Skip to content
Thread Options
#1611939 - 10/04/11 12:31 PM New Employee
cbrown0929 Offline
New Poster
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 4
Western Massachusetts
Any thoughts on how long to give an employee to get 'up to speed' with their position? We hired a teller and she started on 9/19/11. One of the senior managers feels that she is not learning quickly enough and is talking termination already. She has only been on a teller window for the better part of eight days. She came to us with no banking background, so I expected it to take a bit for her to get up to speed and am not concerned with her progress to this point. In addition, we have no formal teller training program, so it is kind of learn on the fly. Thanks!

Return to Top
Human Resources
#1611942 - 10/04/11 12:52 PM Re: New Employee cbrown0929
osucpa Offline
Diamond Poster
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 1,402
Did you present her with an offer letter or discuss a probation period? Review your employee handbook for a probation period for new hires.

Return to Top
#1612714 - 10/05/11 03:59 PM Re: New Employee osucpa
AFaquir Offline
Platinum Poster
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 763
Top of the world... and never ...

So I am going to get on a soap box here and it is not meant to offend, only to share my feelings on the importance of HUMAN RESOURCES as a strategic function of your organization.

A person not being up to speed is a problem faced by many bankers... but it is a problem of the bank, not the person. All too often we either find ways to make excuses for this person and keep them around or we terminate them. In either case we don't acknowledge the problem the bank has and simply blame the person.

In your case you acknowledged not one but 2 problems many banks (big and small) have.

First you hired someone with no experience... so let's assume the basis of hiring was they seemed capable enough to do the job. That in and of itself is the start of a recipe for disaster, but in and of itself is not a negative. So hiring without experience is relatively neutral to the final outcome...

However, this makes me ask... What are your hiring practices? What are the requirements of knowledge, skills, and education needed to be a teller? What is in your job description for the position of teller? Do you have a job description for the position of teller (a lot of places don't)? Who does your hiring? HR staff? Branch Managers? Senior Managers? What is your interview process like? What questions are you asking which would indicate the person has the skills to do the job? What is your pay? Is it commensurate with what a person would expect for the type of work versus the job expecations? Is it high? Is it low? Is how you pay and how you hire even considered in terms of the bank's overall business and strategic goals? How does the teller position fit into the business and strategic goals of the bank?

I can ask about a million more questions, but they all make my same point. Hiring at your bank whether its to replace the janitor or the president should be a serious process with serious implications to the bank's overall success. Additionally, the hiring process should reflect the bank's value and culture. If the hiring process is wrong you're merely guessing at the ability of a person to meet, exceed or in most cases fall short of the expecatations.

The next problem you identified is poorly organized training. Your OJT may be fantastic, so I can't say the training is poor, but it is likely poorly organized. In the situtation above the poorly organized training can compound a hiring mistake... or simply make a good hire go bad. The person may be fully capable but without proper training can't perform the job duties. I like to say I have the cognitive ability to perform surgery, but without training i'd probably kill every patient.

Additionally the person may just simply not be able to handle OJT, but if you had a new teller workbook or something they might be able to grasp it no problem... or maybe not. So how are you measuring "ability" to perform the job without training? How are you gauging the effectiveness of the training for the employee? At my org we had compliance issues with lending rules... I asked a question, who thinks the way we currently do training is ineffective: I got 100% response stating it was ineffective. Well then thats MY problem as a compliance officer to fix, not the employees to know better.

Additionally there are probably parts of the job that are unique to your institution... so for example the order in which transactions is likely different than how my bank processes, so even someone with experience could get lost if not trained properly. I imagine they could pick it up "quicker" but that's not a garauntee either... which goes back to your hiring process

So my thing is consider hiring and training to be cut from the same strategic cloth... If your organization has no hiring process training should have to be more involved than OJT. If you have a solid hiring process, training should be as involved as needed to teach "the bank's way" in either case you still need metrics to gauge whether the person is getting it and whether the training is effective at helping them get it.

I could also go on for hours with regards to the uber importance of continuing training behind the new hire process but that's much more based on corporate culture than the problems you identified here.

In any event, regardless of how I feel, there are some immediate on boardining issues which you may need to address up to and including exactly what OSUCPA said.

What is prompting the manager to suggest the person isn't getting it, would be my starting point though.

In life, there is a lot less that could get better and a lot more that could get worse.


My views only!

Return to Top
#1613209 - 10/06/11 02:44 PM Re: New Employee AFaquir
Lele Offline
Platinum Poster
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 827
In the Sun
In order to offer a consistent training to all employees, I started a training program where I went to all department heads and talked about what the training should include for a new employee in their department and how long that training should last - for an employee with 'no expereince' and for one 'with experience'. For the teller it was agreed that 30 days was reasonable for experience and 60 days for no experience - though the goal is to usually not hire a teller without experience - it stil happens. I made a matrix and the new employee and the manager go over the matrix initially with me present - Compliance Officer - then 15 days later and then finally 30 days later - they review the progress. The employee and trainer initial each task as they are trained - that they understand what was reviewed. There is a section for comments from both the new employee and the trainer. They are also told to not initial if they felt they did not fully understand what they were trained on. I tell them they can call me with any questions about their training. This then goes into their personnel file. It appears to be working and from time to time we review the matrix and add or delete items. We are putting some of the responsibility for training onto the new employee - they have the power to say stop, I do not understand.
Faith is seeing light with your heart when all your eyes see is darkness...

Return to Top
#1613946 - 10/07/11 06:40 PM Re: New Employee Lele
PStateBank Offline
Gold Star
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 498
Lele- Your training program sounds excellent! cool
Nothing ruins a Friday like realizing it is only Thursday

Return to Top

Moderator:  Andy_Z, Gayla Sherry