[BUJPO
are weighted by company size and tBSFEFWFMPQFSTPSJOTUSVDUJPOBMEFTJHOFST
industry according to a Dun & Bradstreet tBSFNJEUPMPXMFWFM CBTFEPOUJUMFTFMFDUJPO
BTTPDJBUFT
database available through Hoovers of tEFUFSNJOFUIFOFFEGPSQVSDIBTJOHQSPEVDUTBOETFSWJDFT
U.S. companies. Since small companies tTFUUIFCVEHFU
dominate the U.S. market, in terms of tNBOBHFSFRVFTUTGPSQSPQPTBMTCJET
sheer numbers, these organizations receive tSFDPNNFOEUIFQVSDIBTF
a heavier weighting, so that the data tIBWFUIFmOBMQVSDIBTFEFDJTJPO
accurately reects the U.S. market.
16 | NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2014 training www.trainingmag.com

TRAINING EXPENDITURES
Backed by an improving job Training Expenditures 2009-2014

market, a sharper focus on "=B*
training to close skill gaps, and '
JODSFBTFENFSHFSTBOEBDRVJTJUJPOT 60
%> Q%
activity leading to more mid- ' Q
size companies, total 2014 U.S. ' Q
50
training expendituresincluding Q
payroll and spending on external Q;
products and servicesjumped ;%%
40 Q
QFSDFOUUPCJMMJPO ;
;%
5SBJOJOHQBZSPMMJODSFBTFE ;;
30
QFSDFOU GSPNCJMMJPOUP >
CJMMJPO XIJMFTQFOEJOHPO
outside products and services rose 20
QFSDFOUGSPNCJMMJPOUP
CJMMJPO
10 %
The training budget gure > % >
>
was calculated by projecting
the average training budget to a 0
weighted universe of companies, /0
05
05#/0EE #+ 56,/*
D.+ /,
* 01

,/*N#
*
using a Dun & Bradstreet database
available through Hoovers of U.S.
organizations with more than 100
employees. It is interesting to note DEFINITIONS
that although small companies Total training spending: All training-related expenditures for the year,
have the smallest annual budgets, including training budgets, technology spending, and staff salaries.
there are so many of them that they Training staff payroll: The annual payroll for all staff personnel assigned
BDDPVOUGPSQFSDFOUPGUIFUPUBM to the training function.
budget for training expenditures. Outside products and services: Annual spending on external vendors
and consultants, including all products, services, technologies, off-the-
shelf and custom content, and consulting services.
Average of Total Annual Budget

Organization Type Large Midsize Small Average
&EVDBUJPO
(PWFSONFOU.JMJUBSZ
.BOVGBDUVSFS%JTUSJCVUPS
/POQSPmU
"TTPDJBUJPO
3FUBJM8IPMFTBMF
4FSWJDFT
Avg. Across Sizes
www.trainingmag.com training NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2014 | 17

