Companies today can choose from an enormous range of training solutions. Organizations use them to solve business challenges, develop employees and improve performance. The real question is how to identify training programs that deliver meaningful results, address specific organizational needs and fit the way employees actually learn.

Organizations invest considerable resources in learning and development every year. However, training does not automatically generate a positive return on investment.

One of the most common challenges is that employees complete a course, return to their everyday working environment and gradually fall back into familiar habits, processes and ways of thinking.

This means that effective employee training cannot simply be measured by attendance or course completion. The real question is whether employees apply what they have learned and whether that change contributes to stronger individual and organizational performance.

Training expectations are changing

A Hungarian study conducted by Cegos in 2015 highlighted several important trends in corporate learning.

Companies were operating with increasingly limited training time and smaller per-employee development budgets. At the same time, new technologies were making learning content more widely available and considerably less expensive to distribute.

The profile of participants was also becoming more diverse in terms of age, professional background, experience and geographical location.

As a result, employees increasingly expected learning opportunities that were:

• relevant to their individual responsibilities;
• directly applicable in everyday work;
• available when needed;
• accessible from different locations;
• adapted to their preferred learning pace.

Employers, meanwhile, were placing greater emphasis on measuring whether their investment in training actually produced results.

The shift from classroom training to blended learning

The research indicated a gradual decline in the dominance of traditional face-to-face and classroom-based training.

Online learning was becoming increasingly important, although it was not replacing personal interaction completely.

Some capabilities can be developed effectively through digital learning, while others require discussion, practice, feedback or interaction with a trainer and other participants.

This is why blended learning — combining digital learning with face-to-face development — can offer an effective balance.

When participants meet in person, the time can be used increasingly for activities such as:

• workshops;
• coaching;
• practical exercises;
• case discussions;
• feedback sessions;
• collaborative problem-solving.

The theoretical elements of a program can then be delivered digitally before or between these sessions.

Learning should fit into everyday work

Another important development is the increasing connection between learning and employees’ daily responsibilities.

Rather than treating training as an isolated event, organizations can integrate development directly into ongoing projects and business activities.

This allows employees to learn a concept and apply it almost immediately.

It can also increase participant autonomy. Employees can progress through certain learning materials at their own pace while receiving targeted support when they need it.

For employers, this approach can make development more practical and reduce the time employees spend away from their core responsibilities.

What is an LMS?

An LMS, or Learning Management System, is a digital platform used to organize, deliver and manage learning programs.

Depending on the system, an LMS can help organizations:

• publish learning content;
• assign courses to employees;
• track participation and progress;
• manage learning paths;
• administer assessments;
• monitor course completion;
• centralize training materials.

Well-known learning management platforms include systems such as Moodle and other corporate LMS solutions.

An LMS can be particularly valuable for organizations with employees working across different locations because learning materials can be made available consistently to a large number of participants.

What is a MOOC?

MOOC stands for Massive Open Online Course.

These are online courses designed to provide large numbers of learners with access to educational content through the internet.

Platforms such as edX and Coursera helped popularize this model by making courses from universities and other educational institutions available to participants around the world.

MOOCs can provide employees with access to a wide range of professional knowledge without requiring companies to create every learning resource internally.

What is a COOC?

COOC stands for Corporate Online Open Course.

The concept is similar to a MOOC, but the learning environment is designed specifically for corporate development.

Organizations can use this approach to provide employees with structured digital learning around areas such as professional skills, leadership, internal processes or organizational knowledge.

What is a SPOC?

SPOC stands for Small Private Online Course.

Unlike large-scale open courses, SPOCs are designed for smaller, selected groups.

This makes them particularly suitable when learning needs to be adapted to a specific team, function or group of professionals.

The smaller format can also make it easier to include interaction, feedback and more personalized learning activities.

Try digital learning before introducing it

Although online courses have been widely available for years, some managers and employees may still be unfamiliar with digital learning or skeptical about its effectiveness.

