In developing both the overall strategy and the detailed session plans for training from the objectives determined (see Organisation of Training), it is essential to select a structure and methodology that will be most effective for the training environment, considering factors such as:

• cultural environment;

• available training resources;

• available timeframes;

• affordability;

• cost-effectiveness.

Training Focus

The focus of training for voting operations officials is on achieving task competency--the ability to carry out a range of activities accurately and with integrity under pressure, not just to know about them. Appropriate methodologies derive from this basic principle.

It is recognised that task-based learning is better accomplished in face-to-face training sessions rather than from book study. Thus training programs for voting operations officials should be based on aiming to provide all with some face-to-face training. In remote areas, or where face-to-face training is not affordable for all staff, all voting operations officials should at least be provided with the standard reference materials, with a requirement that self-trained officials undertake some form of knowledge assessment, through use of workbooks or exercises provided with the reference materials.

In addition to these formal training and briefing methods, the importance of informal training activities as a reinforcement should not be underestimated. These could include contact through newsletters or quasi-social activities.

Specific Issues to Be Considered

In determining training structure and methodology, there are a number of interrelated issues which require resolution:

• what is the best structure for the training program (see below) and when should it be implemented (see Timing of Training);

• who should be used to present voting operations officials training (see Training Delivery Responsibilities) and what do they need for a successful presentation (see Training Reference Materials);

• what subject matter should training sessions cover and how should this be organised (see Training Session Content);

• what training facilities and aids are required (see Training Environment);

• how is the success of the training to be measured (see Knowledge Assessment and Evaluation of Recruitment and Training).

Testing

Training voting operations officials for a general election is an immense training exercise. While simulations during training can enhance voting operations officials' learning, without the reality of election pressure it is not possible to fully evaluate the degree of success of the chosen training methodology.

Wherever possible methodologies selected should be thoroughly tested in a live environment, if possible in partial elections (by-elections) or other localised elections, before being implemented on a large scale.

Training Structure

Determining the training structure is interdependent with assessing resource needs against resource availability. Often there will need to be some compromises between ideals in relation to:

• the time taken to complete voting operations official training;

• the number of trainers required;

• the ability to engage professional trainers;

• the size of training groups.

Initial decisions will need to be made on whether it is feasible to provide face-to-face training sessions for all voting operations staff. There are three basic training structure models for face-to-face training of voting operations officials:

• the cascade, ripple, or pyramid model;

• the mobile team model;

• the simultaneous training model.

Each has positive aspects that may be sufficient to make it preferable in a particular environment. Elements of each may be combined to provide the most effective structure for an environment. Their positive and negative factors are worth examining in some detail.

Cascade Model

The cascade, ripple, or pyramid model acts through training small groups of people in both voting operations functional skills and training techniques, who then, in turn, train small groups of people with functional skills and training techniques, and so on, until functional skills are passed on to the lowest staff level. In an election environment the model could progress as follows:

• central electoral management body technical specialists and professional trainers train central electoral management body staff;

• central electoral management body staff train regional or local electoral administrators;

• regional or local electoral administrators train voting station managers;

• voting station managers train their voting station staff.

The number of layers in the cascade can be manipulated to fit available time, geography, and logistics considerations and optimal training group sizes. The following table indicates some significant advantages and disadvantages of this model.

Where there is confidence that lower levels of trainers are going to be successful in conducting training sessions (and this can be assisted by maintaining a simple structure for participative activities), and an effective quality monitoring function can be implemented, this model, or a combination of it with some mobile training team features (see below), is a very effective training structure.

Mobile Training Team Model

The mobile team model involves teams of two or more trainers visiting different geographic localities and conducting one or a number of training sessions there. Different variations would see the training team training all staff in the locality or training senior staff only, with these staff in cascade fashion then training their subordinate staff.

The following table indicates some significant advantages and disadvantages of this model:

The major problem with this model in its pure form is the length of time it may take for mobile training teams to train all voting operations staff. This may not be possible under election timetables or mean that training has to be commenced so early in some areas that retention by the time of voting day may have suffered. Conversely, the employment of sufficient mobile teams to train all staff in a short period may not be possible within available budgets or available professional training resources.

Combining a mobile team model for more senior local staff, electoral district administrators, and then using a cascade style where electoral district administrators train their voting station managers who train their own staff can provide a reasonable balance of consistency, time availability, and professionalism.

Simultaneous Model

Under this model all staff are trained simultaneously, on the one day or days, throughout the area for which there is an election. The following table indicates some significant advantages and disadvantages of this model.

Where election training is being promoted as a national event to stimulate interest in electoral education in general or an upcoming election, a simultaneous training model such as a national election training day may assist in image-building and in voter education. For this to be successful, appropriate publicity campaign materials will need to be developed. It may also be an appropriate model where unexpected elections are called at short notice. However, its significant disadvantages will generally mean that unless there are some special environmental factors present, other models offer more cost-effective solutions.