The importance of evaluating training programmes
Evaluating training programmes is an important task that is too often overlooked. Evaluating training is highly important. In this article we explain why it shouldn't be seen as a waste of time, but rather as the backbone of your training strategy.
Evaluation is defined as "the making of a judgement about the value of something", it allows for measuring and assessing results, thus improving practices.
The purpose of training evaluation
We evaluate training for four reasons:
- To demonstrate the training's relevancy and value
- To improve the quality and organisation of training
- To check programme compliance with standards, norms and expectations
- To develop or test the new knowledge gained by participants
This evaluation can be divided into two categories- formal and informal practices:
- Formal evaluation practices are structured and explicit and aim to judge the effectiveness of the training process or product (for example, using a questionnaire to gauge satisfaction).
- Informal evaluation practices are either implicit or explicit and also aim to establish a judgement on the effectiveness of the training process or product. They are more spontaneous (for example, verbal judgments without technical support).
Why evaluate employee training programmes?
The results of your training will have an effect on the motivation of your future participants.
Evaluating the impact of training programmes is "the most convincing way to prove to senior management the value of training". It will allow the training units to optimise the management of training programmes and the decision-making processes that go with them.
Phillips and Kirkpatrick, two major authors on the subject of evaluating training programmes, put forward several reasons why it is worth doing.
The Phillips model: 10 reasons to evaluate the impact of your training programmes
10 reasons to evaluate the impact of your training:
1) To determine if objectives have been achieved
2) To Identify the strengths and weaknesses of the human resources development process
3) To compare the costs and benefits of the programme
4) To decide who should partake in future programmes
5) To test the relevancy and validity of the case studies or exercises
6) To identify which participants were the most successful in the programme
7) To remind participants about some of the most important content in the programme
8) To collect data for the marketing of future programmes
9) To determine whether the programme fulfilled the identified need
10) To create a database to support decision-making by managers
The Kirkpatrick model: 3 reasons to evaluate training
Kirkpatrick suggests 3 reasons for evaluating training programmes:
1) To justify the existence of a training department, by demonstrating how it contributes to reaching company objectives
2) To decide if such programmes should continue or be discontinued
3) To gather information on how to improve future programmes
Kraiger's (2002) model brings together these different explanations for evaluating training and then summarises a hypothesis from the following authors: Sackett and Mullin; Kirkpatrick; Twitchell; Holton and Trott.
It claims training evaluation serves 3 purposes:
1) Decision-making: providing information to determine the level of retention of learning or even how suitable the training staff are.
2) Feedback: allowing for adjustments to be made to training programmes or learning processes.
3) Marketing: allowing for the programme to be marketed, something that is normally done internally.
The limitations of evaluation
These evaluation practices have many shortcomings which have been identified by Kirkpatrick, Phillips, Grove, Ostroff, Lewis and Thornhill, Kraiger and Twitchell.
They can be spit into the following 5 categories:
1) The lack of vision: too few employees have or express a wish to receive additional training, and many have a "we already know everything there is to know" attitude.
2) Identifying development objectives: not knowing what we can and want to evaluate. We must understand the role of evaluating before actually going ahead with the assessment.
3) The absence of technical skills needed to evaluate: many don't have the necessary resources to carry out this evaluation.
4) Risk: the fear of the impact that evaluating training can have on training and programme management.
5) Cost: evaluating can be tedious and we cannot be sure from the outset that the results will justify the investment.
To conclude...
Despite the challenges surrounding training evaluation, it is just as important for management as it is for employees.
It allows HR and management teams to review and adjust the training strategy adequately.
It is down to employees to be aware of their goals from the start and results they have achieved at the end, to analyse any discrepancies and then pinpoint the reasons for continuing to progress.
Sugrue and Rivera stated that: "The best companies have implemented systems to measure and report on the impact of training programmes within the company".
