POST-TRAINING REPORT
MSPO SIA BASIC TRAINING
Training Information
| Item | Details |
|---|---|
| Training Programme | MSPO SIA Basic Training |
| Training Date | 12–14 January 2026 |
| Training Type | Public Training |
| Training Mode | Physical, face-to-face |
| Venue | Majestic 9, Level 4, The Majestic Hotel Kuala Lumpur |
| Training Provider | OSHISIS Solution PLT |
| Trainer | Shahrizal Ridzuan Ambak |
| Number of Participants | 16 persons |
| Training Outline Reference | http://osh-isis.com/outline/tp101.pdf |
| MSPO Observer | Not applicable |
1. Training Overview
The MSPO SIA Basic Training was successfully conducted from 12 to 14 January 2026 at Majestic 9, Level 4, The Majestic Hotel Kuala Lumpur.
The three-day public training programme was designed to equip participants with the knowledge, practical skills, and basic competency required to understand, conduct, document, and review a Social Impact Assessment in accordance with the Malaysian Sustainable Palm Oil Certification Scheme.
The programme addressed the main elements of Social Impact Assessment, including:
- introduction, purpose, and scope of SIA;
- SIA principles and concepts;
- understanding social impacts;
- identification of internal and external stakeholders;
- stakeholder engagement and consultation;
- identification of positive and negative social impacts;
- evaluation of impact significance;
- preparation of mitigation measures;
- implementation, monitoring, and review;
- development of a Social Management Plan;
- preparation of an SIA report; and
- common challenges in conducting and maintaining an SIA.
The programme was attended by personnel representing oleochemical manufacturers, palm-based industries, sustainability functions, quality management, human resources, environmental management, and compliance-related roles.
Practical exercises were provided throughout the programme to enable participants to apply the assessment approach by following the trainer’s guidance. These activities helped participants move beyond theoretical understanding and practise identifying stakeholders, evaluating impacts, preparing mitigation measures, and developing suitable monitoring actions.
2. Participant Attendance
A total of 16 participants attended and completed the programme.
| No. | Participant Name |
| 1 | Nur Anis Rahila |
| 2 | Stephen Vadivel |
| 3 | Yin Mee Thang |
| 4 | Chin Lok Yee |
| 5 | Wong Sei Wei |
| 6 | Tan Yueh Lih |
| 7 | Vinesh A/L Unakrishnan |
| 8 | Kobinathan A/L Palaniandy |
| 9 | Romlianawati Bt Mohd Sharazlee |
| 10 | Normala Bt Ahmad |
| 11 | Nurulafzan Binti Abidin |
| 12 | Fadilah Binti Asy’ari |
| 13 | Yong Youk Mei |
| 14 | Haslinda Binti Pauzi |
| 15 | Yap Chai Wah |
| 16 | Nur Nadia Binti Jasmi |
The participant list was consistent with the official certificate and assessment records maintained by the training provider.
All participants completed the training and assessment requirements and were recommended for the awarding of the Certificate of Achievement.
3. Training Delivery Methodology
The training was delivered using a structured, interactive, and application-based methodology.
a) Interactive Presentation
The trainer delivered the programme using structured presentation materials covering the fundamental and practical requirements of MSPO Social Impact Assessment.
Technical requirements were explained using practical examples to help participants understand how the SIA process applies within actual palm oil supply-chain organisations.
b) Guided Practical Exercises
Participants were given guided exercises to apply the SIA methodology.
The exercises included:
- identifying relevant stakeholders;
- determining stakeholder needs and concerns;
- identifying positive and negative social impacts;
- evaluating the significance of identified impacts;
- proposing mitigation and enhancement measures;
- determining responsible persons;
- establishing monitoring indicators; and
- preparing elements of a Social Management Plan.
The trainer provided guidance during the exercises so that participants could apply the assessment method consistently.
c) Group Activities
Participants worked in groups to discuss assigned scenarios and prepare assessment outputs.
The group approach encouraged participants to exchange operational experience, discuss alternative interpretations, and jointly evaluate the significance of social impacts.
d) Case Study Discussion
Operational scenarios were used to demonstrate the relationship between organisational activities, stakeholders, social risks, and required management actions.
The case studies helped participants understand how impacts may differ depending on:
- the type of organisation;
- the location and surrounding community;
- workforce characteristics;
- contractor involvement;
- employment practices;
- environmental and social conditions; and
- stakeholder expectations.
e) Question-and-Answer Sessions
Participants were encouraged to raise questions throughout the programme.
