International Journal of Project Management 19 (2001) 279±285

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijproman

The use of just-in-time training in a project environment

Shlomo Globerson a,*, Abe Korman b
a
The Leon Recanti Graduate School of Business Administration, Faculty of Management, University Campus, PO Box 39010, 69978 Tel Aviv, Israel
b
Baruch College, The City University of New York, NY, USA

Received 17 June 1999; received in revised form 30 December 1999; accepted 20 January 2000

Abstract
Around 40% of the knowledge acquired in training is lost after a break of 1 month, rising to 90% after 6 months. By providing
training `as needed', Just In Time Training (JIT-T) seeks to solve this problem. In other words, e€ort is not invested in training
people in skills that they are not going to use in the very near future. The paper describes the use of the JIT-T approach in training
project managers, working in a hi-tech company. JIT-T was selected because the management felt that the conventional training
was not e€ective enough. The more crucial project management areas were identi®ed, and the training program was executed.
# 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd and IPMA. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Training programs; Project management; Loss of know-how

1. Introduction After taking a training seminar, a participant typically

As the world of work evolves in the direction of the
adoption of strategies re¯ecting such actions as down-
sizing, outsourcing and the increasing use of contingency
employees, the implications for traditional management
policies and practices are only now beginning to be
explored. Illustrative of this is the training function, one
of the most crucial of all management responsibilities.
Training strategies and approaches which have been of
value now need to be reexamined and restructured,
when necessary, in order to meet the demands of this
new world. In this paper, we discuss the value of one
type of restructuring, i.e. the use of Just-In-Time Training
(JIT-T).
Training is de®ned as the act of teaching individuals
the knowledge they need to function properly on the
job. A typical training method consists of a program/
seminar lasting a few days, where individuals are taught
and exposed to issues and methods relevant to their
working environment. For example, a typical intro-
ductory project management seminar would last 5±10
days, would give a general introduction, and would
cover all nine areas de®ned by the PMBOK [12].
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +972-3-6408515; fax: +972-3-6409560.
E-mail address: globe@post.tau.ac.il (S. Globerson).
0263-7863/01/$20.00 # 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd and IPMA. All rights reserved.
PII: S0263-7863(00)00012-0
return to their working environment and is expected to
improve his performance by applying his new know-how.
Obviously, not all the new knowledge can be applied
immediately since, at any one moment, only speci®c
issues are being dealt with. In other words, a signi®cant
portion of the knowledge gained during the training has
to wait some time before it is needed. It is this fact of
training and its implementations that serves as our point
of departure.
2. The impact of forgetting
It has long been known that a signi®cant portion of
the knowledge acquired during a traditional training
program, having no immediate use, is stored in the
memory system, and may be forgotten over time.
Therefore, it is of utmost importance to evaluate the
loss of knowledge as a function of break length.
It has been shown by researchers (e.g. [2,16]) that the
length of the interval during which people do not practice
the relevant skills is a very good predictor of forgetting.
Other researchers [5,9] have suggested that forgetting is
also a€ected by the kind of activities that people are
engaged in during the intervening period.
Impressive information on the cost of forgetting was
presented by Anderlhore [1], who found that a plant
280 S. Globerson, A. Korman / International Journal of Project Management 19 (2001) 279±285
may lose around 50% of its productivity due to a pro-
duction break of 3±6 months and may lose 75% after a
1 year break. Globerson et al. [8] found a loss of knowledge
of around 40% after a break of 1 month, rising to 90%
after 6 months. It was found that people tend to forget
more on cognitive tasks than on motor tasks. Remaining
know-how was found to decrease exponentially with
break length, as described in Fig. 1. Therefore, the
longer the delay between a training program and the use
of the knowledge acquired during the training period,
the greater the loss of gained knowledge.
If management desires the lost knowledge to be
regained, another training program is needed. The crucial
question is the duration of the retraining session
required for regaining lost knowledge. A careful literature
survey has not revealed any source that gives sound
information concerning the duration of a retraining
session. However, using the ®ndings cited above, one
may expect the behavior pattern presented in Fig. 2.
The ®rst session on the time scale in Fig. 2 represents
the ®rst formal training period. The second session of
training, which represents a retraining session, comes
after a break in which there was no training and no use
was made of the know-how gained during the ®rst
training session. As can be seen, the level of know-how
after the second session grows at a faster pace.
Fig. 1. The relationship between break length and the amount of
remaining knowledge.
