Evaluation

The process of examining a training program is called training evaluation.

Training evaluation checks whether training has had the desired efect.
Training evaluation ensures that whether candidates are able to
implement their learning in their respective workplaces, or to the regular
work routines.
Purposes of Training Evaluation
The fve main purposes of training evaluation are:
1.Feedback:
t helps in giving feedback to the candidates b! defning the ob"ectives
and linking it to learning outcomes.
2.Research:
t helps in ascertaining the relationship between ac#uired knowledge,
transfer of knowledge at the work place, and training.
3.Control:
t helps in controlling the training program because if the training is not
efective, then it can be dealt with accordingl!.
4.Power games:
$t times, the top management %higher authoritative emplo!ee& uses the
evaluative data to manipulate it for their own benefts.
. !ntervention: t helps in determining that whether the actual
outcomes are aligned with the expected outcomes.
Process o" #raining Evaluation
$e"ore #raining: #he learner%s skills and knowledge are assessed be"ore
the training &rogram. 'uring the start o" training( candidates generall)
&erceive it as a waste o" resources because at most o" the times
candidates are unaware o" the ob*ectives and learning outcomes o" the
&rogram. +nce aware( the) are asked to give their o&inions on the
methods used and whether those methods con,rm to the candidates
&re"erences and learning st)le.
During Training: t is the phase at which instruction is started. This phase
usuall! consist of short tests at regular intervals
After Training: t is the phase when learner's skills and knowledge are assessed
again to measure the efectiveness of the training. This phase is designed to
determine whether training has had the desired efect at individual
department and organi(ational levels. There are various evaluation
techni#ues for this phase.
Techniques of Evaluation
The various methods of training evaluation are:
i. )bservation
ii. *uestionnaire
iii. nterview
iv. +elf diaries
v. +elf recording of specifc incidents
Objectives:
Performance evaluation of training is intended to serve the following objective:
1. To check effectiveness of training to improve performance of employees on the jobs.
2. To ascertain how far the training is useful to improve career prospects of individual
employee in the organisation.
3. To identify the deficiencies of training for the purpose it is intended in order to
incorporate additions to the training programme.
!. To identify unnecessary aspects in the training for the purpose of deleting such things
from the training programme.
". To improve cost#effectiveness of training programme.
Benefits of Training Evaluation
i. ,elps emplo!ees to monitor their own improvement.
ii. -uilds morale, b! demonstrating an interest in staf development.
iii. To maximi(e the training .) %return on investment&.
iv. ,elps to determine the form of future training programs.
v. $ssists with identif!ing the efectiveness of diferent forms of teaching
%such as classroom based or web based&.
$valuation Techni%ues &'ethod(:
) number of techni%ues have been developed for evaluating effectiveness of training
programme. These are listed below:
1. *our *actor +omparison 'ethod.
2. Three *actor +omparison 'ethod:
3. Test.#retest 'ethods
!. Pre#post Performance tests method.
". $,perimental#+ontrol -roup# Testing methods.
1. Four Factor Comparison Method.
.irkpatrick and others propose this method. )ccording to this method evaluation of
following four factors is essential to determine effectiveness of training programme.
These are:
i. /eaction
ii. 0earning
iii. 1ehaviour
iv. /esults
i) Reaction:
$mployees2 reaction to training programme by itself is a good indicator. This is a subjective
evaluation. 3owever it reveals the attitude of trainees to the training programme. /eaction is
obtained by 4opinion surveys4 and taking majority views. 'ajority views may take different
forms of their reaction to the training programme vi5 4useful4 4inade%uate4 4boring4
4e,cellent4 4waste of time4 etc. 6henever the majority of trainees feel the programme is a
2waste of time2 or 2boring2 it is an indication of ineffectiveness.
ii( Learning: 7n this case an attempt is made to assess whether the trainees have learned the
skills and knowledge intended to be imparted through the training programme were infact
ac%uired by the trainees. This assessment is made by test retest pre#performance or post#
performance evaluation methods
iii) Behavior: 3ere the trainees2 behavioral pattern is e,amined carefully after his training
programme for the purpose of evaluating whether there are changes in his behaviour in the job
compared to the period before the training was imparted. *or e,ample a supervisor who has
undergone a training programme on 4human relations4 or 4inter#personal relations4 can evaluate
his performance by comparing the number of complaints received against him from his
subordinates after the training programme for a given period with that of the numbers received
for the same period prior to the training. 'anager can also actually observe the behavioral
pattern of supervisor towards his subordinates after training. This is also another criterion of
effectiveness of training.
iv) Resut: This is the method of evaluating %uantifiable indices or attributes of performance
which can be directly related as a. result of training. $,amples are productivity reduction in
rejection rates of finished goods or number of defectives incidents of accidents absenteeism
cont1icts number of redressal of grievances applications etc.
