Training Proposal · Training Approval Request
Training Proposal & Internal Approval Document
What is a training proposal?
- An approval document that starts from the problem
- Comparing options makes the case
- Unmeasurable objectives and a single lump-sum total get proposals rejected
The moment you start writing a training proposal, your role changes. You are no longer someone who runs training; you are someone proposing how the company’s money should be spent. Approvers don’t read a document top to bottom. They look at the amount first, then look for “why now.” So if page 1 lacks the performance gap and the numbers behind it, the curriculum attached after it goes unread. The outcome is effectively decided on page 1.
A training proposal and an approval request are often mentioned together, but they are different things. The proposal is a persuasion document; the approval request authorizes the spending. Many companies secure a lump sum early in the year through the annual training plan, then file a separate approval request for each course before spending. The approval chain also changes by amount. Up to KRW 5 million (≈ US$3,740) is often decided by the team lead alone, anything over KRW 30 million (≈ US$22,400) goes up to the CFO or CEO, and from KRW 10 million (≈ US$7,480) many companies require two or three comparative quotes or a written justification for a sole-source contract. Approvers ask about the per-person cost far more often than the total.
The most common misconception is that a thick curriculum table gets you through. Even a proposal with a 16-week session schedule gets rejected by one question: “So what gets better?” If the objective is written as “raise leadership awareness,” the only thing left to report afterward is a satisfaction score, and that becomes the grounds for a cut in next year’s budget talks. Mishaps are more common when a proposal is approved but no separate spending approval is filed. The instructor contract isn’t ready two weeks before the session and the schedule slips, or the advance payment is late and a cancellation-penalty dispute follows. If you resubmit a rejected document with the objectives and rationale unchanged and only the amount cut by 20%, the same approvers will block it again for the same reason.
Eun-a ChoExpert in communication, stress management, career development, and Gen Z/Millennial training
John KimCEO of Nanum Consulting and author of B2B Marketing DesignThe format took hold as a working document where two things meet: the approval system that authorizes spending in advance, and the analysis and design phases of the ADDIE model, a systematic process for training design. Companies call it different things, such as training proposal, training approval request, or implementation plan.
Consider a hypothetical case: Company A, an auto-parts manufacturer with 620 employees. Of the 24 people promoted to team lead over the past two years, 5 stepped down within a year, and those teams’ turnover was double the company average. Mr. Kim, an HR development associate, designed a KRW 32 million (≈ US$23,900) program for new team leads and submitted the approval request, but it was rejected once.
- Approval stalled for three weeks after the first submission. The HR director sent the document back to Associate Kim, saying, 'I see why we need training, but I can’t see why it costs KRW 32 million (≈ US$23,900).'
- Associate Kim interviewed all 24 promoted employees and moved the culture survey result, that only 38% of teams held 1:1s, to the top of page 1.
- The objective changed too, from 'raise leadership awareness' to 'within 3 months of completion, one 1:1 per team member per month, with an 80% completion rate.'
- Once in-house instructors (KRW 9 million (≈ US$6,730)), external outsourcing (KRW 41 million (≈ US$30,700)), and a mix of in-house and external coaches (KRW 32 million (≈ US$23,900)) sat side by side in one table, the CFO chose on the spot: 'Let’s go with Option 3.'
- The budget was broken down with every unit price and quantity spelled out: instructor fees of KRW 1.8 million (≈ US$1,350) a day for 6 days, 1:1 coaching for 24 people × 3 sessions × KRW 250,000, (≈ US$185) and KRW 3.2 million (≈ US$2,390) for materials, venue, and operating costs.
- Five days after resubmission, the full KRW 32 million (≈ US$23,900) was approved. Three months later, the 1:1 completion rate rose from 38% to 81%, and quarterly turnover among teams led by new managers fell from 6.2% to 3.1%.