I have seen lots of suggestions to refer to the Kirkpatrick model. The Kirkpatrick model is inadequate if you really want to understand training evaluation because it ignores several very important issues. This is what makes many attempts at level 4 evauations fail. Some key points are:
1. The most important stage of evalutation is the need analysis. It is here that you have to identify the measurable objectives for all 4 levels that Kirkpatrick identified. Without this you’ll make outcome evaluation practically impossible, and it will never be convincing. It is like doing research without a hypothesis. I.e. identifying correlations and then go back and claim that they are causal. It is offering yourself for slaughter.
2. Many make the mistake of trying to isolate the contribution of training to business results. This is a silly waste of time destructive to cooperation an team work. It is really based on insecurity on the part of trainers and/or based on the view that evaluation is a judgement technique rather than a process to aid better decisions. Training is only a support function, it exists to help others produce results. Attempts to isolate the contribution of training will never be convincing to the audience unless they already believe that “training did it”. As a metaphor: What is the ROI of the bun in a burger?
3. Keeping in mind that evaluation is a decision tool one needs to realize that in order to evaluate level 4 there needs to be a benchmark to show monetary business results. Thus if training is meant to maintain standards it is nonsensical to evaluate it beyond level 3. Level 3 can be evaluated for cost effectiveness i.e. achieving more learning or job application for less money/time on training.
So before you evaluate decide whether the training is a necessity to maintain standards (most training is) or something that is supposed to add measurable business results. If it is in the latter category, analyse how training is planned to help what measure, then measure before and after training. If it is in the first category, use logic to defend the training and evaluate cost effectiveness. (If logic does’t work, consider how to do a level 4 evaluation.) Once you grasp these above issues, training evaluation is not all that hard, even at level 4.
Cheers,
Terje
.