2014 TRAINING INDUSTRY REPORT
Types of Training Products and Services

Intended to Purchase Next Year
Assessment & Analysis Testing 19%
Audience Response Systems 6%
"VEJPBOE8FC$POGFSFODJOH1SPEVDUT4ZTUFNT 18%
"VUIPSJOH5PPMT4ZTUFNT 37%
Business Skills 21%
$FSUJmDBUJPO 23%
$MBTTSPPN5PPMT4ZTUFNT 33%
$POTVMUJOH 20%
$POUFOU%FWFMPQNFOU 29%
$PVSTFXBSF%FTJHO 27%
$VTUPNFS3FMBUJPOTIJQ.BOBHFNFOU 11%
Enterprise Learning Systems 8%
Games & Simulations 20%
,OPXMFEHF.BOBHFNFOU5PPMT4ZTUFNT 15%
Learning Management Systems 41%
Mobile Learning 23%
Online Learning Tools & Systems 44%
4VQQPSU0O%FNBOE-FBSOJOH5PPMT4ZTUFNT 17%
1SFTFOUBUJPO4PGUXBSF5PPMT 27%
Talent Management Tools & Systems 18%
Training Management Administration 13%
Translation & Localization 7%
8FC 3%
0 10 20 30 40 50
Average training expenditures for large companies decreased XBT GPSTNBMMDPNQBOJFT JUXBT
TMJHIUMZGSPNNJMMJPOJOUPNJMMJPOJO For those who reported an increase in their training staff,
XIJMFTNBMMDPNQBOJFTSFNBJOFECBTJDBMMZnBU the average increase was four people, ve less than in 2013.
JOWT JO
BOENJETJ[FDPNQBOJFT For those who reported a decrease in their staff, the average
JODSFBTFEGSPNNJMMJPOUPNJMMJPO EFDSFBTFXBTQFPQMFVQGSPNMBTUZFBS
4PNFQFSDFOUPGPSHBOJ[BUJPOTTBJEUIFZJODSFBTFETUBGG 0UIFSUSBJOJOHFYQFOEJUVSFTSFCPVOEFEUIJTZFBSUP
from the year before (up from 34 percent in 2013), while CJMMJPOGSPNCJMMJPOJO4VDIFYQFOEJUVSFT
QFSDFOUTBJEUIFMFWFMSFNBJOFEUIFTBNF VQGSPN DBOJODMVEFUSBWFM USBJOJOHGBDJMJUJFT BOEFRVJQNFOU0O
QFSDFOUJO
4PNFQFSDFOUTBJEJUXBTMPXFSWT average, organizations spent 11 percent of their budget
percent in 2013. Large nonprots and service organizations PS WT MBTUZFBS
POMFBSOJOHUPPMT
had the largest personnel costs. Across all organization BOEUFDIOPMPHJFT-BSHFSFUBJMFSTXIPMFTBMFSTBOETNBMM
types, larger companies spent about 10 times as much as education organizations spent the highest portion of their
midsize, and midsize companies spent about three times budgets on tools and technology (24 percent and 21
as much as small ones. The average payroll gure for large percent, respectively). Manufacturers across all sizes spent
DPNQBOJFTXBTNJMMJPOGPSNJETJ[FPSHBOJ[BUJPOT JU the greatest percentage of their budgets on training tools.

Training Expenditures per Learner 2012-2014
$1,059 Q
All Companies $881 Q;
$976 Q
Small (100 to 999 $1,115

employees) $1,092
$1,238
Midsize (1,000 to $1,104

9,999 employees) $829
$819
Large (10,000 or $864

more employees) $490
$903
0 300 600 900 1,200 1,500
Hours of Training per Employee 2013-2014
All Companies 37.5 Q;

40.7 Q
Small (100 to 999 36.5
employees) 42.2
Midsize (1,000 to 38.8
9,999 employees) 41.6
Large (10,000 or 37.5
more employees) 36.2
0 10 20 30 40 50
-BSHFFEVDBUJPOPSHBOJ[BUJPOTBOETNBMMHPWFSONFOUNJMJUBSZ organizations have lost their edge on cost savings as midsize

organizations spent the smallest percentage of their training PSHBOJ[BUJPOTTQFOUMFTTUIBOMBSHFPOFTUIJTZFBS WT
budget on tools and technologies (1 percent and 4 percent, QFSMFBSOFS

SFTQFDUJWFMZ
-PPLJOHBIFBE UIFNPTUGSFRVFOUMZBOUJDJQBUFE 0OBWFSBHF FNQMPZFFTSFDFJWFEIPVSTPGUSBJOJOH
purchases are online learning tools and systems (44 percent per year, three hours more than last year. In general, small
WTQFSDFOUMBTUZFBS
BOEMFBSOJOHNBOBHFNFOUTZTUFNT companies tended to have more hours of training this year at
QFSDFOUWTQFSDFOUMBTUZFBS
5IJTJTGPMMPXFECZ 3FUBJMFSTXIPMFTBMFBOETFSWJDFTPSHBOJ[BUJPOTIBEUIF
BVUIPSJOHUPPMTTZTUFNT QFSDFOUWTQFSDFOUMBTU IJHIFTUBWFSBHFOVNCFSPGIPVSTPWFSBMM XJUIMBSHFSFUBJMFST
year), classroom tools and systems (33 percent vs. 29 wholesale organizations having the largest number of hours
percent), and content development (29 percent vs. 30 PGBOZPUIFSPSHBOJ[BUJPOUZQFPSTJ[F IPVST

percent last year). $PNQBOJFTDPOUJOVFEUPEFWPUFUIFCVMLPGUIFJSUSBJOJOH
0WFSBMM POBWFSBHF DPNQBOJFTTQFOUQFSMFBSOFS expenditures to training non-exempt employees (40 percent,
UIJTZFBSDPNQBSFEXJUIQFSMFBSOFSJO down from 42 percent in 2013). Training for exempt non-
Manufacturers spent the most this year with an average NBOBHFSTEFDSFBTFEGSPNQFSDFOUUPQFSDFOUJO
PG 6OMJLFQBTUZFBST UIPVHI JUMPPLTMJLFMBSHF 2014.

