I’m curious if anyone has ever tried to put solid data against the cost benefits of training on your process versus not training? I work for a multi-regional global organization and there are 2 very different opinions on this topic. For myself, I feel that if we expect our apps and infrastructure groups to follow a process that they need yearly training delivered in a very well organized manner. I feel that by having the yearly training combined with ongoing face time with the various groups, does prove to reduce incidents, increase compliance and in the end reduces our overall costs associated with change and incident.
I used to work in a Fortune 500 pharmaceutical organization that was required, by law, to give us annual training on certain safety and security measures as well as hazardous conditions. Every year for 10 years I sat through the same training. The same PPT slides. The same speech. For new-hires, it was valuable information (I guess. At least the gov. thought so), but for the rest of us, it was a waste of time.
I understand where some in your organization who have experienced this might see how they could become mired in similar situation.
The solution is pretty obvious for something like a service management process. Include the basic process information in the new-hire training, but have annual follow up training that is not “by the book”, but more an open forum (heck, it could even be a gripe session for them to vent their frustrations at the process). The knowledge gained in the annual review can then be fed into service improvement and the changes implemented could be topics for discussion at the next annual session.