Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFeedback - compiledThis was a great training with a very skilled and engaging presenter. Could so easily have been boring but he knew his subject and how to engage his audience. Thank you for the excellent training. City gets a lot of people thru Training at once, but honestly a waste of my time away from family.  I prefer a computer class that I can do at home in my pj's with a mug of hot chocolate. Thanks The City needs to re-examine its Ethics Training.   1) Annually is too often.  2) In today's digital world there's no reason for in-person training.   This years format worked great.  Giving us scenrios, voting, discussing among table, and voting again. To whom it may concern, The training provided by the Local Government Center was very good  It was and short and sweet.  It reminded us that it is not always possible to assume that we know the answers to situations governed by the Ethics Handbook, and that if in doubt we should consult the Handbook, and if still in doubt consult with the City Attorney for answers.  Dan Clark and Blake Anderson are very good trainers and it was a pleasure to see them perform this service. The information was well presented in my session and done so by knowledgeable presenters who knew the subject intimately. OTOH I think it’s painting with too broad a brush to ask ALL advisory board volunteers to attend this training, and certainly not necessary on an annual basis. My suggestion: Via a script or short powerpoint, introduce the purpose and content of the training to each advisory board group with the expectation the board leaders will engage in a 5 min discussion on how that training may or may not be relevant to their roles. In my case - the InterNeighborhood Council or INC - my comment in the discussion would be that I don’t see a relevance sufficient enough to warrant annual training. So perhaps initial or ‘inoculation’ training would be appropriate for us. I think this year’s training, based on contextual situations, was great. I went into it thinking “not this boring rehash of stuff I only need to be told once every five years” but was pleasantly surprised by the way the presenter kept it interesting, light, and thoughtful. I do think every year is kind of over-kill but appreciate that there is an attempt to keep it interesting and based on plausible situations. Far better than read and regurgitate the manual. Thanks for asking! I thought it was good use of time and realize that ethics training is more useful in a group setting. I appreciate your efforts.  Ellie I thought the presenter did a good job of connecting some realistic example ethical questions that could likely come up in a volunteer board position.    The group members weighing in on the example situations, and then discussing them was very good.    That all said, I think requiring this every year is perhaps a bit much.    Having this training available every year is good for all the new volunteers, but every other year or every three years seems adequate after that. I understand the need for this training, but the frequency is a bit of a struggle for me.  Here are my list of possibilities to make this better: Make it online.  This took a lot of work on their part, but is an excellent example of training that works online: http://fwp.mt.gov/hunting/hunterAcces s/hunterLandowner/hunterLandownerProject.html Make it every other year.  I don’t need it every year. Do it at the actual meeting of the board.  Condense it down to a bite sized piece and then make sure you use examples that would happen within that specific group. Have everyone do it.  I am on the Transportation Committee.  As a citizen (not a City Employee), did you know that I’m the only one on the committee who has to do it?  That’s more than a bit frustrating to know that I’m all ethically square according to the city, but they have never done the training. I’m sure I have more ideas, but I will stop there.  I might not be as fired up as you might think. I really appreciate and operate well under clear direction. It was a little frustrating that the facilitator didn't do a great job of making it clear what was and was not ethical in the examples they used/had us vote on. Having a final ruling (based on advice from the city attorney) from the facilitator after group discussion would have been helpful to me. Of the three or four previous ethics sessions I've sat in on, this year's training was far and away the best one.  The presenter was courteous while still commanding the room and understood each and everyone of us in the room have tight, busy schedules.  So although the training was on-point, fast-paced, and moved through quickly, he was still able to get the main points across to the crowd.  The right balance of group talk at each table paired with the presenter presenting to the entire audience made for a balanced learning session.   Hello BCCO. Please don't quote me... I thought it could have been longer. Maybe 90 minutes total.  The joint DRB/Historic Board meeting right afterwards was helpful as well. My concern is that it was more in depth but left me wondering if I want to expose myself to the liability. We also had several new board members at that meeting which was wonderful, but they left wondering what they had gotten themselves into.  My two cents. I think the content was spot on. The compact format was much appreciated. Rather than try to go over all of the possible ethics scenarios, this year’s training used a couple examples to covey the thought-process necessary for board members to make ethical decisions. Considering the vast majority of each year’s board members have served for years, I strongly urge the City to keep future trainings brief—whether online or in person. Thanks. I thought it to be very beneficial. I really liked the interacting and the questions and the real life examples that were used. As well it was very timely and engaging. I found it to be very good. Thanks, Any more questions for me just let me know. I think this could be accomplished totally on-line.  I see no reason to require an in-person training.