!. "hree Factor Comparison Method: 7n this method the training effectiveness is
determined by analy5ing following three factors:
+ost factor.
+hange factor
7mpact factor
(a) Cost Factor: 7n this method the cost of training is computed which involve training costs
8n men materials training aids which might include rentals salaries cost of stationery and
other consumables which are directly and indirectly involved in imparting training. 1ased on
total outlay 2cost per trainee2 is estimated and compared.
(b) Change Factor: 3ere a comparison is made on knowledge9skill or attitude of a trainee as
he possessed both before and after the training and the change is normally e,pressed as a
ratio. +hanges are recorded on performance and behavioral aspects as well. These figures are
measured by conducting pre#testing and post#testing.
(c) #mpact Factor: This factor measures the change of results before and after training on
aspects such as productivity rejection rates number of accidents number of defectives
morale indications and motivational factors wherever such attributes can be %uantified
directly or indirectly. 6herever %uantifiable changes are 2positive2 it indicates 2effectiveness2
of training and 2negative2 when the training is not effective.
3.Test-Re-test Method: In this method the trainees are given a test before they start the
training programme. This test is given to ascertain the level of knowledge and skill possessed
by the trainees before commencement off training programme. After the training programme
is completed similar test is administered which is called the' Retest'. The structure and
contents of test are designed to suit the skill and knowledge intended to be imparted through
the training programme. The hypothesis being tested is that the "training imparted increased
the efficiency of trainees". A comparison of test score during "test" and "re-test"'should either
prove or disprove the above hypothesis. This way the effectiveness of training programme is
evaluated.
The limitations of this method are the following assumptions made in this Method:
+hanges in test scores truly represent changes in their performance on the job. . +hanges in
test scores occurred are solely attributed to the training programme. 7n practice both the
above assumptions are not fully valid.
$. %re&%ast&%er'ormance "ests Method: 8ne of the limitations of the 4test#retest4 method
given above is the assumption that 2test score2 is an indicator of performance on the job. Pre#
post performance method overcomes this disadvantage. 7n this method each trainee is
evaluated of his 4performance on the :ob4 before the training programme is initiated. This is
called 4Pre performance test4. )fter completion of training programme the same trainee is
again subjected to another similar performance test. This is called 4Post#Performance test4.
The 2change of ratings for 4Pre#performance4 and ;Post#performance< test is an indication of
effectiveness of training programme. Positive rating &vi5. increase( of post#performance test
is an indication of effectiveness. 7n this method also it is assumed that the reason for the
change of rating of 4post#performance test4 is entirely attributed to the training. This remains
as the main limitation of this method as that of 4test#retest4 method discussed in the earlier
section. 3owever in contrast with 4test#retest method4 Pre#post performance test method
deals directly with job performance. To that e,tent this method is# a shade better than 2test#
retest method2.
(. )*perimenta&Contro +roup "esting Methods: This is the most accurate of all other
methods of evaluation. 7n this method two groups have been established. These are the
following:
+ontrol -roup
$,perimental -roup
These groups are selected in such a way that they are identical and comparable as to
.nowledge skill and attitude and both are evaluated on actual job performance. 1oth the groups
work on the job. +ontrol group continued to work on the job. $,perimental -roup is made to
undergo the training programme. )t the end of the training the two groups are evaluated again.
The e,act method of evaluation depends on the design of the test. There are three types of test
design these are given below:
=imple post#test >esign
Pre#test#post#test >esign
The =olomon *our#-roup >esign
(a) ,impe post&test -esign: 7n this case after the training is imparted to the e,perimental
group both the groups are subjected to evaluation by testing them on their performance on the
job 7f there is a significant difference in the performance between the two groups the same is
attributed to effectiveness of training. Positive change of efficiency of the e,perimental group
&higher rating( is an indication of effectiveness of training.
(b) %re&test&post&test -esign: 7n this case both the groups vi5. control group and
e,perimental group are subjected to performance test before the commencement of training
programe. 0ater training was imparted to the e,perimental group. )fter completion of training
once again both the groups were subjected to performance tests on the job. This is called post#
test. ) significant
+hange in performance of e,perimental group is an indication of effectiveness of training.
.dvantages: This test design has following advantages:
$,traneous factors if any get neutralised being e%ually affected both control group
and e,perimental group.
)nalysis of co#variance possible by using the pre#test scores. )nalysis of co#variance
is more effective than simple difference between post#test scores.