Summary: Evaluating training effectiveness is critical to ensure training programs support business objectives. If not, they become redundant. In this article, I outline how to evaluate training effectiveness and address inherent shortcomings (if any).
When employees train often and learn effectively, the results usually show up in organizational performance. There’s also a mountain of research-based evidence that links effective training to exceptional performance.
Yet, surprisingly, a Brandon Hall Group research brief indicated that 9% of organizations surveyed did not see a need to link training-induced behavioral changes to business performance. Because many organizations have entrenched training as standard operating practices, they therefore lack proper metrics to measure training and its contribution to positive business outcomes.
Here are some compelling reasons for evaluating training effectiveness.
Shareholders, Boards of Directors, and Executive teams hold business leaders accountable for their spending plans. The better the justification for those spends, the more likely those funds continue to flow. If L&D managers wish to secure ongoing funding for their learning initiatives, they must evaluate the effectiveness of training program spending and justify the ongoing need for those programs.
The primary goal of any training plan must be to support business objectives. It is only by evaluating the impact of training programs that business leaders can get objective metrics on how well those programs work to support business objectives.
When training aligns with business objectives, an in-depth training evaluation is the only way that learning leaders can identify important KPIs to make training more relevant. By measuring the results of a program, L&D teams can evaluate those results against predetermined KPIs and enhance or improve training plans based on that assessment.
Unfortunately, aspirations to evaluate the effectiveness of training program implementations don’t necessarily equate to concrete and measurable success in determining training effectiveness. That’s not because those “aspirations” are flawed! It’s typically because of inherent organizational challenges that stymie the fulfilling of those aspirations.
Here are some of the critical challenges that L&D leaders encounter while embarking on initiatives for evaluating training effectiveness.
Organizations that lack employee performance metrics are unable to say with any degree of certainty whether training helps or hinders employee performance. For instance, how do you link specific training outcomes to even more specific performance objectives? And how do you determine if training is helping to develop your in-house talent pools or if employees are successfully applying newly acquired skills (learned through training) as performance aids on the job?
When preparing to evaluate the effectiveness of training program results, most evaluators begin with a training outcomes measurement approach. That strategy seldom works because it doesn’t consider what happened prior or subsequent to training. What’s required is a methodology that reviews the training framework across the organization, beginning with a Training Needs Analysis (TNA) and culminating with a determination of whether training meets all KPIs and delivers a justifiable Return On Investment (ROI).
Training technology, such as Learning Management Systems (LMSs) and Learning Content Management Systems (LCMSs), has embedded tools that provide a lot of analytic data for evaluating training effectiveness. Unfortunately, many organizations either lack the right tools and technologies to collect such data or are incapable of using available tools to collect and objectively analyze that data.
Many organizations lack the capability or capacity to link organizational performance with specific training-related outcomes. This lack of abilities is reflected in the ineffective evaluation of training results.
Evaluating the effectiveness of corporate training programs is not as simple as having a “committee” review training results and decide. While the endpoint—results—matters, an objective approach to evaluating training effectiveness requires a much broader scope of assessment.
Continuous learning is critical as a workforce performance enhancer. However, changing workplace dynamics, including gig-work, remote working, mobile and socially interactive work groups, and the use of external consulting/contract staff makes it hard to craft learning as a “one size fits all” strategy. Individual learner-group needs must be integrated with business outcomes and into every learning program; otherwise, training strategies will be ineffective at driving performance.
According to the Brandon Hall Group survey cited earlier, of the total population of organizations with ineffective training strategies, just 31% of those surveyed indicated an alignment between performance outcomes and business outcomes.
Augment TNA With Learner Needs Analysis (LNA)
During the Training Needs Analysis phase, L&D teams must integrate Learner Needs Analysis as they identify specific learning objectives and map them to business objectives.
During LNA, L&D teams must:
It’s only then that learning leaders can use quantifiable metrics to evaluate the effectiveness of training program outcomes.
Use specific training metrics, such as the number of employees trained—including virtual and on-premises—assessment scores, learner feedback, drop-out rates, and training hours logged to track the progress of each learner. By identifying and tracking the right KPIs, and combining them with business metrics, L&D leaders can support the organization to drive critical organizational strategies and tactics.
Thankfully, when evaluating training effectiveness, L&D teams have several frameworks to model their assessment approaches. Some of these include:
Other relevant models include the learning-transfer evaluation model (LTEM), Kaufman’s five levels of evaluation, the success case method, and summative vs. formative evaluation. Each of these models, however, comes with its own detractors and proponents. Before selecting an evaluation model, therefore, training audit teams must weigh the pros and cons of each model as it pertains to their organizations’ training objectives and strategies.
Success in evaluating training effectiveness depends largely on collecting and analyzing relevant data—be it quantitative or qualitative in nature. The use of the right tools, such as LMS, LCMS, and data analytics and presentation tools, goes a long way in that evaluation. Learner interviews, training feedback forms, anonymous polls, and surveys are additional tools that aid in objective training evaluation. Unfortunately, while some L&D teams don’t have access to such tools, others cannot use them effectively, and still, others lack an integrated set of tools and use what they have as “standalone” solutions.
Typically, organizations rely on traditional post-implementation reviews (PIR) to evaluate the effectiveness of training program outcomes. While PIRs are an important tool to measure training effectiveness, they are often a lagging indicator. The best way to gauge whether training is, and continues, meeting its objectives, is to use ongoing surveys, user satisfaction assessments, focus group feedback, and learner interviews to trigger proactive changes in learning programs.
To evaluate the effectiveness of training program results, it’s imperative that training audit teams cast their attention beyond the endpoint—i.e., results achieved. It’s important to start at the beginning, with an in-depth Training Needs Assessment, and use data-driven metrics to evaluate whether training objectives are linked to the business’s strategic vision.
I hope the strategies mentioned in this article will help you successfully evaluate the effectiveness of your training programs.
EI is an emotionally intelligent learning experience design company that partners with customers in their Digital Transformation journey.
