Tag: 夜上海ysh论坛

first_imgIncreasingresponsibility for T&D rests with line managers, but how much time do theyput into it and how effective is their involvement? Sue Clark asks across-section of organisations for their experiencesGaryMilesProgramme director, Roffey Park Management InstituteOursurvey of 180 line managers and team members in 1999 showed that the majorityrecognise development as an effective way to improve performance, increasemotivation or bring about change.Thekey types of development interventions most commonly used are coaching,feedback, counselling, on-the-job training, mentoring, help with the selectionof courses, work shadowing and arranging visits to other organisations.However,the survey revealed that nearly 30 per cent of line managers spend less thaneight hours a month developing others, while 47 per cent spend between eightand 16 hours on development.Timewas cited as a major barrier to effective coaching and development, whilefeedback was hampered if the culture in the organisation did not encourageopenness.Therewas also a mixed response to the idea of reward for developing people. Some seedeveloping others as a normal part of their job while others believe theyshould get a financial reward linked to team performance.Evaluatingthe development of others also appears to be a significant challenge and linemanagers clearly need more help with this.GlendaMartinTraining and development manager, Boots the Chemist, IrelandI’mnot surprised by the figures from Roffey Park, but you have to focus on theother aspects of development beyond the recognised training and developmentthat goes on between the individual and his or her line manager.AtBoots development is one of the key elements of their job, but it is often doneindirectly, for example by facilitating learning through buddy systems whereindividuals meet with their peers and share information. The line managers willset these groups up and monitor them but they won’t actually take part.Moredirectly, line managers provide coaching and leadership, and they cascadelearning down.Theyare also part of projects and working parties where groups will co-operate toachieve a goal. Developmentactivities are sandwiched between pre and post briefings that focus on how totransfer any learning back into the work place.Theirrole in training and development is crucial to the organisation.ChrisJefferiesHead of training, First QuenchThereis a danger where a training and development function exists within anorganisation that line managers, consciously or not, will not view T&D aspart of their job, especially when they have other priorities.Weemphasise the role of our line managers’ involvement in development byequipping them with coaching skills. Thenwe have a process whereby the line managers become self-sufficient. Theyidentify any training need and then solve it from their own resources.Anindividual from the team will provide the expertise to develop others, theT&D function equips them with the skills.Forexample we have been running a cascade programme where an evangelist or coachis chosen from each training event to pass on the skills to the next group. Itstarted at board level and is working its way to our 20,000 staff who are basedat 2,500 retail units around the UK.Itis a bit of a trade off, a compromise on quality. But we need to deliver agreat deal to many people rather than a little to a few.Trainingin our organisation is like fishing: we teach our people how to do it, ratherthan give them the fish.MikeSpillerGroup personnel and training director, Granada Food ServicesLinemanagers play an important role in training and development within ourorganisation as we believe it is the most effective way to improve performance andmotivation. It is sufficiently important to be included in the job descriptionsof all line managers.Professionaltrainers instruct managers on how to train, and they have developed modules andmaterials which enable the line managers to conduct the training with theirteams.Andas we promote training as a line responsibility, our trainers report to themanaging directors, thereby ensuring the training of line managers and that oftheir teams is focused on the needs of the business, individuals and teams.Wealso encourage line managers’ own development using internal and externalsources.Ifa line manager is being developed then it is more likely they will beencouraged to develop their own staff.However,training only becomes really effective when it is owned by line managers and islinked to business, individual and group needs.KirstenBarclayHuman resources manager, Welsh Development AgencyManytraining and development experts believe that individual training needs arebest identified jointly by the line manager and individual team member.Butif the individual and manager are best placed to identify individual trainingneeds, does it necessarily follow that they are best placed to identify themost appropriate means of addressing the need?Managersand their teams are often not aware of the different ways that learning canoccur and inevitably fall back upon the trainer-led course, neglecting otherlearning methodologies such as project work, CBT, professional networks, eventhe precursor of much CBT – directed reading!Nonetheless,devolving HR to the line means that managers increasingly have a role inidentifying and addressing training needs in their teams.Theinevitable next step is devolving some if not all of the training budget toline managers for their local level training.Ideallymanagers will then have an explicit objective in their annual appraisal –developing team members. Comments are closed. In line for feedbackOn 1 Feb 2000 in Personnel Today Related posts:No related photos. Previous Article Next Articlelast_img read more

