Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.
You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs (or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.
Due to the ambiguity in the sentence, I decided to keep it like the original. The other suggestions could work in other contexts though. Thank you to all of you. 3 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer
Yes! Now THAT would make a whole lot more sense — and even justify the causal relationship: if you are good at putting together training and conveying the information to your trainees, it does kind of presuppose you are also good at finding out what is the key information that needs to be conveyed... People always said that was my (probably sole!) strong point as a teacher.
Otherwise, I really don't see the link between the two parts of the sentence. However, even if that were indeed a typo, I suspect this is an incorrect usage and that working out a causal (or other) relationship between them is going to be the key to finding the best translation.
I was thinking of just using the original term itself, as Diego suggests, but I agree it does sound it a bit unnatural, as Allegrotrans mentioned. This term seems more common in French usage than in English usage. Tony, I agree with you -- I don't see the causal relationship.