Leaders responsible for learning and development can benefit from experiencing these formats personally before introducing them across the organization.

Completing an online course can provide useful insight into questions such as:

• Is the platform easy to use?
• Is the content engaging?
• Can employees realistically fit the learning into their working day?
• Does the format encourage practical application?
• What kind of support will participants need?

This makes it easier to evaluate training solutions from the employee’s perspective rather than purely from an administrative or cost perspective.

Training should be part of a development process

One of the most important principles of effective employee training is that a training course should not be treated as the complete development process.

It is only one element.

Before selecting a training program, employers should understand what they are actually trying to change.

This requires looking at factors such as:

• organizational strategy;
• company culture;
• leadership behavior;
• existing skills and capabilities;
• business challenges;
• employee development needs.

If the underlying organizational environment does not support the behavior introduced during training, employees are likely to return to their previous habits.

Start with a proper needs assessment

A successful training program should begin before the first workshop or online module.

Organizations need to understand the gap between current performance and the desired outcome.

This may involve:

• employee interviews;
• manager feedback;
• competency assessments;
• organizational diagnostics;
• performance data;
• employee surveys;
• business objectives.

Without this diagnostic stage, companies risk purchasing training that may be professionally sound but irrelevant to the problem they are actually trying to solve.

Follow-up determines whether learning becomes behavior

The period after a training program is just as important as the training itself.

Employees need opportunities to practice what they have learned, discuss difficulties and receive feedback.

Follow-up activities can include:

• coaching sessions;
• manager check-ins;
• peer learning groups;
• refresher modules;
• practical assignments;
• post-training workshops;
• progress measurement.

These activities help transfer knowledge from the training environment into everyday behavior.

Managers play a critical role

Even an excellent training program can have limited impact if managers do not reinforce the behaviors employees are expected to adopt.

For example, a company may train employees in collaborative problem-solving while managers continue to make every decision independently. Or an organization may introduce communication training while its leadership culture discourages employees from speaking openly.

Training therefore needs to be aligned with management behavior and the broader organizational environment.

Managers can strengthen learning by discussing development objectives with employees before training, encouraging experimentation afterwards and providing feedback as new skills are applied.

Measure results, not just participation

Training effectiveness should not be evaluated only by how many employees completed a program or how satisfied participants were immediately afterwards.

Organizations should also ask whether the development activity changed something meaningful.

Depending on the objective, this could include improvements in:

• employee performance;
• leadership effectiveness;
• sales results;
• customer satisfaction;
• productivity;
• employee engagement;
• retention;
• quality or error rates.

The appropriate measure depends on the purpose of the training.

Effective training should be tailored to the organization

There is no single training format that works equally well for every organization and every employee.

The most effective development programs combine appropriate learning methods with the realities of the business.

By working closely with training professionals, organizations can create programs that reflect their strategy, culture, employee needs and everyday challenges.

The objective should not simply be to deliver training. It should be to create sustainable changes in knowledge, behavior and performance.

When development is based on accurate diagnosis, relevant content, practical application and structured follow-up, effective employee training can become a genuine investment in both employee capability and organizational performance.

Source: HR Portal

In April 2017, a government bill was submitted to the Hungarian Parliament proposing significant amendments to the Labour Code provisions governing working time and rest periods. Following an earlier overview of the proposed changes affecting working-time reference periods, this article looks at further elements of the legislative package.

The proposed amendments focused primarily on giving employers greater flexibility in organising working schedules while also modifying certain rules concerning the allocation and recording of annual leave.

Working-time schedules could become easier to modify

Under the rules described in the source, employers were responsible for organising working time while taking into account the requirements of safe and healthy working conditions and the nature of the work.

Working-time schedules generally had to be communicated to employees in writing in advance and cover at least a specified period.

If no new schedule was communicated, the previously applicable schedule remained in force.