Training Expenditure Allocations

Who Gets Trained? Staff per 1,000 Learners
40% *W +0 *
40
35
30 26% 15
24% 12.5 12.4 13.1
25
20 10
15
10%
10 5
5
0 0
D. ,/ * 005
* & & 6
0 / /
D. +/ 005
* D. +/ E
*W %%% %%%%
D. +/ D+1 * +0 *
Staff per 1,000 Learners Staff per 1,000 Learners

80
5 +0 * #0+0 *
30 27.2
20 18.3
16.7 16.4 16.2 23.1
21.7
15
20
15.6
10
10
5
0 0
6
0 / /
6
0E
/ / /
E
80
5 %%% %%%%
#0 % %% %%%
+0 * +0 *
0
05 /
05 Is the Number of
Training-Related Staff Higher
-,5 /E
0
5 or Lower Than Last Year?
+0 *:0* /RZHU

=>: +LJKHU

*W +0 *
00/ 00
05 E 6DPH

=0*0
+0 * 0/ 0
0
05 E=;;'>%
TRAINING BUDGET
Budget status was almost evenly split, What Happened to Your

with 43 percent saying their training Training Budget This Year?
budget increased and 41 percent
TBZJOHJUSFNBJOFEUIFTBNF4PNF
percent reported a decrease in budget.
'HFUHDVHG
Last year, 41 percent said their budget
XFOUVQQFSDFOUTBJEJUSFNBJOFE ,QFUHDVHG
UIFTBNFBOEQFSDFOUTBJEJUXFOU
EPXO&EVDBUJPOBOEHPWFSONFOU
military organizations showed the
5HPDLQHG
greatest tendency for training budget
WKHVDPH
DVUT XIJMFSFUBJMFSTXIPMFTBMFSTBOE
NBOVGBDUVSFSTEJTUSJCVUPSTTIPXFE
the largest gains. Increases were not
evenly distributed across organization
sizes. Large companies (23 percent)
showed more decreases than midsize
(14 percent) and small (13 percent)
companies.
Most of the budget increases were
NPEFTUMFTTUIBOQFSDFOU4PNF
QFSDFOUTBXJODSFBTFTJOUIFUP
QFSDFOUSBOHF XIJMFQFSDFOUPG Budget Change by Industry
organizations reported increases in the
UPQFSDFOUSBOHF.PTUSFTQPOEFOUT 9% Q7
0*
who reported an increase in their .BOVGBDUVSFS%JTUSJCVUPS 60% Q"
0*
training budgets attributed it to the 31% Q#0
following reasons:
13%
Services 42%
t*ODSFBTFJOUIFTDPQFPGUIFJS 45%
USBJOJOHQSPHSBNT QFSDFOUWT
percent last year) 13%
t"EEFEUSBJOJOHTUBGGBOENPSF 3FUBJM8IPMFTBMF 65%
MFBSOFSTTFSWFE QFSDFOUGPSCPUI 22%
vs. 49 percent and 40 percent,
respectively last year) 25%
(PWFSONFOU.JMJUBSZ 42%
t1VSDIBTFEOFXUFDIOPMPHJFT
33%
FRVJQNFOU QFSDFOUWT
percent last year) 28%
Education 11%
Like last year, the majority (42 61%
percent) of respondents reported budget 0%
EFDSFBTFTCFUXFFOBOEQFSDFOU 0%
Association
Some 44 percent chose other as
100%
the reason for the decrease, citing
corporate mandate to cut expenses, 22%
LMS implemented, lowered priority Nonprot 31%
by the organization, and Training 47%
department reorganized, among others.
0 20 40 60 80 100
This was followed by:

TRAINING BUDGETS
t4UBGGSFEVDUJPOT QFSDFOUEPXOGSPN How Much Did Your Training Budget Increase?