first_imgThe Secretary of State has announced the reappointment of Charlie Taylor as Chair of the Youth Justice Board (YJB) for a period of one year.His new term will run from 17 March 2019 to 16 March 2020.Charlie Taylor said: Further readingCharlie Taylor’s biography Press office 020 3334 3536 Youth Justice Board media enquiriescenter_img I’m delighted to have been reappointed as Chair of the YJB. I will continue to focus on delivering the Board’s priorities, advising ministers and improving outcomes for children who come into contact with the justice system. Youth Justice Board for England and WalesClive House70 Petty FranceLondonSW1H 9EXlast_img read more

first_imgBy Dialogo March 01, 2013 MIAMI, EE.UU. – Un helicóptero Sea Hawk SH-60B del Escuadrón Antisubmarino Aéreo Ligero 49 se prepara para aterrizar en la cubierta del buque USS Gary el 20 de enero. La embarcación es utilizada en el marco de la Operación Martillo, una misión internacional que reúne a países del Hemisferio Occidental y de Europa en un esfuerzo conjunto para eliminar las rutas del tráfico ilegal en ambas costas del istmo centroamericano. (Cortesía Raúl Sánchez-Azuara/Diálogo) MIAMI, EE.UU. – El comandante en jefe del USS Gary, capitán James E. Brown, examina un barco sospechoso el 20 de enero. Casi el 90% de la cocaína que llega a los Estados Unidos ingresa a través de México y Centroamérica, según la Junta Internacional de Control de Estupefacientes de las Naciones Unidas. (Cortesía Raúl Sánchez-Azuara/Diálogo) MIAMI, EE.UU. – Un helicóptero Sea Hawk se prepara para despegar de la cubierta de la fragata misilística estadounidense USS Gary para investigar un barco sospechoso que navegaba en aguas internacionales, cerca de la costa de Ecuador el 21 de enero. (Cortesía personal de Diálogo) MIAMI, EE.UU. – La tripulación del USS Gary realiza el mantenimiento diario de un Sistema de Ametralladoras de Fuego Rápido MK 38-25mm el 20 de enero. El buque USS Gary es utilizado en el marco de la Operación Martillo, que decomisó 127 mil toneladas de cocaína y confiscó 56 lanchas rápidas durante su primer año de operaciones, en 2012. (Cortesía Raúl Sánchez-Azuara/Diálogo) MIAMI, EE.UU. – La tripulación del USS Gary participa de un simulacro de incendio en el buque el 20 de enero. (Cortesía Raúl Sánchez-Azuara/Diálogo) MIAMI, EE.UU. – El armamento más grande del USS Gary es una ametralladora rápida MK 75 calibre 62 de 76mm. El buque USS es utilizado en el marco de la Operación Martillo, una misión internacional que reúne a países del Hemisferio Occidental y de Europa en un esfuerzo conjunto para eliminar las rutas del tráfico ilegal en ambas costas del istmo centroamericano. (Cortesía de Raúl Sánchez-Azuara/Diálogo) MIAMI, EE.UU. – Los marineros del buque USS Gary y de la Guardia Costera conducen un bote inflable rígido durante una patrulla de rutina el 20 de enero. El USS Gary desempeña un papel integral en las actividades antinarcóticos. Casi el 90% de la cocaína que llega a los Estados Unidos ingresa a través de México y Centroamérica, según la Junta Internacional de Fiscalización de Estupefacientes de las Naciones Unidas. (Cortesía Raúl Sánchez-Azuara/Diálogo) MIAMI, EE.UU. – Los mecánicos del helicóptero Scorpions of Sea Hawk SH-60B del Escuadrón Antisubmarino Aéreo Ligero 49 (HSL) realizan reparaciones en el motor en uno de los hangares del buque USS Gary el 20 de enero. (Cortesía Raúl Sánchez-Azuara/Diálogo) MIAMI, EE.UU. – El comandante en jefe del USS Gary, capitán James E. Brown, brinda instrucciones a su tripulación desde el puente el 20 de enero. (Cortesía Raúl Sánchez-Azuara/Diálogo)last_img read more

first_imgMinesto has appointed Leask Marine as an offshore installation contractor to execute the installation of all the balance of plant for Minesto’s Deep Green 500kW project in Holyhead Deep off the coast of North West Wales. The contract comprises the installation and hook-up of three significant balance of plant components, namely concrete gravity base foundation structure, buoy containing a micro grid and communications system, and power transfer fastening comprising of the top joint, tether, bottom joint and subsea umbilical.The DG500 project is the first installation of Minesto’s marine energy technology in utility scale.The project is planned for commissioning and operation in 2018.David Collier, COO at Minesto said: “We are very pleased to be working with Leask Marine as offshore installation contractor for this significant project in Holyhead Deep. They have a track record for identifying safe, innovative and cost-effective solutions for installing subsea structures in high tidal flows and other marine energy environments. So, I believe that their appointment will be a great asset to the overall project.”last_img read more

first_img* Because of the limitations in PHPP discovered in the field, PHIUS partnered in 2011 with Fraunhofer Institute for Building Physics and Owens Corning to collaborate on a new passive design tool that would appropriately predict energy performance for passive buildings in all climates. We now use WUFI Passive, capable of static (similar to PHPP) as well as a more detailed dynamic simulation to assess whole building energy performance, comfort conditions, hygrothermal performances of envelope assemblies, and hygric interaction of the enclosure and the living space. But between consulting on some projects and certifying and reviewing many others, we learned that the concept of a single Holy Grail standard for North America’s varied climates is just too good to be true.In practice, designers have arguably been forced into non-optimal decisions and designs in pursuit of the European 15 kWh/m²•year metric. For example, in the colder climates they tended to seriously overinsulate — with diminishing returns in the outer layers — and tended to overglaze (with expensive high-performance windows, no less). The projects relied heavily on solar gain to make the energy balance work.With some exceptions (e.g., the Pacific Northwest), the North American continent has design temperatures that are much more challenging than central Europe. It gets significantly colder during the winter, even while the number of heating degree days (HDDs) on an annual basis can look very similar to those in Europe. Madison, Wisconsin, is a perfect example: It has a colder design temperature than Oslo, Norway, while its HDDs are almost 2,000 lower than Oslo’s. PHPP problems in hot, humid climatesThese issues also manifested in the Passive House Planning Package (PHPP). Because PHPP is a massive Excel spreadsheet, users can “look under the hood,” which makes it a nice teaching and learning tool. But while well validated for heating-dominated climates, the tool proved inaccurate when we consulted on the LeBois House in Lafayette, Louisiana.The project was intended to be a proof-of-concept project in the Lafayette climate, and to demonstrate that designers could confidently use PHPP in hot and humid climates. The project plan included monitoring for two years after it was inhabited. During that period it became clear that in PHPP, cooling demand and sensible peak algorithms were off by a large margin. Moreover, we learned that latent loads really need to be accounted for in the standard (they were not at the time).The project was performing significantly better on the sensible cooling demand side than PHPP had predicted, by about 30%*, but worse on the peak — a situation that makes system sizing difficult. On the other hand, RESNET’s energy modeling tool REMRate predicted the actual performance almost spot on.Overall, the project was a huge success. We proved that hot climate passive principles do apply, resulting in superior comfort and significant energy savings. An overreliance on solar gainAlthough design temperatures are colder, there is generally very good solar potential in North America. Therefore designers in the U.S. and Canada tried to compensate by becoming essentially “solar Passivhauses” to get closer to the target, which in return caused overheating and comfort issues. (The passive solar movement learned those lessons in the 1970s. Ironically, those lessons were the ones that led to the development of the original passive house concept that deemphasized solar and reemphasized insulation.)Let’s face it: the annual heating demand of 15 kWh/m²•year was a result of meeting 10 W/m2 peak load in a specific climate, the European climate, with less extreme design temperatures — which as a bonus also allowed “supply air heating only” — the flagship core definition of a Passivhaus as established by the Passivhaus Institut (PHI).The specific relationship of annual demand and peak load in the European climate has led to the characteristic definition of the standard. Yet, the relationship of annual heating demand and peak load is not a strong one, and is very different on the North American continent. This is likely the reason why the pioneers in the 1970s and 1980s had identified generally similar peak loads as energy targets but paid little attention to limit their peaks to “supply air only,” because they could not get there, and comfort was still assured with slightly higher peak loads and greater annual demands. By August of 2011, eight years had passed since we completed the Smith House, the first home in the United States to be built to the European Passivhaus standard. Those eight years were heady and full: We founded the national non-profit Passive House Institute U.S. (PHIUS). We created a