AFEST: turning everyday work into a genuine training path

What French law recognises: learning by working

For a long time, only what happened in a classroom counted as training. The 2018 French law on the freedom to choose one's professional future changed that by recognising the training action in a work situation, abbreviated to AFEST. Training can now take place partly or entirely at the workstation, provided it is organised, supervised and assessed.

The key point is this: working is not automatically training. An employee who has repeated the same movements for ten years is not following an AFEST. The approach requires a teaching intention, objectives, support, time for analysis and a written record. Without these elements, the company cannot present it as a training action.

Who this approach is for

The AFEST concerns employees already in post: someone moving to a new machine, an operator progressing to a technician role, an adviser who has to master a new tool, a reception agent taking on a new group of users. It suits trades where the gesture, the posture or the decision in context counts for more than theory.

It is also open to companies of any size, including small ones with no training department. For a reader looking for an internship or a work-study place, it is not an entry route: it is neither a contract nor an integration scheme. You meet it once you are in a job, or as a teaching component of a wider course.

The steps of a well-built AFEST

The regulations describe elements that must all be present:

1. analysis of the activity: identifying the real tasks, the difficulties and the skills involved;
2. setting the objectives: what the employee will be able to do at the end, in observable terms;
3. appointing a trainer: a person in charge of support, preferably separate from the direct line manager;
4. learning work situations, arranged to allow trial, error and progress;
5. reflective phases, in which you look back at what happened;
6. an assessment of what has been learned, with evidence kept on file.

Leaving out any of these steps weakens the whole, especially when the company is seeking funding.

The reflective phase: the moment that gets forgotten

Time for reflection is often sacrificed because it seems unproductive. Yet it makes the difference between an AFEST and mere guidance. The trainer and the learner meet after a work situation, in a quiet place, to go back over the choices made: why that method, what got in the way, what would be done differently.

This discussion can draw on an observation grid, a photo, a recording or simply notes. It often lasts under half an hour, but it fixes what has been learned. It separates the gesture that was learned from the gesture that was understood. An organisation that schedules these sessions in advance, in the timetable, shows that it takes the approach seriously.

Tutor, trainer, manager: roles to keep distinct

Three functions sit side by side and need to be made clear. The manager organises the work and the priorities. The tutor or reference colleague knows the trade well and shows the right gestures. The AFEST trainer, for their part, leads the teaching process: they prepare the situations, run the reflective phases and carry out the assessment. One person may combine two roles, but that requires freed-up time and suitable training.

In small companies, the manager sometimes plays every role. That is possible but risky: learners do not always dare tell their direct superior that they have not understood. Where possible, it is better to hand the reflective part to a third party, internal or external.

Assessing and keeping evidence

Assessment is not limited to a grade. Measured against the objectives, it checks what the learner can do alone, under what conditions and at what level of quality. It can take the form of observation at work, an interview, a piece of work produced or a grid of criteria.

It is advisable to keep a file: the analysis of the activity, the plan of situations, the reports of the reflective phases, the final assessment and the attendance sheets. This file serves to show that the training action took place, especially if a skills operator or a funder asks for supporting documents.

An illustration in a catering kitchen

Imagine a catering assistant moving from a cold-preparation post to a production cook role. The company chooses an AFEST lasting, for example, six weeks. The analysis of the activity identifies four skills: reading a recipe sheet, keeping to temperatures, managing quantities and organising the workstation.

Each week, the trainer sets a specific situation, observes, then spends thirty minutes discussing what worked well. At the end, an assessment in real conditions confirms what has been learned. The durations and content are hypothetical: each company adapts the approach to its trade.

Benefits and limits compared with classroom training

The AFEST has several advantages: closeness to reality, immediate transfer of what is learned, less lost production time and recognition of in-house know-how. It can also be combined with theory classes.

It has limits too: it needs preparation, people who are available and a company culture that accepts mistakes during learning. It suits less well when the risks are high (some certifications require regulated training) or when the post is too repetitive to offer varied situations. In these cases, classroom training often remains preferable or complementary.

Common mistakes to avoid

Several pitfalls recur in companies discovering the approach:

• calling plain on-the-job coaching an AFEST, with no objectives or assessment;
• skipping the reflective phases for lack of time;
• appointing a trainer without freeing up any hours for them;
• keeping no written record;
• not telling the employee that their work is becoming training time, with the rights that go with it.

Before launching an AFEST, it is useful to contact your skills operator (OPCO), which often provides guides, tools and sometimes support.