Training Evaluation ~ Human Resources

Hamblin (1970; cited by Blanshard and Montgomery 1978) defined evaluation as obtaining information on effectiveness of training and assessing it. He differentiated between ‘Evaluation’ and ‘Validation’. ‘Evaluation’ is a process where ‘validation’ is a result. But The Training Support Unit and Branch 6 (TSD) HM Customs & Excise Training Service Division (1992) argued that evaluation of training is simply measuring the results of training. Evaluation process should start during the Need Analysis stage. Training is planned and designed to achieve expected outcomes. But sometimes it may not be possible to achieve expected result because of different reasons and this process of comparing the outcomes of training programme with training objectives is evaluation. Rightly said about training evaluation,

“...Any attempt to obtain information (feedback) on the effects of a training programme, and to assess the value of training in the light of that information.” (Hamblin, 1974; cited by Bee and Bee 1994, p. 174)

Importance of Training Evaluation

Most of the organization needs to analyse the contribution and effectiveness of the training programme. It may be necessary to identify the quality of the existing training programme. These can be achieved through evaluation. Evaluation can facilitate with reviewing training policy, which will affect subsequent stages of next training programmes. If the trainer can see the result of performance, then they can measure performance, can set targets and can feed back the results of performance into the training (King 1964). It is an important management tool to control the effectiveness of training. Blanshard and Montgomery (1978) suggested getting the feedback of trainees’ performance through evaluation process. As a whole, training evaluation process has great impact on the entire training process.

Training Evaluation Process

Cole (1993) defined evaluation as part of the control process of training. He emphasized to set the standards of training. The more accurately the standards can be set, will be easier to evaluate the training.

Levels of Training Evaluation

Most of the authors divided evaluation into different levels. Centre of Social Development (CSD) (nd; cited by Blanshard and Montgomery 1978) divided evaluation into four levels:

a. REACTION LEVEL: it is immediate information collected from trainees.
b. LEARNING LEVEL: it is carried out after completion of the training on competences learned by the trainees.
c. JOB BEHAVIOURAL LEVEL: it is carried out after a gap of time after completion of training. Information regarding changed learning on workplace is collected here. This information should be collected through observing staff and from asking superiors.
d. ORGANISATION LEVEL: the effect of changed job behaviour by the trainees is evaluated here. But difficult to calculate. Because of its wide range of factors involvement. Where trainees may be one of factors for outcomes.

Hamblin (1974; cited by Blanshard and Montgomery 1978) divides above stated 4th level into Organisational and Ultimate Value level. He suggested identifying changes in the way of organisation works and the extent it achieved its ultimate goals.

War, Bird and Rackham (nd; cited by Cole 1993) suggested an on-going process for evaluating training. These are:

a. Context evaluation- deals with information regarding training needs and objectives.
b. Input evaluation- evaluates the effectiveness of training resources, like staffs, different training aids etc.
c. Reaction evaluation- assesses the information about trainees’ reaction about training programme.
d. Outcome evaluation- evaluates results in immediate, inter-mediate and ultimate levels of training.

Difficulties with Evaluation Measurement

According to Blanshard and Montgomery (1978), sometimes numerical figures fails to show the results of training effectively, because of the information remains subjective. Other side of the evaluation cannot be expressed with numerical figures. It should be assessed by intuition. Again it is difficult to express result with this way. It will be more effective to use both the techniques. Quantitative techniques provide standard to compare and other one can interpret the figures.

Factors Affecting Training Evaluation

While evaluating a training programme, certain factors need to be assessed with great importance. According to Kruse et al. (1994) important factors are: