1 / 14

Measuring the Impact of Training and Development Workshops: an action orientated approach

Measuring the Impact of Training and Development Workshops: an action orientated approach. Richard Stockill. Presentation Overview. Introduction and background Method Results Discussion and Implications. Why did we carry out this research?.

matia
Download Presentation

Measuring the Impact of Training and Development Workshops: an action orientated approach

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Measuring the Impact of Training and Development Workshops: an action orientated approach Richard Stockill

  2. Presentation Overview • Introduction and background • Method • Results • Discussion and Implications

  3. Why did we carry out this research? • Budget pressures and the need for an efficient and productive workforce = the need for effective development. • 96% of businesses attempt to assess development work but 74% of those surveyed reported difficulties (CIPD, 2013). • Occupational Psychology’s role in evaluating people development.

  4. Current methods of evaluation CIPP (Stufflebeam) Results Success case method (Blanchard) Behaviour TOTADO (Birdi et al) Learning Reactions Four levels (Kirkpatrick) Balanced scorecard (Kaplan and Norton) V model (Aaron)

  5. Method:participants, measures, procedure

  6. Participants • 93 participants from an Irish pharmaceuticals company took part in a development workshop on communication. These workshops ran over a four week period. • Male = 45%; Female 55% • Average time in the company was 10 years. Respondents were taken from across the whole of the business:

  7. Measures and Procedure Measures: • Evaluation forms • Competency ratings • Impact analysis survey • MBTI personality tool Research design • Pre-post design • Competency ratings validated with manager ratings in 2013 • Impact analysis survey to be validated in February Analysis techniques: • Correlation, T tests, Cohen’s d

  8. Results

  9. Results: changes in behaviour

  10. Results: relationship between data • Table1. Relationship Between Workshop Evaluation and Perceived Business Impacts * p< .05; ** p< .01.

  11. Results: accuracy of self report data • Table2. Accuracy of Self Ratings p< .05; ** p< .01. N=24

  12. Discussion

  13. Discussion and Implications • Using competencies gives a useful business language to demonstrate the impact of development workshops. • Self report measures useful? (Randal, Ferguson, Patterson, 2000). • Behaviour change takes time, is 5 weeks sufficient? Lally (2010) suggests 12 weeks. • Kirkpatrick’s model is practically useful as an organising framework but theoretically little evidence of a relationship between the levels (Holton, 1996); (Allinger, et al, 1997).

  14. References • Alliger, G., & Tannenbaum, S., & Bennett, W., & Traver, H., & Shotland, A. (1997). A meta-analysis of the relations among training criteria. Personnel Psychology, 50, 341–358. • CIPD. (2013). Annual Survey Report: Learning and Talent Development. • Holton, E. (1996). The flawed four level evaluation model. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 7(1), 5–21. • Lally, P., & Van Jaarsveld, C., & Potts, H., & Wardle, J. (2001). How are Habits Formed: Modelling Habit Formation in the Real World. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 998-1009. • Randal, R., & Ferguson, E., & Patterson, F. (2000). Self Assessment Accuracy and Assessment Centre Decisions. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 73, 433-459. • Salas, E., & Tannenbaum, S., & Kraiger, K., & Smith-Jentsch, K. (2012). The Science of Training and Development in Organizations: What Matters in Practice. Psychological Science in Public Interest, 13(12), 74-101.

More Related