TRAINING & EDUCATION


performance, productivity or even profitability


It’s essential to define L&D needs and objectives and once you have done so there is a range of measures including:


• Post-training questionnaires where learners rate the training


• Interviews or testimonies of learners


• Observation of the training • Assessing behaviour change • Metrics such as 360 feedback


• Performance reviews to measure new or enhanced competencies


• Impact on key performance indicators (KPIs)


• Return on investment (ROI)


The first few of these can be relatively easy to arrange, yet still provide valuable feedback if designed well, but it takes more to measure ROI or the effect on KPI’s, and potentially even business success.


For example a well designed post- training questionnaire can cost- effectively produce useful evaluation - if the learner clearly understands their agreed learning needs and objectives - and is then able to articulate whether those needs have been met or not.


But to illustrate dangers here - if a course is charismatically presented, and was interesting and enjoyable in its own right, it may achieve very high satisfaction ratings without necessarily meeting the learning needs or outcomes hoped for.


Hence the derogatory term of ‘happy sheets’ is sometimes used for such feedback, but that is more to do with poorly designed and unfocused questionnaires than their use.


Effective questionnaires are carefully designed with focus on content and whether clearly defined learning outcomes have been achieved or not. Such information is therefore not simply a ‘satisfaction’ rating, but can provide valuable feedback, and can form the starting point for more reflective evaluation


www.tomorrowsfm.com


such as a review with a line manager, HR, or peers at work.


Therefore whatever method or depth of evaluation planned, it is essential for learning needs to be defined, and those learning outcomes must be the focus whatever training intervention is planned, and after delivery the results must be measured objectively afterwards.


IN-DEPTH EVALUATION


OPTIONS TO CONSIDER The Kirkpatrick model is one of the oldest methods but still a well- respected option, and suggests four ‘levels’ of training evaluation:


• Reactions – liking or feelings for a programme


• Learning – principles & facts absorbed


• Behaviour - using learning on the job


• Results - increased production, reduced costs


In practice reactions are often the main source of evaluation, because of the effort and time involved in measuring the other levels, but if devised and analysed properly even the first level can be useful. Post-training interviews with learners, usually by their line manager or HR / training manager is a more objective way of challenging and reviewing the learning absorbed. Further to that behaviour change can be measured over time, possibly involving 360 feedback, performance appraisals, or reviews that measure the new or enhanced competencies. Ultimately the most in-depth evaluation can be designed to measure impact on key performance indicators and other business related metrics.


Return on investment (ROI) This is similar to the last of the Kirkpatrick levels, looking at the financial benefits as compared to the cost of learning. It seeks to analyse the L&D contribution to boosting output or performance, and so a lot of care has to be taken to devise appropriate measures, and this can be time- consuming if done thoroughly.


Easterby-Smith and others suggest another model, with some contrasting aspects to consider:


• Proving – did the training work, and have measurable impact?


• Controlling – the time taken, costs, and consistency or compliance measurements


• Improving – reviewing the training content, methods and trainers


• Reinforcing – using evaluation and reflection as a part of the learning process itself


This approach is particularly relevant to an ongoing training programme where the evaluation feeds into continuous improvement.


Chartered Institute of Personnel & Development (CIPD) ‘RAM’ model finally, whilst aimed at HR professionals it is another perspective to consider when planning and deciding any L& D intervention. It combines many aspects of the models described here, and it stands for:


• Relevance: how training will meet business opportunities and challenges


• Alignment: ensuring through stakeholders that L&D is aligned to key factors such as organisational strategy, reward, marketing or financial strategies


• Measurement: consider a mixture of methods such as ROI and measures of expected change and improvement such as ‘return on expectation’ and KPIs.


In conclusion, a firm focus on learning outputs will result in more effective L&D and better value for money, and there are simple as well as sophisticated approaches to evaluate learning outcomes and the extent to which learning provision is aligned with business objectives.


www.bifm-training.com TOMORROW’S FM | 47


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66