QFSDFOU
4+0 *
t#VEHFUBEKVTUNFOUTUPSFnFDUMPXFSDPTUT
QFSDFOUEPXOGSPNQFSDFOUMBTU
0@ >@
ZFBSCVUNPWJOHGSPNUIF/PUP/P @/@ '@
SFBTPO
@/@ @
t%FDSFBTFETDPQFPGUSBJOJOH QFSDFOU
@/@ ;@
KVNQJOHUPUIF/PSFBTPO
0 10 20 30 40 50
-JLFUIFMBTUUXPZFBST UIFIJHIFTU
QFSDFOUBHFPGPSHBOJ[BUJPOT QFSDFOU
TBJE #0+0 *
NBOBHFNFOUTVQFSWJTPSZUSBJOJOHXJMMSFDFJWF
0@ @
NPSFGVOEJOHUIBOUIFZFBSCFGPSF0O
BWFSBHF PSHBOJ[BUJPOTQMBOUPBMMPDBUF @/@ @
UIFNPTUGVOEJOHUPNBOBHFNFOU @/@ ;%@
TVQFSWJTPSZUSBJOJOHBU *5 @/@ '@
TZTUFNTUSBJOJOH
BOETBMFT
USBJOJOH
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
5IFNPTUJNQPSUBOUQSJPSJUJFTGPSUSBJOJOH
JOUFSNTPGBMMPDBUJOHSFTPVSDFTJO *W +0 *
BSFJODSFBTJOHUIFFGGFDUJWFOFTTPGUSBJOJOH
QSPHSBNT QFSDFOUWTQFSDFOUMBTU
0@ @
ZFBS
GPMMPXFECZJODSFBTJOHMFBSOFSVTBHFPG @/@ '@
USBJOJOHQSPHSBNT QFSDFOUWTQFSDFOU
@/@ ;@
MBTUZFBS
BOESFEVDJOHDPTUTJNQSPWJOH
FGmDJFODZ QFSDFOUWTQFSDFOUMBTU @/@ %@
ZFBS
-JLFMBTUZFBS MFBSOJOHJOGSBTUSVDUVSF 0 10 20 30 40 50
UFDIOPMPHZJOJUJBUJWFTBOEPCUBJOJOHSFWFOVF
UISPVHIFYUFSOBMUSBJOJOHSFNBJOUIFMPXFTU
QSJPSJUJFT
80
5 +0 *

0@ ;@
@/@ @
@/@ @
@/@ ;>@
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Why Did Your Budget Increase?

"EEFE5SBJOJOH4UBGG @
*ODSFBTFE/VNCFSPG-FBSOFST4FSWFE @
*ODSFBTFE4DPQFPG5SBJOJOH @
"UUFOEFE.PSF0VUTJEF-FBSOJOH&WFOUT DPOGFSFODFTTFNJOBST
@
*ODSFBTFE0VUTJEF5SBJOFS$POTVMUBOU*OWFTUNFOU ;@
1VSDIBTFE/FX5FDIOPMPHJFT&RVJQNFOU ;@
#VEHFU"EKVTUFEUP3FnFDU)JHIFS$PTUT @
0UIFS @
0 10 20 30 40 50 60

How Much Did Your Training Budget Decrease?
4+0 *

0@ 22%
@/@ 9%
@/@ 42%
@/@ 27%
0 10 20 30 40 50
#0+0 *

0@ 31%
@/@ 0%
@/@ 56%
@/@ 13%
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
*W +0 *

0@ 10%
@/@ 20%
@/@ 35%
@/@ 35%
0 10 20 30 40
80
5 +0 *

0@ 26%
@/@ 5%
@/@ 37%
@/@ 32%
0 10 20 30 40
Why Did Your Budget Decrease?

