In my work life as a regional coordinator of volunteer programs, professional development is part of an annual cycle of evaluation and career planning. Any course that is not a "must have" for the organization is considered optional (funds permitting) and I'm routinely expected to self-fund growth opportunities. The closer the connection to organizational need, the more likely it is that funding will be provided.
Similarly, in my community life as a board member in nonprofit work, I find that since we have not established base level competencies appropriately we struggle with professional development requests from staff. It is difficult but necessary to say "no" when the request does not match strategic priorities or organizational needs. Maybe I'm just tough, but I expect that optional professional development courses are just that - optional - and the employee or board member owns the responsibility to self-fund where funds are limited.
-- Nellie Taylor
Nellie Taylor's comments about funding professional development run closely with the manner in which large corporations fund professional development. The individual employee must either fund the cost or plead their case with upper management to justify the cost of the courses. As per Nellie's comments, the budgets of nonprofit (and for-profit) organizations are to the limits and such costs that are not absolute "must have" are considered frivolous at best and should be covered by the individual.
However, I recall in my career the number of times I have taken a non "must have" course. I thought about how I brought back to the company the very lessons that I learned from those courses by simply practicing what I learned. I became more efficient, was able to consider alternative solutions to problems, and taught the very same techniques to my teammates. The courses ranged from simple time organization improvement skills to learning about the latest cutting edge technology. These courses ranged in price from a few dollars to a few thousand dollars - all out of my own pocket.
The company did not pay for it since it was outside the scope of my role and felt that it was taken for my own self interest. Although true, I wonder if the company or organization did not benefit from what I have learned. I will agree that courses that are absolutely unrelated and will never be related to the business should not be funded (for example: baking courses while working as an engineer for a telecommunications company). However, in cases where the underlying course/certification has a benefit to either the organization or the role that the person has, then I would suggest that the organization (and the very people that that person works with) extracts a benefit. These benefits can range from introducing better ways of doing things or educating co-workers on how to do things better, or perhaps simply expanding people's minds on what might be possible.
Finally, I believe that employees undertaking professional development - on their own or otherwise - is a triple win. First, it is likely to be of some benefit to the company as I have discussed. Second, it improves the individual in terms of themselves, their outlook, and their marketability. Finally, it improves the nation as a whole with a better educated and better developed/equipped workforce (you and I). Wouldn't that be worth funding?
-- Ariel Gamboa
(response submitted September 11, 2007)
E-mail us your thoughts today at 