Employers were also permitted to modify an already communicated schedule where unforeseen circumstances affected the organisation’s operations or business activity, provided that the change was announced sufficiently in advance.

The proposed legislation aimed to clarify these deadlines by expressing them in hours rather than days.

According to the proposal, employers would need to communicate the schedule for at least one week no later than 168 hours before the beginning of the relevant scheduled working day.

Changes requested or accepted by the employee

The proposed rules would also allow employers to modify an already communicated working schedule at the employee’s request or with the employee’s consent.

In such cases, the additional compensation normally associated with extraordinary working arrangements would not necessarily apply.

This created an important practical issue: whether the employee’s consent was genuinely voluntary.

From an employment-law perspective, this distinction matters because an employee agreeing freely to a change is very different from an employee feeling pressured to accept a revised schedule.

Why working-time flexibility matters

Greater flexibility can benefit both employers and employees.

Employers may need to react quickly to changes in:

• customer demand;
• production requirements;
• project deadlines;
• staff availability;
• unexpected operational circumstances.

Employees may also occasionally prefer to modify their schedules for personal reasons.

However, flexibility works best when expectations are clearly documented and employees retain sufficient predictability over their working time.

Changes to the recording and allocation of annual leave

The legislative proposal also addressed the rules governing annual leave, particularly where employees work under uneven working-time arrangements.

Under the framework described in the source, employers had two main options for allocating and recording leave.

The first method treated most days of the week as working days for the purpose of annual leave, excluding scheduled weekly rest days and certain public holidays.

Under this system, leave was recorded in days.

However, this approach created practical difficulties in situations where an employee was actually scheduled to work on a public holiday.

Public holidays under uneven working-time schedules

The proposed amendment aimed to resolve this problem.

Under the revised approach described in the proposal, all days of the week could generally be considered working days for leave purposes except scheduled weekly rest days and public holidays on which the employee had not been scheduled to work.

If the employee was scheduled to work on a public holiday, that day could therefore potentially be taken into account when allocating leave.

This was intended to make the rules better aligned with the reality of employees working under non-standard schedules.

Recording annual leave in hours

The second method allowed employers to account for leave according to the employee’s actual scheduled working hours.

In this arrangement, the employee is released from their obligation to be available and perform work for the same period that they would otherwise have been scheduled to work.

The leave is then recorded using the corresponding number of hours.

This approach can be particularly useful where working days vary significantly in length.

For example, an employee working longer shifts on certain days may use a different number of leave hours than an employee working a standard eight-hour schedule.

Why accurate leave records matter

Accurate leave administration is important for both employers and employees.

For employers, errors in leave allocation can create payroll, compliance and workforce-planning problems.

For employees, transparent records make it easier to understand:

• how much annual leave remains available;
• how leave has been deducted;
• how irregular working hours affect leave balances;
• whether public holidays influence the calculation.

Clear systems therefore reduce the risk of misunderstandings and disputes.

What does this mean for HR and workforce planning?

Changes to working time and leave rules can have a significant operational impact, particularly in organisations using shift work, uneven schedules or working-time reference periods.

HR teams and managers need to ensure that scheduling practices, payroll systems and leave records remain aligned with the applicable legal framework.

They also need to communicate changes clearly to employees, especially where greater flexibility affects when people work or how their annual leave is calculated.

From a broader workforce-management perspective, flexibility can make organisations more responsive, but it should not come at the expense of predictability, transparency or fair treatment.

This article summarises legislative proposals and rules discussed in a 2017 source and should not be treated as a description of current Hungarian employment law or as legal advice. Current requirements should always be checked against the legislation in force.

Source: HR Portal

Under Hungarian labour law, the employer generally has the right to determine an employee’s working-time schedule. However, under certain conditions, the employer may transfer some or all of this responsibility to the employee. This is what is commonly referred to as a flexible or unrestricted work schedule.

But does this really mean that employees can work whenever they want?