Reduced Training Staff 40%
Decreased Number of Learners Served 11%
Decreased Scope of Training 22%
Attended Fewer Outside Learning Events (conferences/seminars) 11%
Decreased Outside Trainer/Consultant Investment 18%
Budget Adjusted to Reect Lower Costs 24%
Other 44%
0 10 20 30 40

TRAINING BUDGETS
Projected Funding for Learning Areas Next Year

Executive Development 11% 60% 4% 25%
Management/Supervisory Training 26% 60% 6% 8%
*OUFSQFSTPOBM4LJMMT FH DPNNVOJDBUJPO UFBNXPSL
20% 60% 7% 13%
*54ZTUFNT5SBJOJOH FH FOUFSQSJTFTPGUXBSF
15% 61% 7% 17%
%FTLUPQ"QQMJDBUJPO5SBJOJOH 10% 61% 10% 19%
Customer Service Training 20% 58% 6% 16%
Sales Training 16% 38 3% 43%
Mandatory or Compliance Training 15% 72% 5% 8%

14% 63% 4% 19%
1SPGFTTJPO*OEVTUSZ4QFDJmD FOHJOFFSJOH BDDPVOUJOH FUD
19% 63% 4% 14%

Onboarding
0 20 40 60 80 100
Q
080*/C 0
Q4-,// #0 0*80*/C 0
Q8 **080*/C 0
Q4
T R A I N I N G D E L I V E RY
Nearly 47 percent of training hours were delivered by a EFWJDFT EPXOGSPNQFSDFOUJO XIJMFTPDJBM

stand-and-deliver
instructor in a classroom settingup a bit MFBSOJOHBDDPVOUFEGPSQFSDFOUPGIPVST VQGSPN
from the 44 percent reported last year. QFSDFOUMBTUZFBS4PNFQFSDFOUPGDPNQBOJFTTBJE
they are using social learning to some extent.
tQFSDFOUPGIPVSTXFSFEFMJWFSFEXJUICMFOEFE
MFBSOJOHUFDIOJRVFT VQBCJUGSPNQFSDFOUMBTUZFBS 4NBMM QFSDFOU
BOENJETJ[F QFSDFOU

tQFSDFOUPGIPVSTXFSFEFMJWFSFEWJBPOMJOFPS companies continue to rely on instructor-led delivery
DPNQVUFSCBTFEUFDIOPMPHJFT VQGSPNQFSDFOUMBTU NFUIPETNPSFTPUIBOMBSHFDPNQBOJFT QFSDFOU

ZFBS7JSUVBMDMBTTSPPN8FCDBTUBDDPVOUFEGPSOFBSMZ Blended learning was fairly even across companies of all
QFSDFOUPGIPVSTEFMJWFSFE EPXOGSPNQFSDFOUMBTU TJ[FT SBOHJOHCFUXFFOQFSDFOUGPSMBSHFDPNQBOJFTBOE
year. QFSDFOUGPSTNBMMPOFT-JLFMBTUZFBS MBSHFDPNQBOJFT
tQFSDFOUPGUSBJOJOHIPVSTXFSFEFMJWFSFEWJBNPCJMF appeared to be focusing on online or computer-based
Training Delivery Methods by Company Size 2014

;;@'@ @>@>@;>@
Small UPFNQMPZFFT
Midsize UP FNQMPZFFT

@>;@@@>@%@

Large PSNPSFFNQMPZFFT
@; @ @;%@%@;@
0 30 60 90 120 150
QB 8 0
5!0-0/E /**/ - :)
Q"*/
,/
&8 0**
61
Q
/,00**
F -0*/61!*/
,/
E

/ 0/)
Q6
+,/
&B0* /*61!*/
,/
)
Q- 61! + **/0- /*74*)
Q#08 0
561

methods (35.9 percent vs. an average of 26.5 percent for learning management systems (LMSs), both with 74
small and midsize companies). percent. Last year, virtual held the lead at 78 percent,
Mandatory or compliance training continued to be done followed by LMSs with 74 percent.
mostly online, with 72 percent of organizations doing at t3BQJEFMFBSOJOHUPPM QFSDFOU EPXOGSPNQFSDFOU
least some of it online and 20 percent entirely online (down last year)
from 21 percent last year). Online training also often is used t"QQMJDBUJPOTJNVMBUJPOUPPM QFSDFOU EPXOGSPN
for desktop application training (56 percent, the same as last percent)
year) and IT/systems application training (54 percent, down
from 58 percent last year). Online training was least used for The delivery methods least often used for training remained
executive development (40 percent had no online training for the same as last year:
it), onboarding (35 percent had no online training for it), and
interpersonal skills and customer service (31 percent had no t1PEDBTUJOHBUQFSDFOU EPXOGSPNQFSDFOUMBTUZFBS
online training for either one). Of the learning technologies t-FBSOJOHDPOUFOUNBOBHFNFOUTZTUFN -$.4
BU
presented, the most often used included: percent (down from 26 percent)
t0OMJOFQFSGPSNBODFTVQQPSU &144
PSLOPXMFEHF
t7JSUVBMDMBTTSPPN8FCDBTUJOHWJEFPCSPBEDBTUJOHBOE management system at 21 percent (down from 25 percent)
Online Method Use for Types of Training

