how to evaluate the effectiveness of training
The growth of innovation processes in the economy requires continuous training. The in-house training of employees has been the primary tool for training and updating knowledge of employees in organizations since the early 1970s. Training and development is core for every organization to remove employee deficiencies and increase output. Training influences performance by improving skills to fit specific job requirements and ensuring job satisfaction across the workforce. According to Mclvor, training influences organizational commitment, participant knowledge and organizational based self-esteem. The main question that faces every manager is how to evaluate the effectiveness of training.
Evaluation of training is any attempt to obtain information on the effects of the training programme and to assess the value of training in the light of that training. There are four levels for evaluating the effectiveness of training (Reio et al., 2017). They include; Reaction level, learning, behaviour and results. At the Reaction level, the training measures how the employee reacts to the training. The critical measures at this stage are attitude questionnaires that are passed out during and after the training sessions. The main focus of this is to assess the learner’s perspective of the course. However, this level does not indicate the training performance potential as it does not measure the new skills the employee has acquired.
Level two of the evaluation process is learning. It helps assess the extent to which employees change attitudes, improve knowledge and increase skills as a result of participating in the learning process. It addresses one major question: did the employee learn anything? This question can be answered through the pre-testing and post-testing of the employees to know what they had before and after training. In measuring learning that takes place, the focus point is the knowledge acquired, skills developed and attitudes that changed.
On the other hand, the third level aims at testing the employees’ capabilities on the job rather than in the classroom. It answers the question; do people use their newly-acquired learning on the job? Behaviour in this scenario can be likened to performance. Learning of a new skill in the classroom is not as important as applying the skill on the job. Therefore, the person who evaluates this level requires being very close to trainees during all the stages of training (Reio et al., 2017). It is thus an essential point as it provides insight into the transfer of learning from the classroom to the work environment and the barriers encountered in implementing the new techniques.
The final level of evaluation focuses on the results of the training process. The results could be assessed in terms of monetary, efficiency, morale and teamwork. Level one is the easiest to measure though it provides the least valuable data. The first three levels as put forth by Kirkpatrick’s evaluation-Reaction model, are largely soft measures. The fourth measure is the major point of focus for most organizations. The first three levels of evaluation give information for improving the learning package while the fourth level gives returns for investing in the learning process. According to Jack Philips, the value of information becomes greater as we go up these levels of information or training evaluation (Phillips, 2016).
In summary, training focuses on changing people, making them better and effective than before. Every organization sets objectives which determine the changes that are required to be made. Evaluating whether or not the training was effective and worthwhile is difficult, but through the models developed, it can be measured. Every organization can adopt the models designed or adopt its measures with the primary goal being reduced costs of training, increased efficiency per worker, reduced employee layoffs and increased client satisfaction.
References
Phillips, J. J., & Phillips, P. P. (2016). Handbook of training evaluation and measurement methods. Routledge.
Reio, T. G., Rocco, T. S., Smith, D. H., & Chang, E. (2017). A critique of Kirkpatrick’s evaluation model. New Horizons in Adult Education and Human Resource Development, 29(2), 35-53.