Mandatory Training
When the Family Doesn't Do It, the Workplace Will (Try)
On my first day back at work after a trip to eastern Tennessee to visit family, I sat under the familiar fluorescent lights of the office building in which I work. We were having a meeting and discussing the training we’re required to watch each month. Like most jobs, there are regular training videos I’m required to watch. This meeting got me thinking about workplace training, in general, and why so much of it seems to be dealing with topics that shouldn’t be dealt with at work.
It’s not that the various workplace training meetings I’ve done have been particularly bad, although that has happened occasionally (OSHA has some especially cringeworthy workplace safety videos that I had to watch once upon a time). And considering what I’ve heard some people have to sit through, mine are a breeze. However, I still find myself ripping off the bandage by working to get them over with as quickly as possible, no matter the job I have, which makes me wonder what it is about them that everyone seems to dislike so much.
To clarify, when I say workplace training, I’m not talking about training that actually pertains to your job. That’s understandable and necessary. I’m talking about the, “Let’s Talk About Workplace Communication,” or “5 Ways to Be More Considerate of Your Co-Worker’s Mental Health,” type of training. This type of training was what was particularly on my mind that morning as the fluorescent lights continued shooting their shards of light into my eyeballs. After devoting some thought to it, I realized that part of the reason employers pay for someone to provide this kind of training (and for their employees to take time out of their day to participate in it) must be that they think it’s necessary, and it often is.
Soft Skills Training
Training videos like the ones mentioned above are trying to teach people “soft skills.” Things like basic workplace etiquette, professionalism, and specific things that are on the higher-ups’ agenda for workplace culture, like responsibility and attention to detail, are all included in these training seminars. But it seems to me that, to someone who had a halfway decent education and upbringing, these skills were something they learned early in high school, if not before. These “soft skills” are the fruit that is born out of a person understanding that they and everyone else are created in the image of God, and that means that there’s a certain, God-ordained way we should conduct business, treat others, and work. So these work training videos or meetings are trying to teach something that people should have learned from their church and family before they ever entered the workforce. This is why so many people are annoyed with them. Employees either weren’t taught these things and see them as annoying workplace restrictions on their behavior or, if they were taught them, they feel like they’re wasting their time on kindergarten lessons about being kind.
Another problem is that the employer is usually unable to provide any reason why the employee should do any of the things the trainer says to do. It usually stops at, “Well, that’s the considerate thing to do.” That’s no foundation firm enough to cause someone to be kind to a co-worker, client, or customer when they’re frustrated with them. The foundation has to be all the way down in a person’s worldview and, as much as this might shock some employers, most people don’t let their employer that far down into their life. If someone does, they’re not usually the kind of person that it’s pleasant to be around outside of work.
But employers continue to try to train people in basic soft skills. Why? I think that employers justify this kind of spending and training because they’ve noticed a decrease in maturity in the workforce and it benefits them to have mature employees. Having mature employees means less workplace conflict, more efficient hours, and better customer service, thereby increasing their bang for their buck when it comes to wages. So, they try to help their employees mature and teach them how to work hard and interact professionally. Now, I don’t think any employer would say it that way, but that seems to be what’s happening. The workplace has tried to take on the role of teaching basic adult social skills.
However, as mentioned above, the employer can’t give any good reason why the employee should behave this way, other than that they might lose their job if they don’t. So, you end up with employees who try to act mature and professional at work and act the way they want outside of work. Of course, people aren’t meant to live that kind of double life, so that eventually breaks down; either the employee’s personal life begins to be swallowed up with work or, more commonly, they slip up at work and do something that’s more like their persona outside of work. Sometimes they get fired, sometimes it’s simply a warning, but there’s usually some consequence when that slip-up happens.
