The Dialectic of Reality, Hope in the Administrative Training Sector

We looked at the constraints that hindered the Kingdom’s human resources training sector’s ability to supply the economy with competent workers in the first half of this study.

Who is to blame for the economic waste caused by the sector’s unwillingness to develop the human capacities required to support economic growth and the development of public and private facilities?

The training centers and the official entities organizing the sector, the two main actors influencing the given training services and their quality, bear responsibility for the sector’s ineffectiveness non varied degrees.

The reduction in the sector’s performance and efficacy is largely attributable to training centers. Curricula, knowledge, and effective human resource development methods are still lacking in many of these institutions. Organizations that prioritize “profit maximization” over quality and up-to-date courses. Its activities are defined by the following characteristics:

First, the low quality of curricula and training materials, as well as their lack of current scientific aspects. Curricula were developed to develop human resources in accordance with the needs of a previous stage of growth, which no longer correspond to current intellectual and technical developments, as well as administrative and institutional progress in the Kingdom.

A vast number of centers provide identical and replicated curricula that are lacking in originality, quality, and modernity, and their departments are not attempting to develop their own advanced training content.

Second, the trainers’ skills and theoretical and practical expertise are limited. There is an abundance of inexperienced and unqualified trainers who lack theoretical understanding, practical experience, and abilities.

Most trainers provide a variety of materials and are happy to provide any purchased material regardless of their subject competence. In training centers, there is a widespread disregard for the trainer’s quality. It is notable that, in general, the centers continue to overlook the national expertise of specialists (retired) who have left senior administrative positions in the public and private sectors.

Third, the training centers lack a developmental action plan and strategy that satisfies the needs of future human resource development plans as well as programs for establishing public and private enterprise administrative structures.

The government organizations responsible for regulating the administrative training sector, as well as licensing and monitoring the centers, are partly to blame for the sector’s apprehension.

We must refer to the efforts made by the relevant authorities in creating and regulating the sector, such as defining standards for licensing training facilities and licensing requirements, to be objective. However, due to a lack of modern worldwide scientific standards in licensing centers and the adoption of curricula, they were unable to construct an effective and developed industry for a variety of reasons.

Instead, concentrate on the standard administrative requirements.

Improving the performance of the administrative training sector, increasing its contribution to the development of the economy and society, and reaching the sector’s desired function will necessitate extraordinary efforts from the training institutes and government agencies that organize it.

To stay in the advanced competitive cycle, training centers in the Kingdom must expand their operations in the following ways:

1. Shifting from traditional training centers to (factories) for national leadership minds, as well as advanced institutes to prepare qualified teams capable of continuing construction operations, and to become a national partner in developing the workforce in public and private sector institutions, as well as preparing national human capabilities capable of performing social and economic development programs.
2. Adopting a work strategy based on a long-term vision, updating the lexicon of its training programs, implementing programs that match the demands of the national workforce, and implementing social and economic transformation programs.
3. Providing innovative, effective training curricula that meet international standards and are based on the most important applied skills, expanding the private sector’s activity, and developing the capabilities of the centers and their training programs in a radical and harmonious manner with the requirements of national development plans.
4. Developing training capabilities, hiring prestigious competent trainers with extensive expertise, and avoiding standard ready-made program providers.

In turn, the bodies in charge of regulating the sector must enhance the sector’s performance, modernize it, and implement qualitative radical changes, the most essential of which are:
1. Develop a comprehensive strategy plan for the sector’s progress and modernization, taking into account both quantitative and qualitative human resource requirements now and in the future.

2. Creating conditions for training centers to be licensed, as well as approving training programs and trainers that meet worldwide quality and standards.

The sector’s success is determined on its capacity to meet labor market needs and requirements for competent and efficient human resources. As previously said, this will necessitate the initiative of the various components of the human resources training sector to update their work environments.

Training facilities that rely on the previous stage’s results and continue to offer traditional programs that have accumulated dust over time can no longer guarantee them to be effective competitive aspects. The creation of current training programs that satisfy the needs of human capacity development at the present and future stages, as well as their continual updating, are required for the success of training centers and the sustainability of their activities.

As a result, the centers must make one of two difficult decisions. Either stick with the current strategy and be OK with offering old, out-of-date ideas, or exit the market. Alternatively, it might become a (factory) for national brains, empowering future leaders and providing sophisticated qualitative programs that focus on providing solutions to present and future stage concerns.

Saad Qaryaquos