The question-and-answer sessions enabled clarification of:
- stakeholder selection;
- consultation methods;
- assessment boundaries;
- impact significance;
- documentation requirements;
- preparation of mitigation plans; and
- review and updating of an existing SIA.
f) Knowledge and Competency Assessment
A formal individual assessment was conducted to evaluate participant understanding of the course content and intended learning outcomes.
4. Training Evaluation Summary
A total of 15 completed evaluation questionnaires were received from 16 participants, representing a response rate of 93.8%.
Evaluation Summary
| Evaluation Indicator | Result |
| Total Participants | 16 |
| Evaluation Responses | 15 |
| Response Rate | 93.8% |
| Participants satisfied with knowledge gained | 15 of 15 |
| Participants rating the training relevant to their work | 15 of 15 |
| Participants achieving the desired learning outcome | 15 of 15 |
| Participants confirming the training met expectations | 15 of 15 |
| Poor Ratings | 0 |
| Negative Feedback | None recorded |
The evaluation results reflected a very high level of participant satisfaction.
All 15 respondents provided positive ratings for:
- knowledge gained from the training;
- relevance of the programme to their work;
- achievement of desired learning outcomes;
- coverage of the course chapters;
- clarity of presentation;
- effectiveness of instructional materials;
- layout and sequence of presentations;
- room and seating arrangements; and
- food and refreshments.
For Chapter 5 on the SIA Report, 14 participants rated the subject coverage as Good and one participant rated it as Average. No participant rated any evaluation item as Poor.
The trainer’s overall teaching performance was rated on a scale of 8 to 10:
| Trainer Rating | Number of Responses |
| 8 out of 10 | 4 |
| 9 out of 10 | 5 |
| 10 out of 10 | 6 |
The average trainer rating was approximately 9.13 out of 10.
No negative or dissatisfactory feedback was recorded.
5. Participant Understanding Assessment
All 16 participants successfully completed and passed the assessment.
Assessment Summary
| Assessment Indicator | Result |
| Total Participants Assessed | 16 |
| Total Passed | 16 |
| Pass Rate | 100% |
| Highest Score | 99% |
| Lowest Score | 86% |
| Average Score | 92% |
| Certificate Recommendation | All participants recommended |
Individual Assessment Results
| No. | Participant Name | Result | Status |
| 1 | Nur Anis Rahila | 94% | Passed |
| 2 | Stephen Vadivel | 88% | Passed |
| 3 | Yin Mee Thang | 97% | Passed |
| 4 | Chin Lok Yee | 91% | Passed |
| 5 | Wong Sei Wei | 89% | Passed |
| 6 | Tan Yueh Lih | 95% | Passed |
| 7 | Vinesh A/L Unakrishnan | 87% | Passed |
| 8 | Kobinathan A/L Palaniandy | 93% | Passed |
| 9 | Romlianawati Bt Mohd Sharazlee | 98% | Passed |
| 10 | Normala Bt Ahmad | 90% | Passed |
| 11 | Nurulafzan Binti Abidin | 92% | Passed |
| 12 | Fadilah Binti Asy’ari | 86% | Passed |
| 13 | Yong Youk Mei | 94% | Passed |
| 14 | Haslinda Binti Pauzi | 88% | Passed |
| 15 | Yap Chai Wah | 99% | Passed |
| 16 | Nur Nadia Binti Jasmi | 91% | Passed |
The assessment results demonstrated that participants achieved a strong level of understanding across the main training areas.
Participants were able to demonstrate knowledge of:
- the purpose and application of SIA;
- stakeholder identification and engagement;
- social impact identification;
- significance evaluation;
- mitigation and enhancement measures;
- preparation of a Social Management Plan;
- monitoring and review requirements; and
- SIA reporting.
The average assessment score of 92% indicates that the intended learning outcomes were successfully achieved.
6. Trainer Observation
The trainer observed that participants were attentive, cooperative, and actively involved throughout the three-day programme.
Participants demonstrated particular interest in:
- stakeholder identification;
- preparation of stakeholder consultation questions;
- evaluation of social impact significance;
- preparation of mitigation actions;
- monitoring indicators;
- development of Social Management Plans; and
- preparation of SIA reports.
The participants came from varied professional backgrounds, including sustainability, quality, human resources, environmental management, technical management, and compliance functions. This diversity contributed positively to group discussions because participants were able to consider social impacts from different organisational perspectives.
