How should you measure your training investment? Our research shows that you may be asking the wrong question. Many organizations are finding it difficult to measure training in a way that provides useful information at an acceptable cost.

Our experience and research tell us that most training initiatives consistently fall short for two reasons:

1. They are not fully implemented or executed.
2. They do not show measurable improvements in performance or in business results.

These two factors have rightfully created ambiguity and cynicism around training as a strategic investment. After all, why would an organization want to invest in processes without clearly understanding how improvements will impact their business?
There are clearly some disconnects between learning and results.

While many companies philosophically believe in "investing in people" through skill building, most are content with allowing the results to "take care of themselves." The probability of this approach having a tangible business impact is slim. We believe that every learning investment must be managed appropriately if you expect a benefit. Without managing the learning process to ensure that training translates into performance and results, there may be little or no benefit for either the individual or the company.

For organizations and employees to realize the full value of training, they must connect two common "disconnects" that occur between learning and business results. Based on Kirkpatrick’s four level Summative Evaluation, the LSA Learning Maturity Continuum™ below shows five levels of measurement, and how, if learning and application are not effectively linked, true learning and business results can not be achieved nor measured.

The Disconnects

1. Adoption Disconnect. The first disconnect is one of adoption. Adoption is the linchpin between Learning (level II) and Application (Level III) shown to the right. While many are improving their ability to ensure that participants can exhibit the specific skills in a training environment, few do what it takes to ensure that those skills will be transferred and applied on-the-job. This "Adoption Disconnect" inhibits learning from producing performance improvement.

While improving key skills, knowledge, and abilities may provide some benefit to the individual, experience tells us that it is only truly valuable to a team or organization if those skills are transferred to on-the-job performance. This means that organizations must invest in and plan for what happens before, during and after their learning interventions in order to improve organizational performance.

2. Alignment Disconnect. The second disconnect is one of alignment. This is the key connection between Application (Level III) and Results (Level IV). Even if training participants are able to apply new skills and change their on-the-job performance, success is unsatisfactory if the new performance results are not aligned with what the business is trying to accomplish. While this may sound obvious, we continue to find organizations that press ahead with learning and development initiatives that have no clear link to business priorities. This usually occurs due to a lack of rigor in analyzing business priorities, performance objectives, and root causes as part of the design phase for a training initiative. This lack of alignment and adoption is exactly what causes training, and often Human Resources, to be out of step with the critical initiatives of a business.

Page 1 of 3 :: First | Last :: Prev | 1 2 3 | Next