&YFDVUJWF%FWFMPQNFOU @;@@>@@
Management/Supervisory Training @;@%@@@
Interpersonal Skills (e.g., communication) ;@'@'@@
IT/Systems Training (e.g., enterprise software) '@'@;@@@
%FTLUPQ"QQMJDBUJPO5SBJOJOH @@;@@%@
$VTUPNFS4FSWJDF5SBJOJOH ;@;@@@;@
Sales Training @%@;@@@
.BOEBUPSZPS$PNQMJBODF5SBJOJOH ;@@>@;@@
1SPGFTTJPO*OEVTUSZ4QFDJmD FH FOHJOFFSJOH
@>@;@@@
Onboarding ;@ @>@%@;@
0 20 40 60 80 100
Q6 Q43 :6
5
0*Q# 6 Q*/16 Q46
0
1>+
/E/
05,
*:

-10*/0&0&
*/
,/

DFODVVURRPVHWWLQJ7KDWJXUHLVXS
*5/1E
/ +
/
+
/ 0*/
1 0
# +
/E+0 **0
/ 10
,*5*0 0
5/* ./ /

Learning Technologies Current Usage4+0 *

Podcasting @ '@>@
Online Performance Support or Knowledge Management System @>@'@
Rapid E-Learning Tool (PowerPoint conversion tool) '@;@%@
Application Simulation Tool ;;@ @>@
Virtual Classroom/Webcasting/Video Broadcasting >@@@
Learning Content Management System (LCMS) @ @@
Learning Management System (LMS) >@@@
Mobile Applications '@>@>@
0 20 40 60 80 100
Q(* ,
/1Q7/,* Q/*,

#0+0 *
Podcasting @%@@
Online Performance Support or Knowledge Management System @';@@
Rapid E-Learning Tool (PowerPoint conversion tool) ;'@'@@
Application Simulation Tool >@ '@@
Virtual Classroom/Webcasting/Video Broadcasting @;@;@
Learning Content Management System (LCMS) '@>@@
Learning Management System (LMS) @;@@
Mobile Applications @'@@
0 20 40 60 80 100
Q(* ,
/1Q7/,* Q/*,

*W +0 *
Podcasting >@>%@@
Online Performance Support or Knowledge Management System @ %@%@
Rapid E-Learning Tool (PowerPoint conversion tool) @;@;@
Application Simulation Tool ;@%@@
Virtual Classroom/Webcasting/Video Broadcasting >@;@@
Learning Content Management System (LCMS) @ >@%@
Learning Management System (LMS) >@@@
Mobile Applications '@> @ @
0 20 40 60 80 100
Q(* ,
/1Q7/,* Q/*,

80
5 +0 *
Podcasting ;@>@@
Online Performance Support or Knowledge Management System ;@ @@
Rapid E-Learning Tool (PowerPoint conversion tool) >@;@@
Application Simulation Tool @@ @
Virtual Classroom/Webcasting/Video Broadcasting '%@@@
Learning Content Management System (LCMS) ;%@@@
Learning Management System (LMS) ''@@@
Mobile Applications ;@>@;@
0 20 40 60 80 100
Q(* ,
/1Q7/,* Q/*,


TRAINING OUTSOURCING
2014 saw a sizeable increase in the average expenditure QFSDFOUTPNFPSDPNQMFUFMZPVUTPVSDFEGPSMBSHFDPNQBOJFT

