SCM and Kirkpatrick
Brinkerhoff’s Success Case Method (SCM) can be discussed as an alternative to Kirkpatrick’s Return on Expectations (ROE) model that is used in order to evaluate training. Training groups can benefit from using SCM in addition to Kirkpatrick’s model because such type of the training analysis allows for concentrating not only on training as a failure or success but also on specific features of the program that helped trainees become effective workers or prevented them from the success.
specifically for you
for only $16.05 $11/page
SCM provides an evaluator with information regarding cases that were successful or non-working (Medina, Acosta-Perez, Velez, Martinez, & Rivera, 2015). Trainees are contacted individually, and interviews are helpful to conduct an in-depth analysis of the training experience and results with the focus on narratives.
From this point, SCM and Kirkpatrick’s model is focused on collecting different types of information. SCM provides detailed qualitative information regarding trainees’ experiences, and Kirkpatrick’s model provides factual information regarding the achievement of the training goals (Grohmann & Kauffeld, 2013). Thus, the information received with the help of SCM can be used more effectively to improve the training program with references to trainees’ experiences and expectations. The data gathered with the help of Kirkpatrick’s model can be used to support the discussion of what aspects of the program can influence its effectiveness (Tan & Newman, 2013).
SCM can be used in order to make evaluation instruments associated with Kirkpatrick’s model more efficient. Thus, it is reasonable to add more open-ended questions to surveys used for collecting the data regarding the employees’ performance. It is also necessary to apply observation and case study techniques in order to decide what changes in employees’ behaviors are observed and how these changes can influence achieving the business goals. Therefore, the business impact can be assessed with references to managers’ narrative descriptions of results.
The Compaq SCM Study and Job Training
The low level of the practical application of the learned material in the case of Compaq was associated with the fact that the employees assigned to participate in the training program were selected inappropriately. It is possible to assume that trainees perceived the training impractical because they did not address issues discussed in the program daily (The success case method of evaluating the impact of performance interventions, 2004). While referring to this case, it is also possible to determine barriers to the students’ application of learning to their practice.
The first barrier is the negative perception of training because employees often resist making efforts associated with the learning process. Therefore, the second barrier is unclear motivation. Employees need to know why training is beneficial for them. Finally, there is often resistance to change because of the unwillingness to study something new and adapt to new rules (Allen, 2015). Still, it is possible to identify these barriers before starting the training program, and the focus should be on communicating the importance of training, accentuating goals and the course of changes, and demonstrating the benefits of participating in this program.
In order to plan the training program efficiently, it is also important to refer to the major types of SCM conclusions. Designers of training programs should decide regarding the program’s potential outcomes that are important for employees and businesses. Moreover, designers should also evaluate different aspects of the program in order to focus on the most efficient procedures (Brinkerhoff, 2006). It is also necessary to determine the scope according to which the program’s success will be evaluated. The value associated with the realization of the training program should be stated clearly in order to attract employees and explain the importance of this initiative.
100% original paper
on any topic
done in as little as
Allen, T. (2015). Overcoming 9 common barriers to learning.
Brinkerhoff, R. (2006). Telling training’s story: Evaluation made simple, credible, and effective. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
Grohmann, A., & Kauffeld, S. (2013). Evaluating training programs: Development and correlates of the questionnaire for professional training evaluation. International Journal of Training and Development, 17(2), 135-155.
Medina, L., Acosta-Perez, E., Velez, C., Martinez, G., & Rivera, M. (2015). Training and capacity building evaluation: Maximizing resources and results with Success Case Method. Evaluation and Program Planning, 52(1), 126-132.
Tan, K., & Newman, E. (2013). The evaluation of sales force training in retail organizations: A test of Kirkpatrick’s four-level model. International Journal of Management, 30(2), 692-702.