Training effectiveness- clause 6.2
•Download as PPT, PDF•
2 likes•2,452 views
The document discusses training evaluation and effectiveness from an ISO-9000 perspective. It outlines Kirkpatrick's four-level model of training evaluation, including reaction, learning, behavior, and results. However, the model has limitations as levels three and four are rarely completed due to difficulties in measurement. The document also discusses defining training needs, designing training, providing training, and evaluating training outcomes as key steps in an effective training process.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (17)
Similar to Training effectiveness- clause 6.2
Similar to Training effectiveness- clause 6.2 (20)
More from SAROJ BEHERA
More from SAROJ BEHERA (18)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Training effectiveness- clause 6.2
- 1. Training Effectiveness, design and delivery- an ISO-9000 perspective. By Saroj Ku. Behera
- 5. Factor How Factor Influences Type of Evaluation Design Change potential Can program be modified? Importance Does ineffective training affect customer service, product delivery, or relationships between employees? Scale How many trainees are involved? Purpose of training Is training conducted for learning, results, or both? Organization culture Is demonstrating results part of company norms and expectations? Time frame When do we need the information?
- 7. Donald Kirpatrick’s Model for Training Evaluation
- 9. DONALD KIRKPATRICK'S 4 LEVELS OF EVALUATING TRAINING Levels Description Comments Level 1 Reaction Trainee reaction to the course. Does the trainee like the course? Usually in the form of evaluation forms, sometimes called "smile sheets". Most primitive and widely-used method of evaluation. It is easy, quick, and inexpensive to administer. Negative indicators could mean difficultly learning in the course. Level 2 Learning Did trainees learn what was based on the course objectives? Learning can be measured by pre- and post tests, either through written test or through performance tests. Level 3 Behavior Trainee behavior changes on the job - are the learners applying what they learned? Difficult to do. Follow-up questionnaire or observations after training class has occurred. Telephone interviews can also be conducted. Level 4 Results Ties training to the company's bottom line. Generally applies to training that seeks to overcome a business problem caused by lack of knowledge or skill. Examples include reductions in costs, turnover, absenteeism and grievances. May be difficult to tie directly to training.
- 14. Training: for organizational needs
Editor's Notes
- Additional Speaker Notes: Bring the discussion close to home by asking the audience of trainers to think about the questions they have as a training course concludes. Share these important questions and ask if / how they find out the answers. While we may walk away with a “feeling” about how things went, it is important (for the reasons on the prior slides) to be able to validate these feelings. However, how do we go about validated these feelings and finding concrete answers? What answers can we draw from in the training community?
- Additional Speaker Notes: Kirkpatrick’s 4 Levels of Evaluation provides a possible framework to answer the key questions we face as a training session concludes. Developed in 1952 by Donald Kirkpatrick, it is widely cited and viewed by most as the first evaluation model for corporate training (Pershing & Gilmore, 2004)
- Additional Speaker Notes: Given that Kirkpatrick’s framework touches on important areas to assess, as well as its wide citation within the profession, it is easy to understand the broad appeal within the industry. However, as we will see in the next slide, this wide appeal has not translated to wide use . . .
- Additional Speaker Notes: While Kirkpatrick is widely known, all levels are not widely used in practice. As cited in Pershing and Gilmore (2004), an ASTD study found only Level 1 was regularly used. This reflects important potential problems in adopting Kirkpatrick’s Model, including: the noted perception problems (time consuming, difficulty in measurement, beyond the realm of most trainers), as well as the pitfall of reliance on Level 1 results that may or may not translate to similar Learning / Transfer and ROI results that should be evaluated in Levels 2, 3 and 4.
- Additional Speaker Notes: Brinkerhoff & Dressler also note 3 important problems with reliance on Kirkpatrick. Brinkerhoff & Dressler stress that training must be considered as part of the greater Performance Environment that includes the “owners” (such as senior and line managers), as well as other non-training factors (such as management support, incentives or rewards) which may impede or enable training. Given these limitations, it is recommended an alternative to Kirkpatrick be considered at BIG.
- Additional Speaker Notes: As noted at the beginning of the presentation, it is necessary to incorporate an evaluation plan into the training programs at BIG. While Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Evaluation is a well known framework, it has important limitations. It is unlikely, the training staff at BIG will complete all of the necessary 4 levels to effectively evaluation the training program. Further, it lacks performance system focus. Brinkerhoff & Dressler propose a streamlined Success Case Evaluation Model that is recommended for use at BIG. As the training staff has not routinely performed evaluation as part of the underwriting training programs, it provides a relatively rapid evaluation and feedback process. It will also address the key business impact issues while contemplating the entire performance environment.