Fig. 2. Level of know-how as a function of training sessions and breaks.
3. JIT training
Since the present era is characterized by the need of
companies to keep a tight control on expenses, compa-
nies today are not willing to spend money on having an
`inventory of knowledge' to be used when needed.
Managers ask themselves what kind of training they
need in order to adapt to an uncertain future with an
increasingly volatile workplace. Also, managers are
reluctant today to release employees for long training
courses.
JIT-T means `as needed' training rather than accu-
mulating an inventory of know-how that is lost over
time. JIT-T means not only at the appropriate time, but
also just enough training and in just the right context.
JIT-T may also be considered as a rediscovery of on-
the-job training o€ered in a self-paced manner.
The importance of JIT-T has already been recognized
by leading companies. For example, a number of com-
panies included in Computerworld magazines 1997 Best
Places to Work, have made a commitment to JIT-T for
soft and technical skills. United Parcel Service (UPS)
and Xerox have also implemented JIT-T by having self-
study rooms equipped with workstations [15].
The adoption of JIT-T does not mean that no general
training is given, since in order to apply a certain module
of know-how, the trainee needs to have a general
knowledge of the subject matter. Fig. 3 describes the
basic di€erence between the conventional training
approach and the JIT-T approach.
The general training module is required in both
approaches. However, while the conventional approach
delivers the three know-how modules, M1, M2, and M3
together with the general training, the JIT-T approach
delivers them separately and only when they are needed.
A major issue that should be resolved when designing
a JIT-T approach is the ability to de®ne the required
overview module and to evaluate the extent of indepen-
dence among the di€erent modules. In order to allow
use of the modular approach, the di€erent modules
should be independent of each other. That is, each may
be taught and applied independently. If this is not true
 S. Globerson, A. Korman / International Journal of Project Management 19 (2001) 279±285
Fig. 3. Conventional and JIT-T approaches.
for any pair of modules, then they should be integrated
into one.
Let us illustrate this approach with an example from
project management training. Applying the conventional
approach, the areas included in the Project Management
Body Of Knowledge Guide (PMBOK) [12], will be cov-
ered as one package. The use of the JIT-T approach will
call for one general session, followed by separate ses-
sions that cover each of the modules when needed.
4. Cost-bene®t analysis of training
If there is no immediate use of the knowledge gained
during the training session, forgetting takes place. As
mentioned, forgetting is a function of the break length
between the end of the training session and the start of
performing the task which requires the actual use of the
gained know-how.
Training strategies may di€er in many attributes, such
as the number of subjects covered, the extent of coverage
of each subject, and the frequency of training work-
shops. A typical training workshop may last a few days,
and may be either given on consecutive days, or may be
spread over a few weeks. For the purpose of illustration
and analysis, let us identify two extreme strategies:
Strategy A: The training workshop covers all relevant
subjects within the area of interest. For
example, a project management workshop
will cover all nine subjects identi®ed by the
PMBOK Guide [12].
Strategy B: The ®rst training workshop covers an over-
view session and one subject. The second
workshop will cover another subject which
has not been covered, and so on. Each
training workshop will start whenever a
need is recognized.
Fig. 4 summarizes the di€erences between the two
alternatives with regard to relevant attributes.
The use of JIT-T is justi®ed when the training setup
cost is low enough, in comparison with knowledge
holding costs, to allow shorter and more frequent
training workshops.
281
Cost-bene®t analysis of the alternative training strategies
may be done in a manner similar to that for an inventory of
material kept by an organization to be used later. In both
cases, inventory of material and `inventory of know-how',
the value decreases over time. Since inventory analysis is
used by many organizations and has been around for quite
a while, let us review its basic concepts, and then give a
comparative analysis for inventoried know-how.
A typical objective of an inventory system is to satisfy
annual demand at the lowest possible cost, where cost
consists of ordering cost (also called setup cost), and hold-
ing cost. Setup cost comprises the costs of all the activities
required for issuing a new order, such as evaluating present
inventory levels, identifying potential suppliers, issuing
purchasing orders, and delivering the order. Holding cost
comprises the costs associated with keeping the item in
inventory until it is needed. These costs include main-
tenance cost, insurance cost, and costs of perished items.
A typical objective of an annual training program is
to satisfy annual needs at the lowest possible cost, con-
sisting of setup and holding costs. In a similar manner
one may also analyze purchasing and maintenance of
know-how gained by training. There is a setup cost for
preparing the training seminar, and a holding cost
which is related to the loss of know-how gained during
the training period. The following sections discuss and
develop a training cost model.
4.1. Training setup cost
The costs associated with this category relate to all the
activities from the initial stage of identifying training
needs to the last day of the training period. They include
the following:
. Identifying training needs
. Preparing the training package
. Administering the training (space, food, material,
instructors, equipment)
. Work time lost by the trainees and paid by the
company.
We may di€erentiate between two types of setup cost.
The ®rst type is generated by a new seminar, which
requires all the above stages. The second type of setup
cost is generated by repeats of the same seminar. Since
the needs have not changed, there is no need to identify
them again, and there is no need to prepare the training
package. Therefore, the setup cost of a repeat seminar is
just a function of administration cost and time lost.
4.2. Knowledge holding cost
The costs associated with this category relate to the
cost of loss of know-how acquired during the training
period. Rather than talking about the cost of maintaining
282 S. Globerson, A. Korman / International Journal of Project Management 19 (2001) 279±285
Fig. 4. Attributes of two extreme training strategies.
unused knowledge, we can estimate the value of knowl-
edge lost due to lack of maintenance. For example,
using the ®nding quoted above with regard to the
impact of forgetting, we may assume that around 40%
of the know-how achieved is lost after a month.
In order to analyze the cost of possible training patterns,
one should develop a unit of measurement for know-
how. For simplicity, let us use a ``training day'' as the
unit of measurement. An amount of know-how equal to
a ``training day'' means the know-how gained during
one training day. Let us introduce the loss of know-how
by going over the following example.
4.3. Example
A training program lasts for 3 days. During the ®rst
month after the training, none of the know-how gained
during this program has been used by the trainees.
Therefore, around 40% of it has been lost, which is
equal to 1.2 training days.
An informal survey administered to trainers by the
authors, found that trainers estimated the recovery
training time to be around 50% of the loss. That is, if
the loss was 1.2 days, then the retraining session should
be around 1:2  0:5 ˆ 0:6 days. Expressing the loss in
dollars, we may say that it is equal to the cost of running a
short training seminar lasting 0.6 days. Let us further
assume an instruction cost of $5000 per day and a trainees
daily salary of $150. Or, an amount of $90 (150  0:6)
lost due to a retraining seminar that lasts for 0.6 days.
To run the retraining seminar will cost 5000 ‡ X  90,
where X is the number of trainees who participate in the
seminar. That is, if a retraining session is held just for
one person, its cost is $5090, and for ®ve participants it
is $5450, or an average of $1090. As can be seen, the
average retraining cost per trainee is a function of the
number of participants.
Obviously, the retraining issue is much more compli-
cated since there is a need to identify the content and the
intensity of the lost know-how.
5. The impact of technology on training
Fortunately, technology has now become available
which make possible the tailoring of the material to be
learned to individual needs. Computer assisted instruc-
tion keyed to individuality and individual needs is
obviously not a new medium. It has been used by military
since the early 60s and is now being used in virtually all
types of learning and training contexts as evidence for
its value continues to accumulate with the increasing
popularity of interactive multimedia technology. With
multimedia, learning can be achieved 30% faster and
performance increased by 25% over traditional training
methods [3]. As mentioned before, the use of JIT-T is
justi®ed only when the setup cost is low enough to allow
more frequent use of training sessions since di€erent
individuals may require the know-how at di€erent
times. Obviously this may be achieved Ð and has
already been achieved Ð by the use of the Internet,
which has already become a very common medium. For
example, in 1997, around 150 accredited colleges and
universities in North America had nontraditional
bachelors degree programs that allowed students to
spend little or no time on the college campus [10]. The
use of the Internet and Intranet have already spread to
companies as well, particularly the latter. Intranet seems
to be becoming a major player in JIT-T. Its market is
around twice as large as the Internet market [4], and
companies intend to use it as a major vehicle for
enhancing internal JIT-T. For example, GTE [14]
delivers JIT-T to help their employees do their jobs
better. Employees are able to use the Intranet in order
to get training whenever they need it and while doing
their regular work.
6. Skills of the trainer
In developing such programs, there are several skills
that seem to be crucial for trainers in JIT-T programs.
They need to be able to organize and categorize the
material in a proposed training program into those
patterns which can be utilized at di€erent times and in
an order which is potentially maximally ecient for
e€ective learning and minimal forgetting. The chal-
lenges then are several. The trainer needs to organize the
material into meaningful modules, order them in a way
that maximizes learning and minimizes forgetting. Thre
trainer also has to present them in a manner such that
the individual trainee knows enough about each and can
 S. Globerson, A. Korman / International Journal of Project Management 19 (2001) 279±285
understand them well enough to that he/she will be able
to choose those training modules most appropriate for a
particular time and context. It may be noted also that
the categorizing of training materials into modules is
not a new perspective. Fleishman [6], for example, has
shown training materials could be categorized into
separate components by relating them to ability test
relationships while Glickman and Vallance [7] utilized
the method of critical incidents in proposing the sub-
division of training materials. However, neither related
their work to the JIT-T framework we are proposing here,
a framework which is a combination of both sophisticated
training organization and trainee self-pacing.
JIT-T signi®cantly change the training approach and
the trainers role. The new approach requires the trainer
not only to be an expert in the subject matter and a
competent instructor, but also to be able to prepare self-
guided training packages. Trainers need to consider
themselves as guiders of appropriate self-learning rather
than only as teachers. As a result, a typical training
session should include two major parts Ð an overview
session and a self-teaching session. The overview session
should include a general introduction, as well as an over-
view of the subjects for which self-paced modules are
available. The self-teaching session should equip trainees
with the proper tools and abilities to retrieve the self-
paced modules and be able to study them on their own.
7. JIT-T: behavior and attitudes
We begin here with a paradox and a warning. The
paradox is as follows: JIT-T may be most e€ective and
most needed in those settings where it will be hardest to
implement. The reason is that JIT-T may have the
greatest potential use in those organizations undergoing
rapid changes since it is in these settings that it is most
dicult, if at all possible or justi®ed, to develop any
long-range standardized training programs.
The reason is that anxiety makes it more dicult to
make the cognitive decisions and develop the cognitive
structures that are necessary for the implementation of
JIT-T.
Anxiety makes it harder to plan and to organize in a
fruitful, long-range manner and yet this is precisely
what the trainer needs to do in developing her program
and the trainee needs to do in choosing a trainee pro-
gram and a training pace for himself [11].
Management, therefore, needs to plan its steps and its
decisions, recognizing the reality of such anxiety and the
need to respond to by designing a JIT-T program which
does not increase anxiety and the dysfunctional beha-
viors that result. Such guidelines have increasingly been
proposed by a number of authors in recent years and
can be structured to ®t the particular characteristics of a
particular work setting (c.f. [13]).
283
8. Example: JIT-T in project management
A large high-tech company that develops and installs
telecommunications sub-systems decided to establish
formal project management procedures. Upper man-
agement approached MANPAT, an educational insti-
tute within the business school of Tel Aviv University
that specializes in project management education.
The company wished to introduce an aggressive and
e€ective project management training program using
the JIT-T approach. The following two principles were
adopted:
. to train project managers only in subjects that
could immediately be put into practice in the daily
working environment
. to verify that the managers of project managers
were familiar with the PMBOK Guide, and were
able to request their subordinates to apply relevant
project management techniques and procedures
The following plan was devised and implemented
using these principles:
1. Review of the PMBOK with the managers of pro-
ject managers. This review took half a day.
2. Assisting the managers with selection of the most
relevant topics to be covered in detail. Fig. 5 pre-
sents the average relative importance assigned by
the managers to the di€erent topics.
3. Design and implementation of a 3 day seminar for
the managers of project managers, aimed at cov-
ering the selected topics and identifying tools and
techniques to be used by the company. The fol-
lowing program was established for the seminar,
using the relative importance assigned by the
managers:
Day 1: project life cycle, organization of the project,
WBS, work packages
Day 2: resource estimation, scheduling, project
control
Day 3: risk management, quality assurance,
human resource management. During the seminar,
the managers identi®ed the following templates to be
prepared before running the workshop for project
managers: a check list of items required for starting a
project, a generic WBS, a work package templates,
and templates for identifying risk drivers.
4. Development of the tools identi®ed during the
seminar so that they could be taught and practiced
in the project managers' seminar. This was done
during a 1-day workshop in which the work of
developing the tools was shared among the man-
agers. The resulting templates were adopted as
standard procedures to be used by all project
284 S. Globerson, A. Korman / International Journal of Project Management 19 (2001) 279±285
Fig. 5. Relative importance of project management subjects, as ranked by managers.
managers in the company, and were posted on the
companys Intranet.