The answer depends on the nature of the role, the level of independence given to the employee and how the employer structures the arrangement.

What types of working-time schedules exist?

One of the most common arrangements is the standard working schedule.

Under a traditional schedule, employees typically work according to working hours determined by the employer, with clearly defined working days and rest periods.

A more flexible alternative is an uneven working-time arrangement, where working hours and rest days can be distributed differently over a defined period.

This can give employers greater flexibility in industries where workloads vary significantly from day to day or week to week.

The important point is that under these conventional arrangements, the employer still determines when the employee works.

A genuinely flexible arrangement differs because the employer transfers some or all of the right to organise working time to the employee.

When can flexible working hours be used?

Not every job is suitable for flexible working hours.

The role must allow the employee to organise their work independently.

For example, flexible scheduling is generally difficult to apply in positions where employees need to be physically present at a specific location at a specific time.

This may include:

• production-line employees;
• retail employees working fixed opening hours;
• roles requiring continuous physical coverage;
• positions closely linked to fixed customer-service hours.

By contrast, flexible schedules may be more suitable for roles such as:

• sales representatives;
• consultants;
• IT professionals;
• certain project-based positions;
• roles where employees largely determine how and when tasks are completed.

Senior executives may also work under more flexible scheduling arrangements because of the autonomous nature of their responsibilities.

Does a flexible schedule need to be agreed in writing?

According to the framework described in the original source, a flexible work schedule needs to be introduced in writing.

The employer may grant the employee the right to organise their working time and, depending on the applicable arrangement, may also withdraw this flexibility later.

The precise legal requirements depend on how the employment relationship and working schedule are structured.

From a practical perspective, written documentation is important because both parties should understand:

• which parts of the working day the employee can organise independently;
• whether any fixed working periods remain;
• whether workplace attendance is required;
• what availability is expected;
• how performance will be measured.

Fully flexible vs partially flexible working hours

A flexible work schedule does not necessarily mean complete freedom.

An employer may transfer all responsibility for working-time organisation to the employee, or only part of it.

A partially flexible arrangement is common in practice.

For example, the employer may require the employee to:

• be present in the office on certain days;
• attend scheduled meetings;
• remain available during specific core hours;
• work during certain customer-facing periods.

Outside these fixed periods, the employee may decide independently when to complete their work.

For example, an employee might work early in the morning, take a longer break during the day and continue working later in the afternoon, provided that the arrangement allows this and all responsibilities are fulfilled.

What are the benefits for employers?

Flexible scheduling can reduce administrative complexity for employers in suitable positions.

Instead of managing every hour of an employee’s working day, managers can focus more strongly on objectives, deadlines and results.

This can be particularly effective in knowledge-based professions where productivity is difficult to measure purely by time spent at a desk.

Potential benefits include:

• greater employee autonomy;
• reduced scheduling administration;
• more efficient organisation of project-based work;
• greater flexibility in international teams;
• stronger focus on outcomes rather than presence.

However, flexible working arrangements should not be used simply as a way to avoid obligations associated with working time or overtime.

Flexible working does not mean unlimited working

One important risk is assuming that because employees organise their own schedules, there are no limits on how much work can reasonably be expected from them.

If the workload assigned by the employer consistently cannot be completed within normal working hours, the arrangement may raise questions about whether the employee is effectively performing additional work.

In other words, flexibility should not become a substitute for realistic workforce planning.

Employers should still ensure that workloads, deadlines and expectations are reasonable.

What are the benefits for employees?

The greatest advantage of flexible working hours is autonomy.

Depending on the arrangement, employees can organise part or all of their working day around their own productivity, responsibilities and personal circumstances.

This can make it easier to balance:

• work and family responsibilities;
• commuting;
• personal appointments;
• individual productivity patterns;
• professional and private commitments.

For many employees, the ability to decide when certain tasks are completed can improve both efficiency and work-life balance.