GPSUSBJOJOHPVUTPVSDJOH VQGSPN JO QFSDFOUGPSNJETJ[FPOFTBOEQFSDFOUGPSTNBMM
-BSHFDPNQBOJFTPOBWFSBHFTQFOUNJMMJPOWT organizations.
GPSNJETJ[FDPNQBOJFTBOE GPSTNBMM The level of outsourcing is expected to stay relatively steady
POFT"OBWFSBHFPGQFSDFOUPGUIFUPUBMUSBJOJOHCVEHFU JOTPNFQFSDFOUPGPSHBOJ[BUJPOTTBJEUIFZFYQFDU
was spent on outsourcing in 2014, the same as in 2013. to stay the same in the outsourcing area. The percentage
On average, 29 percent of companies completely of companies expecting to decrease use (11 percent) is
PVUTPVSDFE-.4PQFSBUJPOTIPTUJOH WTQFSDFOUMBTU slightly higher than those expecting to use outsourcing more
year). Learner support, however, was mostly handled in- QFSDFOU
5IFSFBSFFYDFQUJPOTGPSJOEJWJEVBMGVODUJPOT
IPVTF QFSDFOU
-.4BENJOJTUSBUJPO QFSDFOU
MBSHFMZ though. In learner support, twice as many companies said
was handled in-house, as well. they will be doing less than those that said they will be
*OTUSVDUJPOGBDJMJUBUJPOXBTIBOEMFEBCPVUFRVBMMZJO doing more.
house and outsourced. Across all the topic areas, large There arent many differences between the outsourcing
companies outsourced more than midsize ones, and midsize changes by company size. One thing that stands out:
organizations outsourced more than small companies. This Large companies will outsource less custom content
FGGFDUXBTNPTUTUSJLJOHGPSDVTUPNDPOUFOUEFWFMPQNFOU development.
*0:0*W 0-

0* / 0
05
.+ /,
E
/
05,/*,
5=;;';;
,+E
=;;40
05 E'
+
/E/ //0/
05-,5 /:0**+ /
,/*,
5 E,/*,
5*
.+ / /*/01
0/ 1*/ 01
Extent of Outsourcing4+0 *
*OTUSVDUJPO'BDJMJUBUJPO @@@
LMS Administration (registration, upload data) >%@>@@
-.40QFSBUJPOT)PTUJOH ;@'@%@
Learner Support '@'@@
$VTUPN$POUFOU%FWFMPQNFOU >@;'@@
0 20 40 60 80 100
Q6,/*,
5Q# 6,/*,
5Q*/1
+ / 16,/*,


TRAINING OUTSOURCING
Extent of Outsourcing#0+0 *
Instruction/Facilitation @ @@
LMS Administration (registration, upload data) '>@%@@
LMS Operations/Hosting @>@'@
Learner Support >%@@@
Custom Content Development > @@@
0 20 40 60 80 100
Q6,/*,
5Q# 6,/*,
5Q*/1
+ / 16,/*,

*W +0 *
Instruction/Facilitation '@%@;@
LMS Administration (registration, upload data) %@@>@
LMS Operations/Hosting @'@;@
Learner Support ';@@;@
Custom Content Development @;'@'@
0 20 40 60 80 100
Q6,/*,
5Q# 6,/*,
5Q*/1
+ / 16,/*,

80
5 +0 *
Instruction/Facilitation @@@
LMS Administration (registration, upload data) >%@%@@
LMS Operations/Hosting @@@
Learner Support '@'@@
Custom Content Development ;@ @'@
0 20 40 60 80 100
Q6,/*,
5Q# 6,/*,
5Q*/1
+ / 16,/*,

