Training is not a 'discretionary expense'

If there's one word that should be removed from the newspaper industry's language as it relates to training, it is the simple word "discretionary."

"Sorry," one newspaper executive after another says when Poynter or the Media Management Center or API calls with word of a new training program, "but we've cut all travel and training this year. We're looking at those as 'discretionary' expenses."

What a mistake.

It's just amazing that in a day of cutthroat media competition for readers and advertisers, any newspaper executive could consider training as a discretionary activity. Golf dates with advertisers are discretionary. The luxury box at the ballpark is discretionary. Comprehensive staff training, on the other hand, is essential for any organization that aspires to compete effectively in the tough-and-getting-tougher media marketplace.

In fairness, many newspaper organizations invest significantly in training and development. Gannett, Cox and a few others come immediately to mind. Unfortunately, though, far too many newspaper companies see training as just another expense rather than as a core element of their long-term workforce-development strategies.

The memory is fresh of a call I received from the CEO of a newspaper chain in which he informed me that his publishers all had said during annual budget reviews that they wouldn't be sending anyone to API or other residential training centers during the next year. The reason? All the publishers feared that if their people went away for training they would use the time to network and find jobs in other companies!

It somehow didn't seem to register with the CEO that what he really was saying -- and what his publishers all were saying -- was that the organization's internal culture was so unsatisfying that key employees were anxious to work elsewhere.

The best companies carefully cultivate better internal cultures than that, and a key way they do it is by investing in personnel development. As "Training Magazine" said recently, the best companies "....have an unwavering commitment to people and their corresponding development in the face of, and sometimes in spite of, economic uncertainty."

These companies, the magazine said, "have tacit social contracts with their employees that go well beyond paychecks and perks du jour, solidifying corporate cultures that continually foster and reward both the creation and application of knowledge, not only for the betterment of the company, but for the betterment of the individuals that constitute their workforces as well."

There is considerable research attesting to the powerful return on investment (ROI) from quality training. For example, a Development Dimensions International (DDI) survey of 187 companies in 115 countries addressed that issue directly. In the study, DDI found that 34 percent of the organizations with superior financial performance had high-quality leadership-development programs. DDI reported that "customer service, financial outcomes, the quality of products and services, employee satisfaction and retention -- all are better when there is an investment in leaders."

There are numerous studies showing that quality training, consistently applied, leads to better work performance. Better work performance, in turn, yields better products and services. Better products and services yield more sales, which yield greater profits.

So help me understand: How could training be considered "discretionary?" Newspaper employees whose companies give them too few opportunities to develop their technical, managerial and leadership skills should be asking their bosses the same question.