Contents:
Use models that allow you to see the big picture
In corporate training, simple questionnaires are often used to assess participant satisfaction. However, such an assessment often becomes the only criterion, which is important for both Russian and foreign companies. However, surveys don't provide a complete picture of how effective training was or the quality of a particular educational product. This limitation prevents us from improving programs, courses, and trainings or making informed decisions based on learning outcomes. Ultimately, tunnel vision arises, focusing on a narrow aspect while ignoring broader indicators of the effectiveness and quality of the educational process. To achieve real improvements in corporate training, it is necessary to use comprehensive assessment methods that will provide more accurate data on the results and needs of participants.
Will Thalheimer emphasizes the importance of using ready-made tools to evaluate the effectiveness of training. He notes that various proven methods can be used, but as an example, he cites his LTEM model, which stands for The Learning-Transfer Evaluation Model. This model includes eight levels, with the first six devoted to the training process and the last two to assessing the actual performance of employees. The sequence of levels allows for a deeper understanding of how training affects performance and what areas require improvement.
- Attendance — did employees attend the classes (or listen to them, if we are talking about online classes).
- Activity — how attentive, interested, and engaged were the employees in the training.
- Student perception — how they perceived what they learned. At this stage, we evaluate not impressions, but understanding, completion of practical tasks, motivation to use the acquired knowledge in work, and the need for further support.
- Knowledge — how well employees remembered what they learned (this applies to theory, for example, specific terminology). Moreover, memorization should be assessed both immediately after the completion of training and several days later.
- Decision-making ability — can employees make decisions based on the data they received during training on a specific (and relevant) case. This assessment again occurs twice - immediately after training and after some time. The results, of course, are relevant specifically for the final assessment: if a person can make the right decisions based on the training results with the same confidence a few weeks after completing the course, then it was most likely effective. However, after completing the course, this is not so obvious: after all, immediately after the training, you can do the required work perfectly, and then completely forget everything.
- Task Ability — can employees both find a solution and complete the required task? The expert notes that this is checked comprehensively and again in two stages, of which the second is relevant.
- Transfer — have employees begun to perform work tasks more successfully (or simply successfully, if this was previously difficult) and can this be objectively confirmed? At this stage, there are also two assessment options: the first is for a situation when employees initially receive assistance in transferring knowledge to practice, and the second is for a situation when they act completely independently.
- Transfer Effectiveness — how do the training results affect the students themselves, their colleagues, and the company? The expert also suggests assessing the extent to which they can impact their communities, society as a whole, and even the city or locality where they live.
The first points may seem obvious, and experienced professionals may argue that attendance or activity have no significant impact. This is indeed true. The training model includes additional sublevels: the first four points do not allow for an assessment of training effectiveness, although they can provide general recommendations for developers. Points 5 and 6, which relate to competencies such as decision-making and task execution, help better understand whether the course or training creators have achieved their goals. Only points 7 and 8 reflect changes in the workplace, demonstrating whether knowledge has been transferred to practice. Training effectiveness can only be assessed through the prism of real changes in professional activity.
LTEM is not the only training effectiveness evaluation model. In fact, it is an adapted version of Kirkpatrick's four-level model, as Will Thalheimer openly discusses. However, LTEM demonstrates an important approach to evaluation that focuses not only on knowledge and impressions but also on achieving tangible results. This method allows for a deeper understanding of the impact of training on performance and skill development, making it a useful tool for organizations seeking to improve their training programs.
Use Peer Consultation
Will Thalheimer recommends engaging colleagues within your company with relevant expertise in evaluating training programs. For example, such a specialist can review the assessment questions and tasks, discuss them aloud, and offer their own answers. This will help identify shortcomings and shortcomings in the materials. The expert emphasizes that revising questionnaires or cases is normal practice, and this is precisely why independent evaluation is important. Using peer input improves the quality of training and increases its effectiveness.
The expert refers to this measure as a "reality check," which is a key element in the decision-making process. This helps avoid situations where seemingly correct decisions turn out to be ineffective. It's important that your peers don't rely solely on their own methods, but rather objectively evaluate the approaches you propose. Furthermore, they should have in-depth knowledge of how people learn.
It is important to note that for small companies where corporate training specialists Because organizations often perform multiple functions and work alone, this recommendation may be less relevant. However, there are other options for addressing this issue. For example, you can seek support from the professional community or consult with colleagues from other companies. This will help you exchange experiences and gain new ideas for effective corporate training.
Involve third-party experts in auditing training programs
Will Thalheimer's third tip emphasizes the importance of regularly evaluating internal training products with independent experts with deep knowledge of evidence-based education. These specialists can provide valuable recommendations on effective and ineffective aspects of programs, as well as make necessary improvements to existing courses or help develop new, effective educational solutions. This approach not only improves the quality of training, but also promotes a more efficient use of resources.
The expert notes that it is best to invite a consultant who will not only provide recommendations, but also actively collaborate with you. Simply suggesting ideas in the "let's do it because it's the right thing to do" format is unlikely to have a significant impact on your work or contribute to professional development. On the contrary, collaborative discussion and active participation in the process will help you achieve your goals and improve your results.