Let me walk through each of these and hopefully it will help you make the right decision on whether or not to put your employee through this training or not.

​

MOTIVATED EMPLOYEE

A motivated employee is critical to the success of this program.  And not just motivated to work, but motivated to make changes for the better.

​

As a supervisor/manager you should evaluate whether or not your employee will use what's taught.  Here's some questions to answer:

• Do they adapt to change?

• Are they proactive or do they sit back and let others take on new work?

• Are they coachable?

• Do they value improvement in both themselves and the program they run?

​

If they are not that type, you may get limited value sending them to this class. 

​

​

SUPPORTIVE MANAGER

Just about every manager I know is either supportive of their staff, or tries damn hard to be.  But this may take a little different kind of support.  Here's what I mean...

​

I will be introducing some new concepts to your employee.  I ask them not to try to implement everything at once (there's a lot of stuff) but pick a few areas to work on that they believe will have the biggest positive impact.  I also ask them to work with their manager on these things - last thing I want is for someone to go rogue and try and do some of this without manager support.

​

And that's where you come in.

​

The kind of supportive manager needed to make this a success, should work with the employee, both on agreeing on changes to be made, and then supporting that employee on making those changes.  A lot of my own personal success and program success was because I had great managers.  Team effort needed!

​

​

GREAT TRAINING

I may be biased here just a little, but these master classes are better, way better in fact, than any GOA training I have personally taken including the entire Management Development Program (over $10,000 spent putting me through that) or any Leadership/Supervisor program I've been put through.

​

But maybe you've still got a few questions?  Hopefully I cover them below:

​

1. Is what you're teaching legal/ethical/within the rules?
   A lot of what I teach is how to do things differently, but it for sure is within the rules.  As an example, when doing reference checks I recommend changing the HR question "Would you hire this employee?" to "If your reputation was on the line, would you hire this employee?".  The change was allowed by HR and it produces much more honest answers from the former employer.
   
   Nothing I teach is going against the rules.
    

2. How do I know what you are teaching works?
   Most of what I teach is already out there and not secret.  It's contained in some of the top business and personal development books.  I just used these concepts and found which ones worked and compiled them into one single class.  They have worked for thousands of people and businesses.
    

3. If I don't have the same training as my employee, how will I know how to support or not support what they are recommending?
   Have them explain it to you in detail.  If they can't teach it to you, they may not understand it well enough to implement it.  I doubt it will get to that as none of the concepts I teach require a genius IQ.  They are simple concepts that produce big results.
   
   There is always the option of you taking the program, too.  
    

4. Is there a lot of "fluff"?
   That depends on your definition of fluff.  Some will call defining a work unit's team values "fluff".  I call it a great use of time.  Unless you don't like things like team cohesion or staff morale.  There is a lot of content and not all of it is going to be applicable to every employee.  It's like having a really great toolbox.  Take out and use the tools you need.
    

5. Why do staff need this?
   There used to be a saying in business that "the big eat the small".  That's evolved into "the fast eat the slow".  It's the same in government.  If you are not fast enough, some other agency or department is going to take your workload.  Or it gets contracted.  You need to be competitively preventative.
    

6. Is it worth the cost?
   No.  It's worth a lot more.  One of Warren Buffett's most famous quotes (via Benjamin Graham) is, "Price is what you pay; value is what you get."  I aim to give you much more value than the price you paid.
   
   When I set out to develop these class, I used the University of Albert's Management Development Program as a benchmark.  I went through it.  The cost to put me through that program was north of $10,000.  My assessment was there was a lot of good knowledge, but much of it was good theory and difficult to put into practice.  To me that's wasted money.
   
   In my class, everything I teach has been put into practice and has produced good to great results.  Results matter.
   
   So why do I charge so much?  
   
   If you do the math, you can see I don't get rich off this, and for the time I spend and have spent it doesn't even pay that well.  The reason I put the price up there is because I want managers to really think about the people they send to me.  If they do a good job selecting the right candidate, they should be rewarded with a more skilled employee and program improvement.  If I charged say $100, I may get flooded with unmotivated employees that just want to add another course to their resume.  It wouldn't be good for me, my courses reputation, the manager, or the tax payer.
   
   If you want some other things to consider:

• If my course increases productivity by 20% (it can), it would be equivalent to hiring another full-time person for many teams.

• If it saves you hiring the wrong person ONCE, it's paid for itself.

• Putting staff through this likely decreases their chance of leaving, and you having to go through the "fun" of filling that vacancy. 

• I put in hundreds of hours developing this.  It's solid.

​