Training Completion Without Learning
A construction and engineering firm with 4,800 employees and 60 active project sites reports 97% completion of annual code-of-conduct training and a phishing click rate that fell from 18% to 9% after a new simulation campaign. Yet near-miss reporting dropped 35% over twelve months, hotline calls are down by half, and two site supervisors admit they discourage workers from filing reports because 'it creates paperwork.' A site manager was dismissed for falsifying a safety checklist; workers on that site say no one ever explained their stop-work authority. The new CEO wants a mandatory refresher course for all staff and a completion target of 100%. You lead ethics and compliance. Project deadlines are tight and site supervisors control overtime and assignments.
1. Assess whether the CEO's refresher course is the right primary intervention. Use the Learn component to distinguish training completion from learning and culture.
Read the worked answer
The CEO is treating a learning and culture problem as a content-delivery problem. Completion rates show that people opened and finished a course; they do not show that workers understand stop-work authority, believe reporting is safe, or see supervisors rewarded for raising issues. The Learn component is broader than training: it includes awareness, communication, knowledge sharing, and the cultural signals that determine whether knowledge is used.
The strongest evidence points away from a content gap. Phishing performance improved, so staff can learn and change behavior when the topic is reinforced. Near-miss reporting fell while training completion stayed high, and supervisors openly discourage reports. Workers on the falsified-checklist site say stop-work authority was never explained, which suggests the training did not reach the operational context or was contradicted by supervisory behavior. A 100% completion target would likely increase box-ticking and may further punish sites that fall behind.
A refresher course may be a small component, but it cannot be the primary intervention. The primary issue is whether the organization rewards silence. Training without a change in supervisor incentives and without visible follow-through on reports will not restore reporting.
2. Design a 60-day diagnostic and two interventions that address the likely root causes, with measures that would tell you whether they are working.
Read the worked answer
The 60-day diagnostic should combine anonymous site-level interviews, a review of near-miss and hotline reports by site and supervisor, and a sample of closed investigations to see whether reporters received feedback. I would also review supervisor scorecards and overtime allocation to test whether reporting conflicts with production incentives. The diagnostic should be led jointly by ethics and operations, not by compliance alone, because supervisors control the conditions that shape behavior.
Intervention one: revise supervisor scorecards and project reviews so that reporting quality and closure of corrective actions are assessed alongside schedule and cost. This targets the incentive that supervisors say drives their behavior. Intervention two: institute a no-blame near-miss review with a 10-business-day feedback commitment to the reporter and visible site-level summaries of what changed. This addresses the belief that reporting only creates paperwork.
Measures should include near-miss reports per active site, the percentage of reports receiving feedback within 10 days, repeat reports from the same site, and a short anonymous trust survey before and after. Completion rate should remain a compliance metric, not the primary success measure. If reports rise but feedback timeliness does not, the intervention is not working.