Flexibility requires trust and accountability

A successful flexible working arrangement depends heavily on mutual trust.

Managers need to trust employees to organise their work responsibly, while employees need to remain accountable for results, deadlines and availability.

This means that flexible working is often most successful when expectations are clearly defined.

Employees should understand:

• what results they are responsible for;
• which deadlines must be met;
• when colleagues need to be able to reach them;
• which meetings or activities are mandatory;
• how performance will be evaluated.

Without this clarity, flexibility can quickly become a source of confusion rather than a benefit.

Flexible working can also strengthen recruitment

From a recruitment perspective, flexibility has become an increasingly important element of the employee value proposition.

For many professionals — particularly in IT, consulting, sales and other knowledge-based roles — the ability to organise working time independently can significantly influence how attractive an employer appears.

Flexible arrangements can therefore support:

• candidate attraction;
• employee retention;
• work-life balance;
• autonomy and engagement;
• access to broader talent pools.

However, employers should communicate clearly what “flexible” actually means.

A candidate may interpret flexible working hours as complete freedom, while the employer may mean only a slightly adjustable start and finish time.

Clear expectations during the recruitment process can prevent misunderstandings later.

So, can employees really work whenever they want?

Not necessarily.

A flexible work schedule means that the employee receives greater responsibility for organising their own working time, but the degree of flexibility depends on the specific arrangement.

Some employees may have almost complete control over their schedule, while others may need to respect fixed core hours, meetings or workplace attendance requirements.

The most successful arrangements combine autonomy with clearly defined responsibilities.

For employers, this means focusing less on exactly when work happens and more on whether the employee delivers the expected results. For employees, it means using flexibility responsibly while remaining available and accountable.

This article provides a general overview based on the cited source and should not be considered legal advice. Working-time and employment regulations may change, and individual arrangements should be assessed according to the legislation in force and the circumstances of the specific employment relationship.

Source: HR Portal

Both employers and employees frequently face the question of whether a fixed-term or permanent employment relationship is more appropriate. Each arrangement has its own advantages, limitations and legal implications, particularly when it comes to termination.

The choice between fixed-term vs permanent employment should therefore be based not only on the expected duration of the role, but also on the level of flexibility required by both parties.

Permanent employment: greater flexibility, but termination requires care

Most employment relationships are concluded for an indefinite period.

A permanent employment relationship does not have a predetermined end date. Instead, it generally continues until one of the parties terminates it, the parties mutually agree to end it, or another legally recognised reason brings the employment relationship to an end.

One common method is termination by notice.

A notice of termination is a unilateral written declaration that ends the employment relationship once the applicable notice period expires. Because it is unilateral, the other party does not need to agree to the termination.

However, once a notice has been validly communicated, withdrawing it may require the consent of the other party.

When must an employer provide a reason for termination?

Under the principles described in the original source, an employer terminating a permanent employment relationship generally needs to provide a reason for the decision.

The justification may typically relate to:

• the employee’s conduct;
• the employee’s capabilities or performance;
• the operation of the employer.

The reason should be clear, genuine and logically connected to the termination.

In practical terms, the employee should be able to understand from the notice why the employer no longer requires their work.

A vague or generic explanation may therefore be insufficient.

The original source also notes that different rules may apply in certain special cases, such as where an employee qualifies as a pensioner.

Notice periods for permanent employees

Where an employer terminates the employment relationship by notice, the employee may be released from performing work during part of the notice period in accordance with the applicable rules.

If the employee resigns, however, they generally remain responsible for working during the full notice period unless the employer agrees to release them from this obligation.

Employers also need to consider any statutory restrictions or protections that may limit their ability to terminate employment in particular circumstances.

These protections typically restrict the employer rather than the employee, meaning employees generally retain greater freedom to resign.

Termination with immediate effect

In exceptional circumstances, an employment relationship may be terminated with immediate effect.