Certified Passive House Consultant (CPHC) training curriculum and delivered trainings to hundreds of professionals from coast to coast.Those pioneering professionals began building their own projects from coast to coast, and from north to south, in all U.S. climate zones save for Florida. Because PHIUS had a good deal of practical experience building its own projects, because it provided training and certification (at the time under the auspices of the German Passivhaus Institut), PHIUS was quite naturally closely involved with nearly all of these projects.And that’s when we — PHIUS and CPHCs and builders across the United States — began collectively to learn the limitations of the European Passivhaus metric in varied climate zones outside of Central Europe. Some buildings were overinsulated and overglazedTo be sure, the concept of a single, relatively easily understood, internationally applicable energy metric for heating and cooling was (and is) enormously attractive. And in Central Europe the metrics have been well verified and tested. RELATED ARTICLES Redefining PassivhausAn Inside Look at the New PHIUS StandardNew Passive House Rules Take EffectA New Passivhaus Standard for North AmericaPossible Relaxation of Passivhaus Standard Stirs Debate A Petition Strives to Defend a Certain Definition of ‘Passive House’ A Proposed Passivhaus Amendment for New EnglandPHIUS PHloggingBuilding Science Corp. and PHIUS to CollaborateA Passivhaus Conference in GermanyA Post-Passivhaus Paradigm for Energy-Efficient Design Joseph Lstiburek Surprises Passive House Conference Attendees Developing new passive house standards for North AmericaIn 2011, the PHIUS Technical Committee, a volunteer body based on modified consensus and comprised of international building science experts and North American passive house practitioners, embarked on the plan to identify a methodology to generate new passive standards for all climate zones. The tech committee has identified four foundational principles that the standard should follow:1. Being biased towards conservation by constraining the envelope design through definition of annual heating and cooling demands and peak loads per climate that must be met using passive measures first. The climate-specific annual demand thresholds should pay back the investment and peak load thresholds should assure comfort.2. Meeting a total primary energy maximum per person for all energy uses in a building. This is essentially the equivalent to a carbon limit, responding very directly to the amount of carbon savings that need to be achieved in the building sector to stabilize the climate.3. An airtightness requirement assuring building envelope durability, verified by climate and measured in air leakage per square foot of envelope area.4. Cost-effectiveness using national average costs for materials and energy.The sweet spot or characteristic energy use intensity (EUI) is then defined as the optimum design between demand and supply, or more specifically, between conservation and generation. In California, PV beats passive houseBut this project was another example of an overarching conclusion: the original German standard and tool were inadequate when applied in climates other than the cool, moderate, heating-dominated baseline climate. Results did not support the one-size-fits-all standard concept.In cold climates, unreasonably high investment costs led people to abandon the concept, and uptake in northern cold climates remains to this day insignificant. In warmer climates like coastal California, a European passive house is easily beaten by a house with a photovoltaic system, because the standard does not go far enough and does not harvest enough through conservation to make it a financial slam dunk.Standards are tools that help us to quantify, measure against and meet certain goals we have agreed upon. It’s only logical that they need to be updated and refined as economics, materials and other conditions change and as we learn more. It is an evolutionary process.Standards should evolve, informed by feedback loops, or they become a hindrance, not a help. We can’t blindly trust: we need to verify and validate to assure that our models remain applicable. Lower PV prices have changed the conversationIn a sustainable world we must look at zero energy as our goal. We are no longer only trying to justify the cost-effectiveness of a certain level of stand-alone conservation, we are trying to justify the optimal combination of both, conservation and generation, to reach zero energy.The energy supply would be expected to come from renewable sources; for buildings this would most likely come from photovoltaic (PV) systems. The cost for these systems has come down dramatically over the past few years. This changes the conversation significantly. Figuring that zero is our goal, the cost of PV has a significant impact on where the optimum lies. Now zero has indeed realistically become our new target; positive energy is next. That alone is reason to redo the calculations and refine the standards.In 2013 we pitched the idea of refining