When investing in training, companies can sometimes assume that it will eat from their bottom line rather than add to it.
Internally this attitude can be reinforced by a reactive culture which engages in training “for compliance sake”. However, research has shown that a proactive culture encourages those involved in budgeting for training to prove a positive return on investment successfully.
In order to be able to show this, there is a requirement to measure the effectiveness of training. The Kirkpatrick Model is a 4 level evaluation of training which offers companies the ability to justify their investment in training. As well as that, it will identify improvements and changes required in training programmes which are likely to become apparent as business environments continue to rapidly grow and adapt.
Level 1: Reaction – How did the learner feel about the training?
When a training module has been completed this analysis can be done quite simply with ‘Smiley Sheets’, questionnaires and surveys. Verbal, informal reactions can also be recorded at this point. Questions such as “Did you find that your time was well spent completing this training?” can be asked at this point.
Level 2: Learning – Have they taken in the knowledge or skill?
To evaluate the knowledge intake, assess learners before and after the training is complete. Some skills may require assessment through observation while the level of understanding of others (softer skills) can be measured through interviews. Action based learning such as role plays and projects are also effective at this point.
Level 3: Behaviour – Has there been a change in related behaviour on-the-job?
At this point it is important to get buy-in from line managers. Their observation and interview skills will be required to fully evaluate the effectiveness of the training. Those observing will need to consider the relevance of the change in behaviour and its sustainability. Gathering information from a number of sources such as managers, peers and, if possible, customers, can give a good picture of the trainee’s behaviours. Again, it is important to record all of the information which is gathered so line managers should be equipped with evaluation sheets to help identify behaviour changes. Building this stage into HR appraisals can also be effective.
Level 4: Results – Has the training affected the performance of the business?
Over time, business performance reports in areas such as quality, risk and finance should be evaluated. Interviews can also be conducted with managers to review the effect of training on whole teams so as to conclude on the company-wide impact. Evaluate any effects on sales, costs, quality, frequency of accidents, profits, management styles and customer feedback. Kirkpatrick added a fifth level, Return on Investment, to his training evaluation model although is argued by many that this can be included in Level 4.
It should be noted that each evaluation level requires more resource spend than the previous so it may be decided to complete Level 1 and 2 on all training initiatives and to implement agreed spot check evaluation processes on Level 3. Although Level 4 can prove somewhat difficult to link back to the individual training session it can be assumed that evaluations of the business as a whole occur on a regular basis already. Therefore, shifts in business performance due to training initiatives should be evident over the timeline of the training programme.
When it comes to training, evaluation is often avoided when it comes to relating it back to the affect on the business as a whole. This may be because it can seem immeasurable. However, by using the Kirkpatrick model, trainers can justify their budgets with key decision makers and provide arguments for greater retention rates, more effective workplace behaviours and ultimately a positive impact on the bottom line.
Click on the ‘TAKE A TRIAL’ button if you would like to sample some online safety courses and assessments.
- Elearning takes less than one third the time of classroom training
When investing in training, companies can sometimes assume that it will eat from their bottom line rather than add to it. Internally this attitude can be reinforced by a reactive culture which engages in training “for compliance sake”. However, learning and development can have a big impact through behavioural changes, sometimes even resulting in an organisational culture shift.
Strong examples of this can be seen when there is a greater awareness of hazards and risks due to safety training. According to the 2007 EU Labour Force Survey over 35% of employees reported that work affects their health with 22% reporting a work related health problem which resulted in considerable limitations to normal activity.
Why not encourage those involved in budgeting for training to prove a positive return on investment? By evaluating training and proving its effectiveness trainers will also identify improvements to keep the company ahead of the game. The Kirkpatrick Evaluation Model is a good place to start.
Level 1: Reaction – How did the learner feel about the training? (Questionnaires, surveys and informal verbal reactions)
Level 2: Learning – Have they taken in the knowledge or skill? (Assess learners before and afterwards. Observation, interviews, role plays and projects.
Level 3: Behaviour – Has there been a change in related behaviour on-the-job? (Get buy-in from managers. Observation and information gathering from various sources, HR appraisals)
Level 4: Results – Has the training affected the performance of the business? (Evaluate impact on sales, costs, quality, frequency of accidents, profits, management styles and customer feedback)
Are your employees sitting safely? 