"E
0

*,++
//: 0*01
+0 **01/ 1:- 5 **/0
/* /0/*01/ 1:- 5
80
5
+0 *:,/*,
**,*// /
+ /

Projected Use of Outsourcing4+0 *
*OTUSVDUJPO'BDJMJUBUJPO @@@;@
LMS Administration (registration, upload data) @;>@'@@
-.40QFSBUJPOT)PTUJOH %@@>@;@
Learner Support @;@@@
$VTUPN$POUFOU%FWFMPQNFOU @;;@@;'@
0 20 40 60 80 100
Q
6,/*,
5Q #0 Q8 **6,/*,
5
Q:H'RQW:RQW2XWVRXUFH7KLV)XQFWLRQ
#0+0 *
*OTUSVDUJPO'BDJMJUBUJPO @;;@;@;@
LMS Administration (registration, upload data) ;@;@ @>@
-.40QFSBUJPOT)PTUJOH @%@>@;@
Learner Support ;@;@%@ @
$VTUPN$POUFOU%FWFMPQNFOU @'@'@@
0 20 40 60 80 100
Q
6,/*,
5Q #0 Q8 **6,/*,
5
*W +0 *
*OTUSVDUJPO'BDJMJUBUJPO @@@;@
LMS Administration (registration, upload data) >@@'@;@
-.40QFSBUJPOT)PTUJOH @@ @;@
Learner Support @;;@%@@
$VTUPN$POUFOU%FWFMPQNFOU @;@>@;;@
0 20 40 60 80 100
Q
6,/*,
5Q #0 Q8 **6,/*,
5
80
5 +0 *
*OTUSVDUJPO'BDJMJUBUJPO ;@>@@'@
LMS Administration (registration, upload data) @;@@@
-.40QFSBUJPOT)PTUJOH >@ @'@;%@
Learner Support ;@;>@@@
$VTUPN$POUFOU%FWFMPQNFOU @;%@@;@
0 20 40 60 80 100
Q
6,/*,
5Q #0 Q8 **6,/*,
5

2014 Industry Report

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

2014 Industry Report

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate



Now in its 33rd year, The Industry Report Industrial Classications

Total respondents 998

About Survey Respondents:

16 | NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2014 training www.trainingmag.com

Backed by an improving job Training Expenditures 2009-2014

Average of Total Annual Budget

www.trainingmag.com training NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2014 | 17

Types of Training Products and Services

18 | NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2014 training www.trainingmag.com

Small (100 to 999 $1,115

Midsize (1,000 to $1,104

Large (10,000 or $864

0 300 600 900 1,200 1,500

Hours of Training per Employee 2013-2014

All Companies 37.5 Q ;

-BSHFFEVDBUJPOPSHBOJ[BUJPOTBOETNBMMHPWFSONFOUNJMJUBSZ organizations have lost their edge on cost savings as midsize

www.trainingmag.com training NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2014 | 19

Training Expenditure Allocations

Staff per 1,000 Learners Staff per 1,000 Learners

+0 *:0* /RZHU

Budget status was almost evenly split, What Happened to Your

www.trainingmag.com training NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2014 | 21

t4UBGGSFEVDUJPOT QFSDFOUEPXOGSPN How Much Did Your Training Budget Increase?

Why Did Your Budget Increase?

22 | NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2014 training www.trainingmag.com

Why Did Your Budget Decrease?

www.trainingmag.com training NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2014 | 23

Projected Funding for Learning Areas Next Year

Mandatory or Compliance Training 15% 72% 5% 8%

19% 63% 4% 14%

Nearly 47 percent of training hours were delivered by a EFWJDFT EPXOGSPNQFSDFOUJO XIJMFTPDJBM

Training Delivery Methods by Company Size 2014

Midsize  UP FNQMPZFFT

24 | NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2014 training www.trainingmag.com

Online Method Use for Types of Training

www.trainingmag.com training NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2014 | 25

Learning Technologies Current Usage4+0 *

26 | NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2014 training www.trainingmag.com

2014 saw a sizeable increase in the average expenditure QFSDFOUTPNFPSDPNQMFUFMZPVUTPVSDFEGPSMBSHFDPNQBOJFT

 *0:0*W 0- 

www.trainingmag.com training NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2014 | 27

28 | NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2014 training www.trainingmag.com

www.trainingmag.com training NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2014 | 29

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen

All Companies 37.5 Q;

-BSHFFEVDBUJPOPSHBOJ[BUJPOTBOETNBMMHPWFSONFOUNJMJUBSZ organizations have lost their edge on cost savings as midsize

+0 :0 /RZHU

t4UBGGSFEVDUJPOT QFSDFOUEPXOGSPN How Much Did Your Training Budget Increase?

Nearly 47 percent of training hours were delivered by a EFWJDFT EPXOGSPNQFSDFOUJO XIJMFTPDJBM

Midsize UP FNQMPZFFT

Learning Technologies Current Usage4+0 *

2014 saw a sizeable increase in the average expenditure QFSDFOUTPNFPSDPNQMFUFMZPVUTPVSDFEGPSMBSHFDPNQBOJFT

0:0W 0-