ZarCen Training Model: Systematizing the Training and Assessment Process of Mechatronics Technology for the Optimization of the Skills Based Competency of Industry Workers

Authors

  • Jaido Zarceno College of Technology Management, University of Makati, JP Rizal Extension West Rembo, Makati City and 1215, Philippines

Keywords:

Assessment, Effectiveness, Mechatronics, Skills, Technology, Training, ZarCen.

Abstract

The understudy company is a multinational company with three manufacturing plants located in Biñan and Canlubang Industrial Parks in Laguna, Philippines.  Being a Japanese company where continuous improvement (Kaizen) is infinite, they commonly used it as a strategy to provide solutions. The proof of Kaizen implementation is their in-house training for Mechatronics Engineers and Technicians. The company has its training facilities and programs where they could practice through experiments and researches.  Employees take the training seriously because it is part of their evaluation regarding competence and qualification for promotion.  It is used to harness their skills on different areas including Japanese language development and skills-based development, in this case, Mechatronics Technology. While they were doing this for years, the training departments together with the researcher were able to depict a problem on their system of implementation.  The process started in developing a program for their employees suited to the company needs, followed by the implementation of training and then by doing an assessment. It seems the process is perfect, no wonder for years of implementation it is only in 2012 that they started asking, who would evaluate our training program with regards to industry standards? Are the trainers qualified to train the same level of engineers and technicians adequately? Is our assessment acceptable to local and international standards? Doing all the processes internally seems to be biased because no one coming from an external entity would qualify if they are going in the right direction. 

It is then that the researcher was asked by the understudy company to help them develop a training and assessment program where an external entity would validate the effectiveness of the program. The researcher then offered several options like ISO, ANTA and TESDA as an external standard making body who would have the mandate to give certifications as a proof of effectiveness and excellence in implementing training programs. With open mind, the management decided to embrace the idea on a locally mandated government institution - the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA) a try.  Immediately the understudy company and the researcher formed a core group composed of twenty (20) Engineers and Technicians who pioneered the use of ZarCen Training Model, a training strategy conceptualized and developed by the researcher to provide permanent solution to the problem encountered by the understudy company. After forming a group, the goal was set to develop certified Mechatronics Technicians and Engineers that would undergo Mechatronics Training NC level II, III and IV for the understudy company and at the same time test the effectiveness of ZarCen Training Model. To establish integrity and credibility in measuring the effectiveness of ZarCen Training Model two evaluative procedures were used, one is an external TESDA National Assessment and the researcher’s evaluation instrument. As we go through the process, we were able to develop their skills competence and attain a stunning 100% passing rate on TESDA Mechatronics Certification Level II, III, and IV, the first in the Philippines to achieve such performance for the same group of people rendering a proof of effectiveness of ZarCen Training Model. On the other evaluative measure, The ZarCen Training Model as a strategy got the following composite mean ratings from the panels of evaluators:  4.77 for Mechatronics NC II training, 4.78 for Mechatronics NC III training, and 4.84 for Mechatronics NC IV training. All of the three composite ratings had a descriptive rating of “Excellent”. The ZarCen Training Model also gained a composite mean of the combined responses of the panel of evaluator for the Content of 4.79, Organization of 4.72, Mechanics of 4.80, Comprehensibility of 4.82 and Workability is 4.78, all of these results show an excellent rating. In addition, ZarCen Training Model as a strategy gained a grand mean of 4.78, which has an equivalent descriptive rating of excellent, proving ZarCen Training Model as consistently effective. Following the success of the program, the management decided to put up a Mechatronics Department where all employees would undergo an assessment, at least, Level II for Operators, Level III for Technicians and Level IV for Engineers. Given the standing order, another two batches composed of operators and technicians were able to hurdle Mechatronics Servicing Level II and III which again showed the consistency and effectiveness of ZarCen Training Model.  Finally, after acquiring relevant skills, pioneering engineers and technicians are now localizing the development of automation machines so they need not wait for the parts from their main plant in Japan, a greater impact on operations, logistics and revenue became part of the understudy company.

References

[1] D. Edralin. (2004). “Training: A Strategic HR Function.” De La Salle University – College of Business and Economics. 7(4).
[2] K. Jehanzeb. N. Ahmed Bashir. (2013). “Training and Development Program and its Benefits to Employee and Organization: A Conceptual Study.” European Journal of Business and Management. 5(2).
[3] I. Tarique. Seven Trends in Corporate Training and Development. Pearson Education, Inc., 2014.
[4] Vinesh. (2014). “Role of Training & Development in an Organizational Development.” International Journal of Management and International Business Studies. 4(2), pp. 213-220.
[5] “Australian National Training Authority Amendment Act 2003.” Internet: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2004A01182, 2014.
[6] “ISO 29990:2010.” Internet: https://www.iso.org/standard/53392.html, 2016.
[7] “Republic Act 7796.” Internet: http://www.tesda.gov.ph/uploads/File /REPUBLIC %20ACT%20NO.%207796.pdf, 2015.
[8] T. Homklin. “Training Effectiveness of Skill Certification System: The Case of Automotive Industry in Thailand.” Doctoral Dissertation, Hiroshima University, Japan, 2014.
[9] R.M. Aldaba. “The Philippine Manufacturing Industry Roadmap: Agenda for New Industrial Policy, High Productivity Jobs, and Inclusive Growth.” Philippine Institute for Development Studies. 14(32).
[10] N. Osui. “Taking the Right Road to Inclusive Growth Industrial Upgrading and Diversification in the Philippines.” Internet: https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/29722/taking-right-road inclusive-growth.pdf, 2014
[11] “Industrial Revolution.” Internet: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/313774299011868445/, 2015.
[12] P. Drucker. Management Challenges by the 21st Century. HarperCollins Publishers Inc., 1999.
[13] N. Morris. Control Engineering, Third Edition. McGraw Hill, 1983.
[14] N.S. Nise. Control System Engineering, Second Edition. Addison: Wesly Publishing Company, 1995.
[15] H. Jack. Automating Manufacturing System with PLC. GNU Free Documentation, 2007.
[16] “Branches of Mechatronics.” Internet: http//www.mechatronic.me/, 2013 [January 7, 2014].
[17] J. Zarceno. (2014), “MECHA-Z: An All-in-One Training Module for Mechatronics Course.” Master’s Thesis, University of Makati, Makati Philippines, 2014.
[18] “Mechatronics System” Internet: http//www.mechatronic.me/, 2013 [January 7, 2014].
[19] “Training Regulations, Technical Skills and Development Authority.” Internet: www.tesda.gov.ph, 2013
[20] “Instructional design models and research on teacher thinking: Toward a new conceptual model for research and development.” Internet: http://www.eric.ed.gov/, 1996.
[21] “ADDIE Model.” Internet: http://www.learning-theories.com/addie-model.html, 2011.
[22] “Introduction to Instructional Design and the ADDIE Model.” Internet: http://www.transformativedesigns. Com, 2009.
[23] C. Cowell. P.C. Hopkins. D.L. Jordan. Alternative Training Models. 2006.
[24] K. Gustafson. B. Branch. Survey of Instructional Models, 4th edition. 2002.
[25] The Herridge Group. The Use Of Traditional Instructional Systems Design Models For e-learning. 2004.
[26] A. Mohammed Saad. “Evaluation Of Effectiveness Of Training And Development: The Kirkpatrick Model.” Asian Journal of Business and Management Sciences. 2(11), pp. 14-24.
[27] E. Morato. Strategic Planning and Management. Manila Philippines: Pearson Education South Asia, 2006.
[28] N. Garino. A Practical Guide to Research Project Planning and Development. Manila Philippines: 2011.
[29] R.A.Stiggins. J.S. Chappuis. Classroom Assessment for Student Learning: Doing It Right – Using It Well. Assessment Training Institute.
[30] S. McClelland. “A Training Needs Assessment for the United Way of Dunn County Wisconsin.” Master’s Thesis, University of Wisconsin-Stout, 2002.

Downloads

Published

2017-08-26

How to Cite

Zarceno, J. (2017). ZarCen Training Model: Systematizing the Training and Assessment Process of Mechatronics Technology for the Optimization of the Skills Based Competency of Industry Workers. American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences, 35(1), 67–85. Retrieved from https://asrjetsjournal.org/index.php/American_Scientific_Journal/article/view/3276

Issue

Section

Articles