June 15, 2008

Focus on O&M (June 2008)

POWER PLANT TRAINING
New techniques required

Historians often point to specific wars that illustrate how winning armies applied new armaments and defensive and offensive maneuvers to defeat their enemies. For example, in the American Revolutionary War, the fledgling colonial army defeated the more powerful, better-equipped British forces because the latter insisted on standing in columns and formations—because that’s the way war was fought. Meanwhile, the colonists fought with what amounted to guerrilla tactics: dispersed units and hiding behind trees. Important to note, however, is that better tactics—not necessarily the most advanced weaponry—ruled the day.

 

An analogous situation is apparent in the power plant training arena. If your team is diligently sitting in classrooms listening to an instructor drone on, then you are not applying modern techniques and methods. And some will argue that in today’s competitive markets for electricity, that could spell early defeat. However, it is the ability to apply the latest technology to your situation that results in a competitive posture, not simply possessing the latest technology.

Also, it matters little whether you are using the latest simulation technology or traditional classroom methods; off-the-shelf training solutions simply don’t cut it. A generic product must be customized for specific plants, machines, and personnel if it’s going to make a contribution to your plant. Similarly, vendor-supplied training is rarely sufficient. This seems obvious because of the many organizations that provide training above and beyond what vendors supply.

Thus, power plants must somehow strike a balance between the supplier, who knows the most about the equipment but often provides inadequate (albeit free or low-cost) training, and the training services supplier, who typically sells a generic package that must then be customized to some degree.

New media

Perhaps the most significant wholesale change in the training arena is with the tools of the trade. Printed text has been augmented, even replaced, by video, audio, Internet, and computer-based tools. With the power of the latest hardware and software, in fact, computer, audio, and video are being combined into sophisticated educational packages. The rate of change in computer capability is probably a blessing and a curse: No sooner does a plant or firm buy the latest package with elaborate graphics and simulation than a more advanced version becomes available (Figure 1).

 

 

One of the latest and fastest growing techniques for teaching the topic of business management, for example, is a sophisticated computer simulation game. Computer simulation games emerged over the past decade to improve upon textbook-based training, which may successfully teach the theoretical but can fail to convey the practical. Specialists say this can be a particular problem for the management disciplines of finance, marketing, information science, organizational behavior, and so on. Computer simulations force students to actually sift through, make decisions from, and observe market response to reams of financial data on balance sheets, income statements, cash-flow reports, interest-rate projections, import/export fee schedules, and the like. Most important, the data are constantly changing as the training advances and the computer model processes the participants’ business decisions.

Many simulation training programs model only a single industry and have a preprogrammed business cycle. Such programs are often referred to as “partial economies.” Although teams appear to be playing against each other, they really are playing “beat the program.” In contrast, more complex simulations model multiple industries in multiple countries, and the outcomes depend on the interactions of participating management teams. This more complex model is referred to as a “general equilibrium system.”

Though such training tools are impressive, seasoned power plant managers caution that high-technology solutions often are applied beyond the specific need of the plant. Although computers are pervasive, it will be some time before they replace print and traditional instructors. It is difficult, if not impossible, to replace a terrific instructor who knows the specific equipment or technology in depth.

And are the new media, supposedly new weapons in the training battle, actually just empty shells? Has the same old material simply been given a new look? An in-depth examination of some computer-based training programs, for instance, reveals that much of the material is simply the same stuff that appears in course books and texts: graphics, flow diagrams, text, questions and answers. Granted, some color is thrown in; the computer screen may even allow the direction of flow to be depicted with bright, moving colored dots.

Whether this is an improvement over the text presentation is open to debate. After all, the trainee has some ability to visualize what’s going on if the printed diagrams and explanatory text are top-quality. And three-dimensional graphics could be viewed just as well on a slide projector as on a computer screen. Published literature about power plant training programs is replete with descriptions of the latest technology, methods, graphics, motivators, and so on but surprisingly lean on quantifying the benefits of the new media.

---