The practical exercises were effective in helping participants apply the SIA methodology. Participants were generally able to:
- distinguish between stakeholders and interested parties;
- identify relevant social issues;
- link operational activities to potential social impacts;
- differentiate positive and negative impacts;
- evaluate significance using structured criteria;
- recommend practical mitigation measures; and
- determine appropriate monitoring responsibilities.
The trainer also observed that some participants required additional guidance when preparing the SIA report and converting assessment findings into a structured management plan. This was consistent with the single Average rating received for coverage of the SIA Report chapter.
Overall, the participants demonstrated satisfactory competency and a positive learning attitude.
7. Summary of Improvement Suggestions
The participant evaluation forms included the following comments and suggestions:
- “All very good.”
- Include more quizzes during the programme.
- Allocate more time for group activities and discussion, particularly for participants who are new to Social Impact Assessment.
- Continue sharing practical tools, Social Management Plan formats, and supporting templates.
The feedback did not indicate dissatisfaction with the programme. Instead, the suggestions focused on increasing opportunities for practice, discussion, and use of practical tools.
The following improvement opportunities were therefore identified:
- include additional short quizzes after major chapters;
- allocate a longer period for group discussion;
- provide more worked examples of completed SIA reports;
- provide templates for impact assessment and Social Management Plans;
- include a sample stakeholder consultation record;
- provide additional trainer guidance for first-time SIA practitioners; and
- allow participants to present and receive feedback on their group outputs.
8. Recommendations for Future Training
Based on participant feedback, trainer observations, and assessment results, the following recommendations are proposed.
Recommendation 1: Increase Practical Exercise Time
Future programmes should allocate additional time for practical activities, particularly stakeholder mapping, impact identification, significance evaluation, and preparation of Social Management Plans.
Recommendation 2: Include More Knowledge Checks
Short quizzes may be conducted at the end of each chapter to reinforce learning and allow the trainer to identify areas requiring further explanation.
Recommendation 3: Provide Practical SIA Templates
Participants should be provided with controlled sample templates for:
- stakeholder identification;
- stakeholder consultation;
- social impact assessment;
- significance evaluation;
- Social Management Plan;
- monitoring records; and
- SIA reporting.
Recommendation 4: Expand the SIA Report Workshop
Additional time should be provided for participants to practise converting assessment findings into a complete and properly structured SIA report.
Recommendation 5: Maintain Group-Based Learning
The group discussion approach should be continued because it encouraged experience sharing and helped participants understand different social perspectives.
Recommendation 6: Introduce Sector-Specific Case Studies
Future sessions should include case studies involving:
- plantations;
- mills;
- dealers;
- oleochemical operations;
- refineries;
- contractors;
- local communities; and
- vulnerable stakeholder groups.
Recommendation 7: Conduct a Follow-Up Workshop
A follow-up implementation workshop may be considered to assist participants in reviewing or preparing an actual SIA for their organisation.
9. Conclusion
The MSPO SIA Basic Training conducted from 12 to 14 January 2026 at Majestic 9, Level 4, The Majestic Hotel Kuala Lumpur was successfully completed with the participation of 16 persons.
The programme achieved its objective of improving participant knowledge and practical competency in Social Impact Assessment under the MSPO Certification Scheme.
The training methodology combined structured presentations, case studies, group discussions, guided exercises, question-and-answer sessions, and an individual assessment. The practical exercises enabled participants to apply the SIA methodology by following the guidance provided by the trainer.
All 16 participants passed the final assessment, with scores ranging from 86% to 99% and an overall average score of 92%. All participants are therefore recommended for the awarding of the Certificate of Achievement.
The evaluation results were highly positive. Fifteen participants submitted evaluation forms, representing a response rate of 93.8%. All respondents confirmed that the training was relevant, met their expectations, and achieved the desired learning outcomes.
No Poor rating, negative feedback, or dissatisfaction was recorded.
The principal improvement suggestions were to provide:
- more quizzes;
- additional time for group discussion;
- more guidance for new SIA practitioners; and
- further practical templates and toolkits.
Based on participant attendance, assessment results, evaluation feedback, and trainer observations, the programme is considered successfully delivered and effective in achieving its intended learning outcomes.
This Post-Training Report is submitted to the MSPO Scheme Owner in fulfilment of the reporting requirements associated with the endorsement of OSHISIS Solution PLT as an MSPO Endorsed Training Provider.
