Abstract
This paper provides the discussion of a training evaluation model that was selected for analyzing the success of the program implemented in EFG Amalgamated. The focus is on describing Jack Phillips’ evaluation model that provides information regarding the return on investment as the main measure to assess the initiative’s success. The paper also presents a structured outline to describe the approach that is used for evaluating the training program. The proposed evaluation plan includes four main steps that are correlated with Phillips’ model.
Physical Assets System Training: Case Study
The training evaluation is an important process to determine whether training programs and initiatives can benefit the organization. In order to conclude regarding the benefits of the implemented training, it is possible to apply several evaluation models, including Donald Kirkpatrick’s ROE (Return on Expectations) Model and Jack Phillips’ ROI (Return on Investment) Model (Lee-Kelley & Blackman, 2012). The discussion of the models should be developed in the context of the EFG Amalgamated case. Thus, EFG Amalgamated implemented a new approach to organizing the information about physical assets in all facilities of the company, and the procedure is known as the physical asset inventory system (PAIS). The implementation of the PAIS was supported by the training provided for employees in order to develop skills in working with a new system. The company’s management chose to develop the training program using its own resources instead of applying the training program proposed by the developer of the PAIS. In order to determine whether EFG Amalgamated chose the cost-efficient variant, provided effective training for employees, and achieved the benefits, it is necessary to decide regarding the model to use for the evaluation and regarding steps that should be taken during the evaluation process.
The Model to Evaluate Training
Phillips’ ROI Model is based on Kirkpatrick’s Levels 1-4 Model, the focus of which is on determining the ROE associated with the implemented training. According to Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2007), evaluators need to assess the trainees’ reactions, learning, the application of skills, and the business results after the training in order to state whether the program is successful. Phillips and Phillips (2006) note that, in addition to the mentioned levels, it is also necessary to focus on the monetary value of the results associated with the training program. It is important to refer to measuring the financial outcomes in order to conclude whether the training is efficient in the context of the investment made in the program (Hung, 2010).
In this case, the application of Phillips’ ROI Model is more appropriate for the evaluation of the implemented training program than the use of Kirkpatrick’s Model. The reason is that managers of EFG Amalgamated need the answers to the financial questions because they invested $250,000 in the PAIS, they could invest $100,000 in the training program, but they chose to develop the training using the organization’s resources. Therefore, it is important to calculate the ROI in order to state whether a monetary value of the adopted training program is positive and whether the further application of employees’ developed skills can cover the spending (Griffin, 2010). From this point, the evaluation of the financial contribution of the training program to the company’s development is expected to be realized with the help of Phillips’ ROI Model.
The Approach to Conducting Evaluation
In order to apply Phillips’ ROI Model to conducting the training evaluation, it is necessary to complete the following steps:
- Planning of the evaluation.
- Determine the purpose of the training program and the expected outcomes.
- Plan the ROI analysis.
- Plan the process of collecting the data.
- The collection of data.
- Collect the data regarding the participants’ reactions and learning (levels 1-2 of Phillips’ ROI Model).
- Collect the data regarding the participants’ behavior, the application of learned skills, and the business impact that include the information on costs and profits, as well as changes in the productivity (levels 3-4 of Phillips’ ROI Model).
- The analysis of the data.
- The analysis of the information related to levels 1-2.
- The analysis of the information related to levels 3-4.
- The calculation of ROI.
- The completion of the report to present the results of the analysis.
The presented outline reflects the main steps that should be completed during the process of the training evaluation, and the detailed analysis of these steps is required. The planning phase is important in order to organize the evaluation process effectively. At this stage, it is necessary to determine the purposes and goals related to the training and identify the data that will be collected to calculate the ROI (Guerci & Vinante, 2011). In this case, the purpose of the evaluation is to determine how the implemented training can contribute to improving the company’s productivity and whether the spent budget can be covered with the expected benefits. The next stage is the data collection procedure. During this phase, evaluators collect the information in two steps. First, it is necessary to collect the data regarding the employees’ reactions and learning after the training program is completed. This approach allows for concentrating on the employees’ perceptions associated with training (Griffin, 2010). The second step is the collection of the data regarding the employees’ application of skills and observed outcomes. Evaluators complete this step when some outcomes can be observed. The numbers gathered during the second step are important to calculate the ROI.
From this point, the analysis of the data includes the evaluation of the participants’ first reactions and perceptions associated with the training, and then, the analysis of their actual behavior. The most important step in this process is the calculation of the ROI to conclude regarding the monetary value of the training program (Phillips & Phillips, 2006). At this stage, it is possible to state whether the training is efficient and what benefits can be expected with references to the use of the PAIS. Thus, the ROI analysis will include the calculation of the relationship between the net program benefits and the program costs (Hung, 2010). The results of the analysis will be reported to the company’s CFO.
Conclusion
In order to determine whether the completed training program was effective, it is necessary to apply Phillips’ ROI Model that can demonstrate the financial benefits of using the training. The process of evaluating the program can be presented with references to four main steps that also include the evaluation regarding such levels as reactions, learning, the application of skills, business outcomes, and the ROI. Thus, the first step is the planning of the evaluation process that is followed by the data collection procedure. During this step, the information regarding levels 1-5 is collected for further analysis. Finally, the results of the evaluation and relevant conclusions are reported to the CFO of the organization.
References
Griffin, P. R. (2010). Means and ends: Effective training evaluation. Industrial and Commercial Training, 42(4), 220-225.
Guerci, M., & Vinante, M. (2011). Training evaluation: An analysis of the stakeholders’ evaluation needs. Journal of European Industrial Training, 35(4), 385-410.
Hung, T. K. (2010). An empirical study of the training evaluation decision-making model to measure training outcome. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 38(1), 87-101.
Kirkpatrick, D. L., & Kirkpatrick, J. D. (2007). Implementing the four levels: A practical guide for effective evaluation of training programs. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
Lee-Kelley, L., & Blackman, D. (2012). Project training evaluation: Reshaping boundary objects and assumptions. International Journal of Project Management, 30(1), 73-82.
Phillips, P. P., & Phillips, J. J. (2006). Return on investment (ROI) basics. Alexandria, VA: American Society for Training and Development.