Evaluation of training

Introducing a new topic, concerning the evaluation of training we should make a reference to the Survey Report from CIPD (March 2005).

As explained, in order to conduct the particular survey and gather all the relevant information, 750 telephone interviews with people in employment (both public 7 private sector but not self-employed) were carried out across Great Britain, The sample was almost equally split between male and female respondents. Furthermore, the data were weighted to ensure more accuracy.

The 750 people who participated in this survey have all participated in a training activity at work in the twelve months before the survey. Some of the key findings of the survey follow:

1) 94% of the respondents believe the training they received had helped them do their job better. (So are we implying here a 94% successful transfer of training material in the job context? Is the perception of doing one’s job better synonymous to actually doing the job better? How do we evaluate the transfer?)

2) The most common forms of training received are training held in a meeting room/classroom and on-the-job training. But on-the-job training(OJT) is by far the most popular method, with a 54% of respondents rating it as their preferred method of learning. (What would be the reasons for this preference if we take under consideration the fact that probably on –the- job training is not conducted by professional trainers but by other colleagues and probably there is also a lot of “noise,” which does not facilitate training? Would the fact that training takes place in the actual work setting play a role in this preference?)

3) There remains inequality in learning provision. Those with higher levels of qualifications are more likely to receive training, as are those in younger age groups. (What are the reasons for this inequality? Who actually needs the most training, young or older employees? Is it a matter of age? Potential? Job design/duties? Would the appropriate approach/decision be based not on already obtained qualifications but on potential to evolve?)

In the question: How successful was the training? (Key finding 1) 50 % think the training received has been very successful, while a further 44% judge it to have been quite successful. Undoubtedly these striking results confirm the importance of training in the workplace and the value that employees place on training and development opportunities. However, we of course cannot help wondering, based upon which criteria their training was successful? Are employees in the position to evaluate the effectiveness of the training, or should this impression be combined with measurement of specific performance criteria, in order to gain validity? Probably one could argue that employees themselves are the most suitable people to evaluate a training programme, but on the other hand without having stated specific criteria, their opinion can be severely challenged.

This leads us to the second topic to discuss: Evaluation. 62% of respondents say that usefulness of the training has been discussed with them. Some respondents report difficulties in the practicalities of evaluation because the impact of training is often not directly measured. We should also state that, where discussions about the success of the training take place 51% take place with respondents’ line managers, 35% hold discussions with someone from the H/R department and 17 % with an external provider. Undoubtedly, when employees discuss their thoughts concerning the evaluation of the training programme with someone from the other interested parties, managers, H/R dpt or the external provider, they can reach more fruitful conclusions. Otherwise any kind of evaluation in my point of view would be rather subjective, and would score low in validity.

Some initial thoughts…