The major problem with this scenario, though, is that the workplace is biased toward certain behaviors, many of which are not actually that helpful outside of that specific office or retail environment. Because of that, these trainings often contradict. They want to say you should be able to speak up and express your opinion because they know that that will make the company better, but then they want to instill a culture where there is as little conflict between employees as possible. These two things don’t go together. You either have to be willing to deal with the conflict (which takes time and energy) or give up the ideas that might lead to conflict (which could cost the company money in a potential lost opportunity). It’s also not a great circumstance for people to genuinely be able to add as much value as they could, because (in most states) the employer knows the employee could leave at any time and the employee knows that they could be let go at any time. It’s a strange relationship, in which the employee needs the income but, if they find another source of income, they feel free to leave. The employer needs to retain employees and doesn’t want to have to spend the time and money to constantly be training new ones, while also feeling the pressure to have the best employees possible.
This tension is a negative reflection of the scenario in the family, which brings me to my next point. These training videos, in addition to workplace social events, all feel engineered to try and serve a function in people’s lives that a productive household and family should fulfill. Trying to get people on board with a mission when the success or failure of that mission has little direct bearing on most of the individuals involved is difficult. Many employees are replaceable or interchangeable, and they know it. So, no matter how hard the company tries to feel like a family, everybody always knows that with one wrong move they could be out.
Not so in the family. Everyone there is needed; if anyone fails, everyone suffers. That may sound like a lot of pressure but people tend to do better when they’re a necessary part of a group. Not to mention the fact that reliance on each other forces people in the household to work out issues since, ideally, members aren’t worried about other members leaving or forcing them out. Of course, it doesn't always work out this way, but it at least provides the necessary structure, unlike the typical workplace.
The Alternative
What is the alternative to all of this? The answer is found in a robust family providing a good education, which I believe means a classical one under the responsibility of the household. A classical education trains the whole person; its goal is to produce a whole, godly human being that knows his place in the world and what that means for his daily life. This will include the STEM subjects, of course, but it will also emphasize the humanities; and, really, that classical framework won’t see a hard distinction between those two categories. In fact, the idea that all subjects are related is rooted in the classical Christian worldview. If one God created all things, and Scripture clearly reveals that nature also reveals truths about God, then it follows that the arts, mathematics, and the natural sciences are all related in an inseparable way. But I digress.
What we generally speak of as the humanities are important because they give students a better perspective of humanity as a whole. When you have your worldview shaped by Scripture and the perspective of many different times and places, always comparing that perspective with Scripture, your worldview is more whole. By comparing the similarities between people across time and space, students are better able to understand human nature.
The more whole a person’s understanding of humanity, history, and their place in both, the better they understand how they should treat people and conduct business. This education of the whole person, though, is a high calling and a lot of work. This is one reason why employers, in the few years that employees work for them, can’t instill these values.1 The primary reason, though, is that it’s not their job; it’s the parents’.
In Ephesians 6, God clearly gives the command for the instruction of children to fathers (and, by extension, the household).2 The household is where children are to be raised in the Lord and enculturated into the people of God. Because this true education is of the whole person, it must involve every part of the student’s life. When reciting the Law to Israel, Moses said this to the parents:
"These words, which I am commanding you today, shall be on your heart. "You shall teach them diligently to your sons and shall talk of them when you sit in your house and when you walk by the way and when you lie down and when you rise up.3
If this was the case for Israel, under the Mosaic law, how much more is it the case for us who have the full revelation, the mysteries of God’s plan revealed in full through Jesus Christ?
All of this is not to say you have to homeschool, but if you’re going to send your kids to a private school, it must be seen as delegating a task that is your responsibility. As Nate Spearing mentions often on his podcast, you can delegate your authority (in this case, to the teacher) but you can’t delegate your responsibility. You are responsible for the education of your children and no one else. Again, it’s fine to let someone who loves math teach your kids math. But that’s only as long as you’re recognizing that the education of your children is ultimately your responsibility.
Practical Suggestions
So, how about some practical suggestions? These are just a few things that I’ve found work well for our family. We have two young children who are not old enough to be in school, so these suggestions come from that perspective. What works for you will probably look different, but hopefully, the principles will be helpful to you.