5. Design and implementation of a 4-day seminar for
the project managers. The emphasis was on learning
and practicing the tools adopted by the managers.
The 4-day seminar covered the same material as
the managers' seminar, but emphasized the use of
the adopted procedures.
As a result of the JIT-T process described above, the
training concentrated only on the material to be imple-
mented right after the completion of the seminar,
thereby avoiding loss of know-how gained by project
managers but not required by their managers at that
stage of the implementation.
9. Conclusions
In this era of rapid change of technology, products, pro-
cesses and personal commitment to organizations, the
conventional training strategy is not appropriate any more.
JIT-T is an e€ective answer to this new world as it o€ers a
fast response to some types of organizational training
needs, at a relatively low cost. Since the needed technology,
such as the Internet and Intranet, is available. It is feasible
to apply JIT-T to project management since it is possible to
identify independent training modules within the PMBOK
know-how context. Also, typical project managers seem to
be suciently experienced with internet and intranet envir-
onment in order to use it as the training media for the JIT-T.
References
[1] Anderlhore, G. What production breaks cost. Industrial Engi-
neering 1969;(9):34±6.
[2] Bailey CD. Forgetting and the learning curve: a laboratory study.
Management Science 1989;35(3).
[3] Burton-Cooper G, Burton-Cooper P. Learning what they need,
when they need it. Bankers' Magazine 1995;178(4):42±5.
[4] Cohen S. Intranet uncovered. Training & Development
1997;51(2):48±50.
[5] Ekstrand BR. E€ect of sleep on memory. Journal of Experi-
mental Psychology 1967;75:64±72.
[6] Fleishman E. Toward a taxonomy of human performance.
American Psychologist 1975;30:1127±49.
[7] Glickman AS, Vallance T. Curriculum assessment with critical
incidents. Journal of Applied Psychology 1958;42:329±55.
[8] Globerson S, Amir N, Shmuel E. Rate of forgetting for motor
and cognitive tasks. International Journal of Cognitive Ergo-
nomics 1998;2(3):181±91.
[9] Heally A, Clowson D, MacNamara W, Marmie W, Schneider V,
Rickard T, Crutcher R, King C, Ericsson K, Broune L. The long
term retention of knowledge and skills. The Psychology of
Learning and Motivation 1995;30:135±64.
[10] Herther N. Education over the web: distance learning and the
information professional. Online 1997;21(5):63±72.
[11] Korman A. Motivation, commitment and the ``new contracts''
between employers and employees. In: Kraut A., Korman A.,
editors. Evolving practices in human resources management:
responses to a changing world of work. San Francisco, CA: Jos-
sey-Bass, 1999. p. 23±40.
[12] PMBOK Ð A guide to project management body of knowledge.
Upper Darby, PA: Project Management Institute, 1996.
[13] Ryan KD, Oestreich DK. Driving fear out of the workplace. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1998.
[14] Webb Wendy. GTE's new order-entry system trains thousands
while they work. Presentations 1997;11(10):5±12.
[15] Wilson Linda. Yearn to learn, Computerworld 1997;(6):41±3.
 S. Globerson, A. Korman / International Journal of Project Management 19 (2001) 279±285
[16] Wisher R, Sabol M, Sukenik H, Kem R. 1991. Individual Ready
Reserve (IRR), call up: Skill Decay. Research Report No. 1595,
Alexandria, VA: US Army Research Institute.
Shlomo Globerson is a researcher, edu-
cator and consultant in the ®elds of
project management and operations
management. He is a professor at the
Graduate School of Business Admin-
istration, Tel Aviv University, and a
frequent visiting professor at di€erent
universities and establishments all
around the world. Prof. Globerson is
extensively involved in developing new
courses and workshops for MBA stu-
dents, project managers and top
executives, as well as preparing for the
professional examination in project
management. Prof. Globerson has published over 70 refereed articles
and seven books.
285
Abraham K. Korman is the Wollman
Distinguished Professor of Manage-
ment at Baruch College of the City
University of New York. He is the
author of seven books and over 50
articles in the areas of work motiva-
tion, leadership, executive stress and
inter-group relations in work settings.
He has over 30 years of international
experience as a consultant to the
companies such as Amstar, Beatrice
Foods, Fairchild Industries, RCA,
IBM, American Airlines, Unilever
and the New York Daily News. He
holds a Ph.D. in Industrial Psychology from the University of
Minnesota.