What questions get answers we can use to change the program?
The questions that get answers you can use to change a program ask employers to describe specific, recent situations, because a rating of how important teamwork is can't tell you what a new hire did or failed to do, or whether your program could have prepared them for it.
Questions that tend to produce usable answers
- Think of someone you hired from our program in the last year or two. What did they handle well in the first few weeks, and where did they need the most help?
- What does a new hire who is ready for the job do differently from one who isn't?
- What equipment, software, or procedures do new hires need on the first day that they may not have used before?
- What would you want us to teach that we don't, and what could you teach better on the job than we could in a classroom?
Asking what went well matters as much as asking what went wrong, since it identifies the parts of the program employers value and want to keep. Compare the answers with what the program currently teaches, and look for patterns across several employers before acting on any single comment.
What do employers mean by "communication skills" or "work ethic"?
What employers mean by "communication skills" or "work ethic" varies from one workplace to the next, so the most useful response is to ask for an example. "Communication skills" might mean writing a clear incident report, explaining a problem to a supervisor, asking a question before guessing, or talking with customers, and each of those is taught and practiced differently.
"Work ethic" deserves particular care, because it can describe quite different situations. An employer may mean that new hires arrive late, miss shifts, or leave early. Those patterns sometimes reflect habits a program can help students or participants develop, and they can also reflect transportation, childcare, a second job, or a schedule that conflicts with family responsibilities, which a curriculum change won't address. Asking what the employer has observed, how often, and among whom helps you tell these apart.
If you're an employer trying to build these skills in people already on your payroll, the question is different. Our people have the technical skills but not the people skills. How do we build those? covers that.
Who should we ask besides our employer contacts?
Besides your usual employer contacts, ask the frontline supervisors who work with your graduates, the graduates themselves, and your own instructors. The person who attends advisory meetings is often a manager or human resources leader who hears about problems secondhand. Supervisors see how new hires handle the work day to day.
Recent graduates can tell you which parts of the program prepared them, what surprised them on the job, and what support they did or didn't receive once they started, including graduates who left the field or never found work in it. Instructors often know which employers' expectations have changed. Employers who hire people in your field but rarely hire your graduates are also worth hearing from, because they may notice something your regular partners overlook. Asking whose perspective is missing is part of designing the inquiry.
Focus groups, short interviews, and a brief survey of recent graduates are each useful, and they're most informative when used together: the survey can indicate how widespread a problem is, and the conversations can help explain why it's happening.
How do we tell a skills gap from an equipment gap or a supervision gap?
You can tell a skills gap from an equipment gap or a supervision gap by asking what would have prevented the problem and who would have had to act. The table below gives examples of how each kind of gap might sound and who is in a position to address it.
| Kind of gap | How it might sound | Who can address it |
|---|
| Skills | "They can't read a technical drawing." | The program, through what it teaches and how students or participants practice it |
| Equipment or software | "They trained on machines we stopped using years ago." | The program, often with help from employers who can provide access to current equipment |
| On-the-job training and supervision | "Nobody showed them how we do it here." | The employer, through onboarding, mentoring, and supervision |
| Conditions of the job | "They don't stay past the first month." | Usually the employer, and sometimes both, depending on what is driving it |
Many complaints involve more than one kind of gap; a new hire who struggles with unfamiliar equipment and receives no guidance on the job, for example, is facing both. Sorting what you hear this way helps the program concentrate on what it can change, and it gives you a respectful way to raise what employers can change.
The Grantibly perspective
Lauren's perspective
The people closest to the work often know things the data can't tell you on its own. Supervisors see challenges that executives may not, and graduates can describe the moments when their preparation helped or fell short. A survey or administrative data might show that something is wrong. Conversations with the people involved can help explain why.
We start with the question, not the instrument. Before deciding on a survey or a focus group, a program should be clear about what it needs to understand and what it could realistically change based on what it learns. Employer feedback is only valuable if the program is prepared to do something with it, and that means communicating what was learned and being honest about what will change and what can't.
