Return-Path: <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id iB20pJF00209; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 19:51:20 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 19:51:20 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <6D8722806DF028459457DC1759BD63A3027853@sbswb1> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "Susan Reid" <sreid@workbase.org.nz> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-ESL:10617] RE: Defending Workplace ESL X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; Status: O Content-Length: 2831 Lines: 57 Peter In New Zealand we have really worked hard to push the ROI argument because we operated for many years in an unsubsidised market Have a look at our website and download a copy of a publication called Voices from Management in which we discuss the return on Investment from workplace literacy programmes. There is a model in the Introduction that you might find useful see http://www.workbase.org.nz/Document.aspx?Doc=VoicesfromManagementJan2003 Final.pdf also there is a UK research report looking at the issue as well http://www.basic-skills-observatory.co.uk/uploads/doc_uploads/581.pdf What I really find useful both as a practitioner and as a manager of programmes is to take the presenting issues from the company e.g. high levels of rejects and then create a matrix that looks first at the adverse implications of that issue for the business e.g. increased rework, customer complaints, production delays, higher raw material costs etc etc and then in the next column unpick the things that the programme specifically did to address the issue e.g. discussed quality as a consumer, the importance of the customer, modelled various procedural texts, discussed value chain, and then in the final column describe if you can the returns that the company has received and where that evidence came from e.g. reduction in rejects, reduction in rework , reduction in raw materials budget etc - ( all this data can come from a range of sources) etc. We often find that companies don't want an actual measure of $$$$$ returns if you can show reduction in other sorts of figures - they can work the ROI out form themselves often better than providers can. Also on our website is the Executive Summary of a report called More than Money can Say by an Australian researcher Geoff Pearson who looked at the returns of a small number of Australian firms and was able to categorise the returns under 5 h headings. http://www.workbase.org.nz/Document.aspx?Doc=1996-mtmcs.pdf Good luck Regards Susan Reid Manager, Consultancy Services Workbase: The New Zealand Centre for Workforce Literacy Development. 2 Vermont Street, Ponsonby - PO Box 56571, Dominion Road, Auckland Phone: 09 361 3800 - Fax: 09 376 3700 Website: www.workbase.org.nz - E-mail: sreid@workbase.org.nz Caution - This e-mail and its contents contain privileged information that is intended solely for the recipient. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error please notify admin@workbase.org.nz immediately. Any views expressed in this e-mail are of the sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of Workbase: The New Zealand Centre for Workforce Literacy Development.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Dec 23 2004 - 09:46:56 EST