the standard depending on climate and cost to Building Science Corporation in Westford, Massachusetts. They liked the idea and submitted a research proposal with PHIUS as an industry partner under their DOE Building America contract to define passive standards by climate zone according to U.S. cost data. The calculations are being done using the energy modeling tool WUFI Passive (developed by the Fraunhofer Institute for Building Physics, Owens Corning, and PHIUS) and the energy and cost optimizer BEopt (developed by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory). Solutions that weren’t cost-effectiveOverinsulation and overglazing both resulted in overspending beyond cost effectiveness, seriously challenging the claim that 15 kWh/m²•year is somewhat magically the cost optimum/sweet spot between demand and supply everywhere in the world. (See many earlier articles by Martin Holladay questioning the 16-inch-thick subslab insulation of early Passivhaus projects and the discussions that followed.)Conversely, in warmer and milder climates (a prime example being California), the target of 15 kWh/m²•year is actually too high, allowing projects to leave significant cost-effective energy savings on the table. In extreme hot and humid climates like Florida, we learned that energy targets for cooling were simply unattainable.It appeared that the European standard had simply mirrored the heating demand of 15 kWh/m²•year for cooling without verifying it in hot climates. In practice, insulation does not yield the dramatic return in energy savings in cooling-dominated climates as it does in heating climates; in fact too much insulation can increase the cooling load. European internal load assumptions don’t work for North AmericaIn reviewing base assumptions for the model, the tech committee also decided that the internal loads currently assumed in the European model are far from realistic. While the committee agreed that the defaults for internal loads should be stringent compared to the current national average use of miscellaneous electrical loads, they also acknowledged that the current European defaults are only one-seventh of the actual current internal load average in the United States. This leads to a significant mismatch of what is assumed and what happens in reality.Corrected higher initial internal loads in turn impact heating and cooling demand criteria on an annual basis, and have an impact on where those demand criteria need to be defined when setting standards.As of this writing, the standard adaptation test plan is almost complete and the parameters and the methodology for the study have been decided. As the project progresses, the dynamic modeling side of WUFI Passive will be used to verify hygrothermal wall assembly performance by climate and to assure that the comfort criteria by zone are maintained when annual heating or cooling demands are slightly increased or reduced.Preliminary results are looking very promising. PHIUS is already accepting projects under a pilot certification program.As the work has moved forward, questions have arisen as to how granular these new standards should be. The final format is still an open question. Originally, a zone-based standard model was envisioned, but it is also possible that the study will result in the development of an equation that accurately calculates the respective heating, cooling demand and peak loads by location.The new climate specific standards findings are scheduled to be presented for the first time during the Ninth Annual North American Passive House Conference in San Francisco, September 12-13, 2014. A one-hundred-year payback period is unrealisticThe effort is running calculations for all climates for a typical single-family home, with carefully chosen and defined design constraints and energy baseline features, first in BEopt. All baseline decisions were carefully conceived and evaluated by the PHIUS tech committee. In the process, it became clear that the European case for cost effectiveness of the 15 kWh/m²•year standard is based on a 100-year lifecycle period for a single-family end townhouse.The tech committee found this to be an unrealistic value for a North American economic feasibility assessment of conservation measures. One hundred years might be accurate in an ultimately sustainable energy economy, but we are not there yet. The measures need to be cost-effective in the old economy as we are transitioning to the new. Consequently, the tech committee opted to use 30 years instead of 100.The committee also settled on using a detached, average size single-family home — the predominant housing type in North America. The detached home is also arguably a worst-case scenario to use as a benchmark; any other building type, larger or attached, will perform better. Katrin Klingenberg is the co-founder and executive director of the Passive House Institute U.S. (PHIUS). She has spoken and published on passive building topics nationally and internationally, holds a masters degree in architecture, and is a licensed architect in Germany.last_img read more