Best PD Trainers in the World? Research Says Maybe…


PD Training, in association with REACH Consulting Services and the OrgDev institute, undertook a study of over 4600+ participants and 39 trainers, across 46 different training courses, to determine if a Trainer’s REACH Quotient Score (RQ) has an impact on feedback scoring by learners.

You can read the actual results below and the answer is a resounding YES!

The study showed that trainers who had a higher RQ score also received higher feedback scores from course attendees; and not just by a little.

On average, trainers with an RQ score above 4, received feedback scores that were 11.9% higher than trainers who had an RQ score below 4.

The question is…Why?

So, the RQ score is one of the results of completing a REACH personality profile, along with a personality type placement on the REACH Profile Matrix.  The Matrix has 4 quadrants with each specifying a personality type; Driver, Advisor, Coach and Counselor.  The higher someone’s RQ score, means that they have an easier time ‘moving’ themselves into another of the quadrants and behaving like a different personality type, compared to someone with a lower RQ score.

In fact, the entire REACH Ecosystem was built to help people learn how to grow their “REACH” and provides activities and training that supports the goal of moving into and interacting with other personality types with ease.

Now, back to the question of why a trainer with higher RQ scores gets better feedback?

The study also showed that participants who were naturally in a particular quadrant, also reacted more positively to trainers who had the same personality type.  While this seems to make logical sense, how did the trainers get higher feedback scores from participants with different personality types?

The answer is the trainer’s RQ.

Our trainers are trained in the REACH Ecosystem, and as such have undergone professional development training that has helped them improve their ability to communicate and interact with other personality types.

So, they are better able to communicate and interact on the same level with any of the other personality types, compared to a trainer who has not undergone this specific professional development.

The trainers are purposefully using REACH to sub-consciously engage with participants who have a different personality type and deliver a better perceived learning experience.

For PD Training, this result is the culmination of 5 years of intensive product development and testing to deliver a learning experience that is truly unique compared to any of our competitors.

So, does PD Training have the best trainers in the world?  We like to think so, but we certainly have provided them with the tools and professional development to be outstanding in their role and to create a better learning experience for our customers.  And we require all of our trainers to have undergone REACH training before delivering any courses for us.

Come attend a course of your choice to experience the PD Training difference today!

RQ Study Results:

REACH Consulting Services (RCS), PD Training (PDT) and the OrgDev Institute (ODI) collaborated to study the implications of training styles on learner satisfaction. Key applications from this study are highlighted below, with implications for training, coaching and leadership professionals.

  • ODI gathered end-of-course surveys from 4637 learners, involving 39 trainers and 46 courses over a 2-year period. Learners reported satisfaction with each course via a 1-100% rating.
  • Both trainers and learners completed the REACH Profile, a psychometric assessment of preferences and competencies among four distinct profiles: Counselor, Coach, Driver and Advisor. Participants completed the REACH Profile in advance of their respective courses.
  • Higher course satisfaction ratings were indicated by learners who preferred the same REACH Profile as their trainers preferred. For example, learners preferring the Advisor Profile tended to provide higher course satisfaction ratings if their trainers also preferred the Advisor Profile. Overall, the closer the learners’ plots to the trainers’ plots on the REACH Profile Matrix, the higher the average course satisfaction ratings.
  • It is important to note that learners were not aware of their trainers’ REACH Profile results, and they did not know their trainers’ preferences and competencies based on the REACH Profile Matrix. However, trainers were aware of their learners’ profiles. In fact, trainers were provided a Trainer’s Companion document with tips and techniques to engage learners based on profile preferences. Trainers also had been taught to apply the REACH concept.
  • Trainers’ agility in engaging learners from different profiles was measured by the REACH Quotient (RQ), a 16-competency model yielding a 1-5 average score. There was a positive, statistically significant correlation between the trainers’ RQ and the course satisfaction ratings provided by their learners. Specifically, the average course satisfaction rating for trainers with an RQ of 4 or higher was 83.74%, compared to an average of 71.84% for trainers with RQ of less than 4. This difference of 11.9% was statistically significant.

The results of this study suggest that learner satisfaction can be increased by recognising and applying the insights provided via the REACH Ecosystem – to know and grow.

Bookmark and Share

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.