Page 175 - DMGT518_TRAINING_AND_DEVELOPMENT_SYSTEM

Training and Development System

Notes
Figure 10.5: Approaches to Evaluating External and In-company Training
In-company Training External Training
1. Ultimate Value Cost Benefit
Approach Criteria Client Centered Approach
Organisation
Development
Criteria

2. Trainee-Centered Job-behaviour
Approach Criteria Trainee Centered Approach

Learning
Criteria

3. Training Centered Reach Criteria Training Centered
Approach Transfer Criteria Approach

10.5.2 Kirkpatrick’s Design of Evaluation

Kirkpatrick’s evaluation design suggests four logical steps:
1. Reaction: How well did the trainees like the programme?

2. Learning: What principles, facts, techniques were learnt?
3. Behaviour: What changes in job-behaviour resulted from the programme?
4. Results: What were the tangible results of the programme in terms of reduced cost,
improved quality, etc.?
Since there are many factors like the groups, the conference leader, and the approach to the
subject, the evaluators should recognize the limited interpretations and conclusions that can be
drawn from their findings.

10.5.3 Warr’s Framework of Evaluation

Peter Warr had, for evaluating organisation training, recommended the C.I.P.O. framework of
evaluation. It is preferable to treat evaluation as a process that is carried on before, during and
after training. A training specialist would thus collect information for evaluating training,
“right from the start”.
(i) Context Evaluation (C): Obtaining and using information about the current operational
context, that is, about individual differences and organisational deficiencies.

(ii) Input Evaluation (I): Determining and using facts and opinions about the available human
and material training resources in order to choose between alternative training methods.
(iii) Process Evaluation (P): Monitoring the training as it is in progress. This involves continuous
examination of administrative arrangements and feedback from trainees.
(iv) Outcome Evaluation (O): Measuring the consequences of training. Three levels of outcome
evaluation have been distinguished:
(a) Immediate Outcome: The changes in trainees’ knowledge, skills and attitudes which
can be identified immediately after the completion of training.

170 LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY