Should We Evaluate Training...or Learning?
By now every HR professional is familiar with the classic four-level training evaluation model put forth by Donald L. Kirkpatrick.
The model, now nearly 50 years old, was based on his 1954 Ph.D. dissertation, Evaluating a Human Relations Training Program for Supervisors. He subsequently wrote a series of four articles for ASTD, each of which outlines one of the four levels of evaluation. As he has said, “At the time, training professionals were struggling with the word ‘evaluation." There was no common language and no easy way to communicate what ‘evaluation’ meant and how to accomplish it.”
Like everything else, the quality of training is important. Isn’t it reasonable, then, that it be measured and the trainers held accountable?
For decades, the answer has been yes: we should make every effort to measure the effect of training on (1) participant reaction, (2) in-course learning, (3) on-the-job behavior and (4) business results. But who should be held accountable?
The traditional mindset about training has been that it’s an important event that takes place at some point in time and hopefully has the desired effect at all four levels of impact.
The problem is that training may be an event, but learning is not. For most of the challenging knowledge and skills that participants have to master and apply, learning - when it happens - is an extended process. (See Message to Decision-Makers: Why Training Doesn't Transfer). This is especially true of leadership, supervision, team interaction, communication, sales, service and other highly interpersonal skill areas. Improving these skills means overcoming lifelong habits. To permanently establish new behavior patterns in the workplace, it means altering the physical neural pathways in the brain. This takes time—in the best case, many months of repetition and reinforcement will be needed.
In addition, the trainers aren’t the only people responsible for this learning. The learners own a major responsibility for making a good faith effort to absorb classroom content and to persist in the much more difficult challenge of applying these concepts on the job.
Senior management owns responsibility for investing in high-quality training, promoting its importance throughout the organization, preparing managers for their role in the learning process, removing any and all barriers to applying these skills in the workplace, and rewarding the right behaviors.
And what about the role of managers? Typically, it has been a challenge simply to get managers to release employees for training and to avoid distracting them during the sessions. But much, much more is needed of managers. To get a full return on the investment in training, managers need to be responsible for taking an active role:
- Understand the skills being taught in training
- Role model the desired behavior
- Before training, meet with the learner discuss learning needs, goals and accountability
- During training, support the needs of the learner
- After training, meet with learner to plan workplace applications of the skill
- Look for “learning moments” - observe and listen to the learner
- Coach the learner to learn from on-the-job experiences
- Give feedback to the learner about observed performance
- Encourage the learner
How did the learners react to the training? We think it’s fair to give trainers this feedback and hold them accountable.
But did the learners learn? And did the learning transfer to workplace behavior? While there is much a trainer can and should do to maximize the learning experience, perhaps the greater influence is what the learner and the learner’s manager do before, during and after training.
And as for the impact on business results? For all intents and purposes, what the trainers do gets lost in the myriad of other factors that influence the bottom line.
So fifty years later, maybe the imperative shouldn’t be evaluation of training. Maybe it should be evaluation of learning. And everyone in the organization who plays a key role - from senior management to the individual learner - should take responsibility and be held accountable. And yes, maybe we need a new model, one that evaluates learning.
- Dennis E. Coates, Ph.D., CEO, Performance Support Systems, Inc.