Singing - We sing a lot around the house. We usually sing a hymn or psalm before meals, listen to songs throughout the day, and sing to our boys before bed. These songs are a mix of hymns, psalms, scripture songs, catechism songs, and songs like the doxology and the Gloria Patri (with the occasional John Denver song thrown in for fun). We’ve found this is a good way to get theology and scripture into our minds while also engaging our kids with songs they’ll remember for a long time, if not their whole lives. For the catechism songs, I highly recommend Brian Sauve’s Westminster Shorter Catechism albums, which you can find on his website and on most music streaming platforms. There are other albums, if you’d rather not use the Westminster, but his are the best I’ve heard and extremely catchy, which is helpful for me as I work on learning it, as well.
Review - We aren’t as consistent with this as with singing, but we do try to review verses and catechism questions with our oldest, who is the only one right now that’s old enough to be doing memory work. He has memory verses each month from his Sunday school class, and he has the catechism questions we’ve been teaching him, primarily through music, so we work with him on those. It’s amazing how quickly young children can memorize things, whether set to music or not.
Reading Aloud - Again, we’re not as good at this as I’d like, but I’m always amazed at how much our children pick up while I’m reading, even when it seems like they’re completely distracted. Whether it’s the Bible or another book, I’ll be reading along and my oldest will seem completely disconnected from the reading, and then, all of a sudden, he’ll look up and ask what a word means or why we’re talking about such-and-such. Moments like that remind me to continue to be faithful, regardless of what fruit I’m seeing in the moment.
Final Thoughts
Something I have to remind myself of often is that, if I want my children to grow up to know something, whether that’s a behavior, habit, concept, or skill, I have to ensure that they learn it while under my direct educational responsibility. If I want my children to know how to be polite and respectful to others, then I have to make sure to teach them how and model it for them. There will be things they want or need to learn that I can’t teach them. At that point, it’s my responsibility to find someone who can teach them and delegate my authority to that person for the sake of my children’s education.
It sounds obvious, right? If I want my children to know something, I have to make sure they learn it. But it’s amazing how often I think, “Oh, they’ll learn it eventually.” Well, maybe, but from whom? Do I want them to learn about this concept or how to grow in this skill from that person’s worldview or from our family’s worldview? Of course, part of doing this well means exposing them to other worldviews at strategic points, but even the point at which we allow that exposure is an extension of our family’s view of the world, which should be founded on Scripture.
This is, I think, part of why a lot of children grow up to abandon their family’s practices: they pick things up from their family’s behavior and the behavior of families around them, but never have it explained to them. They’re never taught the why behind the action, so when someone comes along with a why for a different action, it’s easier for them to be swayed. While our actions teach our children more than almost anything else we do, it’s undeniable that teaching and modeling together make for the most effective passing down of our faith and culture.
As with most things, we have to have both. We can’t be all brain and no brawn or vice versa. We must have the theoretical and the practical; otherwise, we risk losing the one we have for want of the other. I realize this essay began in one place and pivoted quickly to another, but I noticed a symptom that I believe is traced back to a lack of a good, Godly, practical education under the responsibility of the parents. Hopefully, my train of thought was clear.
Many people haven’t stopped to think about alternative ways of education or ways of living beyond what is normal in their region. As Christians, it is increasingly becoming the case that, to be faithful to God and His word, we are going to look less and less like most people around us. This is a blessing and a hardship, depending on the circumstances. It often makes it easier to distinguish who is like-minded and who is not. However, it can also mean we draw more attention to ourselves by simply living differently. Often, when people who have rejected Christ see someone living a life of submission to Him, they react in anger. On the other hand, looking different can also be the breath of fresh air that causes someone to ask, “What makes you so different?”4
According to this report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the median tenure at a job for people in the U.S. was 4.1 years, as of January 2022.
Specifically, Ephesians 6:4.
Great stuff man. I was discussing some of these things with my wife just the other day: Family culture is so powerful and formative and has no replacement.