This can arise where one party deliberately or through serious negligence significantly breaches an essential obligation arising from the employment relationship, or behaves in a way that makes continuation of the relationship impossible.

Because immediate termination has serious consequences, the reason for the decision and the applicable deadline for exercising the right are particularly important.

The original source highlights a short statutory period within which such termination must be exercised once the relevant circumstances become known.

Fixed-term employment ends automatically

The defining feature of fixed-term employment is that the parties agree in advance when the employment relationship will end.

Once the agreed period expires, the relationship generally terminates automatically without either party needing to issue a standard notice of termination.

Because the end date is known in advance, the employer may not be required to provide a separate reminder that the employment relationship is approaching its agreed conclusion.

The expiry of a fixed-term contract also differs from ordinary termination in several respects. Depending on the applicable law and circumstances, the standard rules concerning notice periods, termination protection and severance may not apply in the same way.

Leaving a fixed-term position early can be more difficult for employees

One of the most important differences between fixed-term and permanent employment concerns the employee’s ability to leave before the agreed end date.

According to the legal principles described in the source, an employee who wishes to terminate a fixed-term contract early may need to justify the decision.

The reason must generally be sufficiently serious to make continuation of the employment relationship impossible or cause disproportionate hardship in light of the employee’s circumstances.

A more attractive job offer elsewhere, by itself, may not necessarily satisfy this requirement.

This can make fixed-term employment less flexible from the employee’s perspective than a permanent contract.

When can an employer terminate a fixed-term contract?

An employer may also have more limited grounds for ending a fixed-term employment relationship through ordinary notice.

The source identifies examples such as:

• certain insolvency or liquidation situations;
• reasons connected with the employee’s capabilities;
• an unavoidable external event that makes continuation of the employment relationship impossible.

The employer must normally identify the legal basis for the termination rather than simply ending the contract without explanation.

Early termination with compensation

The original overview also explains that, in certain circumstances, an employer may terminate a fixed-term employment relationship with immediate effect by compensating the employee for part of the remaining contractual period, subject to statutory limits.

This provides employers with a degree of flexibility, but it can also create a significant financial obligation.

For this reason, employers should consider carefully how long a fixed-term contract needs to be when the employment relationship is first established.

When does a fixed-term contract make sense?

Fixed-term employment can be appropriate where the role genuinely has a defined duration.

Examples may include:

• temporary projects;
• replacement of an employee who is temporarily absent;
• seasonal requirements;
• time-limited assignments;
• positions linked to a specific project or funding period.

The advantage for the employer is greater predictability about when the employment relationship will end.

For employees, however, the arrangement offers less long-term certainty and may also provide less flexibility if they want to leave before the agreed end date.

When is permanent employment more suitable?

A permanent contract is generally more appropriate where the employer expects the position to remain necessary for the foreseeable future.

It can provide employees with greater long-term security while allowing both parties to terminate the relationship through the normal notice process.

From a recruitment perspective, permanent employment may also be more attractive to candidates who value stability and long-term career development.

However, employers should recognise that ending a permanent employment relationship requires proper procedures and, in many cases, a clearly justified reason.

Choosing the right employment structure

The decision between fixed-term vs permanent employment should reflect the genuine nature of the position rather than simply which arrangement appears easier for one party.

Employers should consider:

• how long the role is expected to exist;
• whether the workload is temporary or ongoing;
• how much flexibility the organisation requires;
• the candidate’s expectations;
• the potential consequences of early termination.

For candidates, understanding the contract type is equally important. A fixed-term agreement may provide an attractive opportunity, but the rules for leaving early can be more restrictive than under a permanent contract.

Clear expectations at the beginning of the employment relationship can help both parties avoid unnecessary disputes later.

This article provides a general overview based on the cited source and should not be considered legal advice. Employment legislation may change over time, and individual cases should be assessed according to the law applicable at the relevant time and their specific circumstances.

Source: HR Portal