REVIEW OF LITERATURE

A review of literature on evaluation of training was conducted to identify methods of effectiveness evaluation for training programs. Five definitions of evaluation were identified in the literature.

Kirkpatrick, 1971

Kirkpatrick’s first level of measurement, reaction, is defined as how well the trainees liked the training program. The second measurement level, learning, is designated as the determination of what knowledge, attitudes, and skills were learned in the training. The third measurement level is defined as behavior. Behavior outlines a relationship of learning (the previous measurement level) to the actualization of doing. Kirkpatrick recognized a big difference between knowing principles and techniques and using those principles and techniques on the job. The fourth measurement level, results, is the expected outcomes of most educational training programs such as reduced costs, reduced turnover and absenteeism, reduced grievances, improved profits or morale, and increased quality and quantity of production.

Paquet,Kasl, Weinstein, & Waite, 1987

One study was found by a major corporation that measured change in productivity and ROI of a training program. CIGNA Corporation’s corporate management development and training department, which provides training for employees of CIGNA Corporation’s operating subsidiaries, initiated an evaluation program to prove management training made a business contribution. The research question posed was, “Does management training result in improved productivity in the manager’s workplace?” The team conducting the research identified that data collection needed to be built into the training program for optimal data gathering. If managers could use the evaluation data for their own benefit as part of their training, they would be more likely to cooperate.

Paulet & Moult, 1987

British Airways assessed the effectiveness of the Managing People First (MPF) training by measuring the value shift, commitment, and empowerment of the trainees. An in-depth interview was used to measure the action potential (energy generated in the participants by the course) and level of action as a result of the course. A want level was used to measure the action potential and a do level for the action. Each measurement was assigned a value of high, medium, or low. However, high, medium, and low were not defined. The study showed that 27% of all participants (high want level and high do level) were committed to MPF

values and pursued the programs aims/philosophy. Nearly 30% of participants were fully committed to the aims/philosophy of MPF although they did not fully convert commitment to action (high want level and medium and low do level). Approximately one-third of the participants (29%) moderately converted enthusiasm into committed action (medium and low want level and medium and low do level). But 13% remained truly uncommitted (low want level and low do level).Behavioral changes (level three of the Kirkpatrick Model) were measured following low impact Outdoor-Based Experiential Training with the goal of team building

Alliger and Horowitz (1989)

Numerous studies reported use of components of the Kirkpatrick Model; however, no study was found that applied all four levels of the model. Although level one is the least complex of the measures of evaluation developed by Kirkpatrick, no studies were found that reported use of level one as a sole measure of training. One application of the second level of evaluation, knowledge, was reported by. In this study the IBM Corporation incorporated knowledge tests into internally developed training. To ensure the best design, IBM conducted a study to identify the optimal test for internally developed courses. Four separate tests composed of 25 questions each were developed based on ten key learning components. Four scoring methods were evaluated including one that used a unique measure of confidence. The confidence measurement assessed how confident the trainee was with answers given. Tests were administered both before and after training. Indices from the study assisted the organization to evaluate the course design, effectiveness of the training, and effectiveness of the course instructors. The development of the confidence index was the most valuable aspect of the study.

Bushnell (1990) also created a modification to the Kirkpatrick Model by identifying a four-step process of evaluation. Bushnell’s model included evaluation of training from the development through the delivery and impact. Step one involved the analysis of the System Performance Indicators that included the trainee’s qualifications, instructor abilities, instructional materials, facilities, and training dollars. Step two involved the evaluation of the development process that included the plan, design, development, and delivery. Step three was defined as output which equated to the first three levels of the Kirkpatrick Model. Step three involves trainees’ reactions, knowledge and skills gained, and improved job performance. Bushnell separated outcomes or results of the training into the fourth step. Outcomes were defined as profits, customer satisfaction, and productivity. This model was applied by IBM’s global education network, although specific results were not found in the literature.

Phillips (1991) stated the Kirkpatrick Model was probably the most well known framework for classifying areas of evaluation. This was confirmed in 1997 when the America Society for Training and Development (ASTD) assessed the nationwide prevalence of the importance of measurement and evaluation to human resources department (HRD) executives by surveying a panel of 300 HRD executives from a variety of types of U.S. organizations. Survey results indicated the majority (81%) of HRD executives attached some level of importance to evaluation and over half (67%) used the Kirkpatrick Model. The most frequently reported challenge was determining them impact of the training (ASTD, 1997).

Lookatch (1991) and ASTD (2002) reported that only one in ten organizations attempted to gather any results-based evaluation. In 1952, Donald Kirkpatrick (1996) conducted doctoral research to evaluate a supervisory training program. Kirkpatrick’s goal was to measure the participants’ reaction to the program, the amount of learning that took place, the extent of behavior change after participants returned to their jobs, and any final results from a change in behavior achieved by participants after they returned to work.

Wagner & Roland, 1992.

Over 20 organizations and 5,000 participants were studied. Three measures were used to determine behavioral changes. Measure one was a questionnaire completed by participant s both before and after training. The second measure was supervisory reports completed on the functioning of work groups before and after training. The third measure was interviews with managers, other than the immediate supervisor, to obtain reactions to individual and work-group performance after an OBERT program. Results reported showed no significant changes in behavior.

Hopkins 1995

There are several ways managers can use professional development to increase the competence, skills, and leadership capacity of their employees. One way to do this involves managers encouraging employees to pursue continuing education opportunities and/or empowering employees through various leadership opportunities within the organization.

Kirkpatrick, 1998

From Kirkpatrick’s doctoral research, the concept of the four Kirkpatrick measurement levels of evaluation emerged. While writing an article about training in 1959, Kirkpatrick (1996) referred to these four measurement levels as the four steps of a training evaluation. It is unclear even to Kirkpatrick how these four steps became known as the Kirkpatrick Model,

but this description persists today). As reported in the literature, this model is most frequently applied to either educational or technical training.

Holli and Calabrese (1998) defined evaluation as comparisons of an observed value or quality to a standard or criteria of comparison. Evaluation is the process of forming value judgments about the quality of programs, products, and goals.

Kirkpatrick (1998) recommended that as many as possible of the four levels of evaluation be conducted. In order to make the best use of organizational resources of time, money, materials, space, equipment, and manpower, continued efforts are needed to assess all levels of effectiveness of training programs. Trainers from all disciplines should develop evaluation plans for training and share the results of these initiatives.

Warr, Allan and Birdie (1999) evaluated a two-day technical training course involving 123 mo tor-vehicle technicians over a seven- month period in a longitudinal study using a variation of the Kirkpatrick Model. The main objective of this study was to demonstrate that training improved performance, thereby justifying the investment in the training as appropriate. Warr et al.(1999) suggested that the levels in the Kirkpatrick Model may be interrelated. They investigated six trainee features and one organizational characteristic that might predict outcomes at each measurement level. The six trainee features studied were learning motivation, confidence about the learning task, learning strategies, technical qualifications, tenure, and age. The one organizational feature evaluated was transfer climate which was defined as the extent to which the learning from the training was actually applied on the job.

Warr et al. (1999) examined associations between three of the four measurement levels in a modified Kirkpatrick framework. Warr et al. combined the two higher Kirkpatrick measurement levels, behavior and results, into one measurement level called job behavior. The three levels of measurement included were reactions, learning, and job behavior. Trainees (all men) completed a knowledge test and a questionnaire on arrival at the course prior to training. A questionnaire was also completed after the training. A third questionnaire was mailed one month later. All questionnaire data were converted into a measurement level score. The reaction le vel was assessed using the data gathered after the training that asked about enjoyment of the training, perceptions of the usefulness of the training, and the perceptions of the difficulty of the training.

Warr et al. (1999) reported the relationship of the six individual trainee features and one organizational feature as predictors of each evaluation level. At level one, all reaction measures were strongly predicted by motivation of the participants prior to training. At level two, motivation n, confidence, and strategy significantly predicted measures of learning change. Learning level scores that reflected changes were strongly predicted by reaction level scores. Findings suggested a possible link between reactions and learning that could be identified with the use of more differentiated indicators at the reaction level. At level three, trainee confidence and transfer support significantly predicted job behavior. Transfer support was a part of the organizational feature of transfer climate.

Transfer support was the amount of support given by supervisors and colleagues for the application of the training material. Warr et al. suggested that an investigation into the pretest scores might explain reasons for the behavior and generate organizational improvements.

Boulmetis and Dutwin (2000) defined evaluation as the systematic process of collecting and analyzing data in order to determine whether and to what degree objectives were or are being achieved.

Phillips and Pulliam (2000) reported an additional measure of training effectiveness,return on investment (ROI), was used by companies because of the pressures placed on Human Resource Departments to produce measures of output for total quality management (TQM) and continuous quality improvements (CQI) and the threat of outsourcing due to downsizing. Great debate was found in the training and development literature about the use of ROI measures of training programs. Many training and development professionals believed that ROI was too difficult and unreliable a measure to use for training evaluation (Barron, 1997).

Schalock (2001) defined effectiveness evaluation as the determination of the extent to which a program has met its stated performance goals and objectives.

Stufflebeam (2001) defined evaluation as a study designed and conducted to assist some audience to assess an object's merit and worth. Stufflebeam's (2001) definition of evaluation was used to assess the methods of evaluation found in this literature review. The reason for selecting Stufflebeam’s definition was based on the applicability of the definition across multiple disciplines. Based on this definition of evaluation, the Kirkpatrick Model was the most frequently reported model of evaluation.

Radhakrishna, Plank, and Mitchell (2001) used a learning style instrument (LSI) and a demographic profile in addition to reaction measures and learning measures. The three

training objectives were to assess knowledge gained through a Web-based training, to determine participant reaction to Web-based material and Listserv discussions, and to describe both the demographic profile and the learning style of the participants. The evaluation of the training began with an on- line pretest and an on- line LSI. The pretest included seven demographic questions. The LSI, pretest and posttest, and LSI questionnaire were paired by the agent's social security numbers. Fifty- five agents of the available (106) agents completed all four instruments and were included in this study.

Fancsali (2002) recommends that staff development occur on an ongoing basis. More specifically, the National Staff Development Council suggests that “educators” spend at least a quarter of their work time on staff development activities (Richardson 1997).

Bozionelos (2002) Placing employees in staff mentorship positions as mentors is another method that has been identified as increasing employees’ skills and efficiency, while also enhancing their reputation among managers, which can lead to greater career success.

Astroth (2004) Recommend that training should address what the position entails and the skills necessary for competency

Jackson (2006)

With regard to scheduling staff development, suggests that the timing of staff development can affect the success of the development program, itself. Consequently, she recommends that the timing of the training schedule be developed with consideration of staff needs and wants. In terms of strategies for effective implementation. As for the ideal format of staff development, recommends that trainings focus on the “main points” and take into account diverse learning modalities, by including “hands on” activities as well as time for discussion and questions.

The Workers or Employees working in or for an organization are now being considered as ‘human assets’ even though different terms like ‘staff’, ‘manpower’, ‘personnel’, etc. are still in currency. The emerging trend is to treat them as ‘human assets’ or ‘human resources’. The success of any organization depends on appropriate use of human assets available in the organization. All other assets could only be supplementary to human assets. Towards augmenting the human resources and to cope with changes – both internal and external, the organization has to concentrate necessarily on developing the ability, wisdom and skills of its workforce. The training effectiveness is dependent on two considerations,

(1) Trainers are fully responsible for training and if the employees do not show results, the trainer should be held accountable(2) Training effectiveness depends on the kind of atmosphere and culture that is prevalent back at home (Mehta 1970).

Training programmes should focus on corporate planning, organizational development and personnel management (Srinivasan 1977).

Constant changes take place in the internal and external levels of business units. It is necessary for the organization to restructure and reinforce the human assets to adapt itself to changes. Business does not have unanimous methodologies for evaluation and it depends on suitability (Bivainis, Morkvenas 2008).

Study of jobs and skill analysis is necessary. The training thus imparted would help the employees to adjust to their job requirements (Dayal 1970).

Training needs for supervisors need to be identified through careful observations, which indicate poor performance, low production, high cost, poor product quality, high scrap, spoilage, wastage, accidents, absenteeism, and turnover (Sundaram 1970).

While Building knowledge – based society and economy, particular importance in human Resources management fall on the value of human resources and management expertise (Lobanova 2009).

The day-to-day complaints and grievances also form a useful source for identifying their training needs. There are some ideologies for training methodologies, which are the bases for training effectiveness. Multinational operating in India finds that their home- tested techniques do not have the same impact here. Due to differences in culture and background business games, T-groups, case methods and workshops are not as effective in India as perhaps in Europe or America. He ends that given the Indian context, the lecture- cum- discussion method would be more useful (Basha 1971).

Structured exercises seem to offer greater scope in India. Techniques such as T-group, management games assume a minimum level of intellectual competence in the participants. The trainer therefore has the additional responsibility of selecting right methodology (Prahlad, Thiagarajan 1971).

Organizational Development (OD) technique can be more useful for training employees in government sector. The training programme of the government is designed to inculcate capabilities to introduce change and review the environment (Saxena 1973).

The data have been collected from supervisors who had undergone training in an Indian Engineering Company. They have a administered a checklist for the collection of data. The response showed that the inputs in industrial relations have little or no impact on their effectiveness. However , most f them thought that training did improve their self-confidence, motivation, identification with the management goals, communication ability and skills. (Banerji 1981).

The data have been collected from 999 respondents from banking institutions. Though these managers found training programmes less effective with respect to their contributions to job performance, they did endorse the usefulness of formal training (Maheswari 1981).

Training for personnel managers should be directed towards attitudes and beliefs uderlying managerial philosophy and their inter relatedness (Seth 1984).

The need for behavioural inputs is vital in any training programme organized for supervisors (Ghosh 1984).

The study is evaluating management training and development deals with pre-training evaluation. The study includes evaluation of training context, input evaluation, post- training evaluation, transfer of learning and job improvement. The study is suggested for job evaluation as a follow- up after six months to one year. All these aspects have been evaluated for the executives training programme organized in the ‘Administrative Staff College’, Hyderabad, which brings out the impact of institutional programmes (Virmani, Seth 1985).

Two models have been suggested to evaluate training effectiveness. First is the expectation achievement model consisting of matching post- training achievement with pre- training expectation of the boss, peers, the sub-ordinates and trainee himself. The second is the experimental control group model where a group of employees who have gone through training is compared in terms of their performance with those who have not (Sikka 1985).

The data have been collected from 119 managers in the steel industry who had attended training in a company or external training programmes. A questionnaire has been administered and responses are tallied. Most respondents were found to be satisfied with the instructors, the size of training group, the training duration, the reading material and the training equipment. They all thought that the environment did help in carrying out some of the learning that took place during training (Jain 1985).

In the work-Evaluation methodology for training based on various research findings of Food and Agricultural Organizations of United Nations, recommended systematic evaluation for ‘agricultural training’ programmes is organized by agriculture extension agencies. Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board evaluated particularly growth, organization structure and problems in achieving managerial performance. It has brought out objectives of training and course content, method followed for effective training in service undertaking (Bhatnagar 1987).

Human resource Development in Public Enterprise dealt with a conceptual analysis of Human Resource Development, organizational development, performance appraisal and carrier development of Steel Authority of India Limited (Bansal 1991).

In the study on HRD practices in Indian industries a comparative study of BHEL and National Fertilizers Limited was made with various Human Resource Development concepts, objectives and practices and considered training as a sub-system (Jain 1996).

In the last two decades, organization has increasingly used computer–based instruction as a method to deliver training to employees and instruction to students (Huang 2010).

Performance and attitudinal outcomes were generally examined across four training designs: classroom training only, classroom training with self-coaching, classroom training with multi- source feedback and classroom training with self-coaching and multi- source feedback (Kules 2008).

The effectiveness of e-learning in the industrial setting at Level three is based on the Kirkpatrick model and compared to traditional classroom learning (Tews 2006).

Effectiveness was determined by assessing the transfer skills from training to the job (Yaw 2005).

To determine the impact of a management development program on organizational performance and to evaluate the influence of management relations on union grievance filing rates (Bostain 2000).

The development and application of a checklist for evaluating e-learning in organizations is based on Scriven’s Key Evaluation Checklist (Guidy-Oulai 2009)

(Michael S. Lane, Gerald L. Blakely, 1990) Management development programmes are increasingly being studied and evaluated, regarding their efficiency and effectiveness. Presents the results of a survey of 155 directors and vice-presidents of personnel and human resource management departments regarding the current status of their management development programmes. The results indicate that management development programmes do not seem to differentiate between levels of management.

(Oladele Akin,1991) Evaluation is increasingly being regarded as a powerful tool to enhance the effectiveness of training. Three major approaches to training evaluation: quality

ascription, quality assessment and quality control are highlighted. In order to enhance the effectiveness of training, evaluation should be integrated with organisational life.

(Phillip C. Wright,1992),Reports on a study of current and past training literature which suggests that, to be effective and to isolate both training needs and those problems having other, non-trainable solutions, training must be preceded by a needs analysis. Proposes a needs assessment model to illustrate an optimum needs assessment process, and compares this model with the Ontario Government's.

(Farhad Analoui 1995) Traditionally,the effectiveness of the senior officials within the public sector has been disaproportionately associated with task instead of people-related skills. A study of 74 senior managers within Railways,over three years,has revealed that managers,in order to become effective,not only require task and people skills but also self-development knowledge and skilss. Moreover, the above broad categories of managerial skills form a hierarchy which suggestd that the more senior positions which managers occupy,the greater the need for people and self development. Explores the implications of the above for senior management training and development in public sector briefly.

(Joe Perdue, Jack D. Ninemeier, Robert H. Woods, 2002) Describes a study undertaken to assess how private club managers perceive the relative effectiveness of alternative training methods to attain specific types of training objectives. Data were obtained from 123 club managers who were members of the Club Managers Association of America. Participants rated the effectiveness of 16 alternate training methods for potential use in six different types of training situations. Training methods studied included case study, video-tape, lecture, one-to-one, role play, games, computer simulations, paper and pencil, audiotapes, self-assessment, movies/films, multi-media, audio, computer and video conferencing and sensitivity training. Training objectives studied were knowledge acquisition, changing attitudes, problem solving, interpersonal skill development, participant acceptance and knowledge retention. Analysis of data indicated that one-to-one training is the preferred method to attain all objectives except interpersonal skill development.

(Diarmuid De Faoite, Colette Henry, 2002) Discusses the importance of proving the effectiveness of training. Effectiveness is the primary motive for training. Describes ways to evaluate training’s effectiveness, behaviour changes on the job being the most important. Defines an approach whereby individuals can see how they have changed and quantify the amount of change.

(Diarmuid De Faoite, Colette Henry, Kate Johnston, Peter van der Sijde,2003) A growing body of academic research has examined the effectiveness of entrepreneurship training and support initiatives, with recent studies focusing on the provision of training and other skills development opportunities. An important theme that has emerged from this work is the failure of many programmes and initiatives to take on board the particular needs of the entrepreneurs in developing training and support systems.

(Kate Johnston, Peter van der Sijde, 2003) Successfully measuring effectiveness in management training and development can be a difficult task. Design of a valid measurement programmed should include evaluation in key areas; including emotional reaction and knowledge gain measured after training interventions. Behavioural change and organisational impact measurements should be used on a longer time horizon to evaluate the progress and currency of the management development programme. Finally, research shows that maintaining a balance of the above measurements is the final key to success in measuring the effectiveness of management training and development.

(Gary D. Geroy, 2004) A common approach towards enhancing managerial effectiveness is to focus attention on improving the knowledge and skill of the manager,

(Ogundeji,2004 )The gap between evaluation theory and practice is a serious problem for training in industry and business[1]. A recent literature review of the summative evaluation on training noted.

(Ching-Yaw Chen, Phyra Sok, Keomony Sok,2007) A previous study found that the quality of education in Cambodia is poor compared to other developing countries. However, the working performance of commercial banks in Cambodia is high. It was speculated that effective training was the main factor underlying this contradiction. Therefore, the main purpose of this article is to explore the elements of training conducted by commercial banks in Cambodia and to examine their relationship with training effectiveness.

Wexley and Baldwin (1986) criticised the traditional training and development for its lack of accountability.  The lack of accountability and rigorous evaluation may be attributable in part to an unfounded belief that “training and development is good for the employees and the organisation; so let there be training budget and training programmes”.  This target-based (e.g., a specific number of employees to be trained during a given year) or budget-driven (influenced by the availability of time, energy, and resources) training and development efforts will ultimately lead to the result that “training is only a paid perquisite or free time for the employees devoid of daily stressors and distractions of the workplace on the one hand, and a wasteful expenditure for the management on the other”. 

Mumford (1988) observes that prior to participating in any training and development experience, participants implicitly ask themselves a variety of questions: Do I believe this training and development will help me or my subordinates?  Are there risks for me if I perform poorly?  How does this experience relate to my job performance?  Not surprisingly, the yield from training and development initiatives will be maximised when employees perceive that desirable outcomes (or avoidance of undesirable outcomes) are attained as a result of their full commitment to a training and development programme.Grider et. al (1990) Conducted a study to determine which training evaluation method were perceived to be the  most effective by training professionals, and which methods were most frequently used . For this purpose they selected members of American Society for Training & Development  (ASTD). The findings of the study suggested:

Integrate T&D into the strategic plan of the firm. Provide necessary resources to evaluate the training activity effectiveness. Establish an information network to facilitate access to necessary data for before and after

measurement The most important benefit to be gained from successful evaluation will be improvement in

organisational performance and increased employee satisfaction.

Bramely (1992) believes that behavioural change is introduced through training evaluation presents a, three part approach:

Evaluation of training as a process Evaluation of changes in knowledge, skills, attitudes and levels of effectiveness Various approaches to evaluation such as interviews, surveys, various methods of observing

behaviour and testing.

Fuchsberg (1993) observed that many organisations base their training and development budgets on annual projections for new initiatives that link, optimistically, with business requirements.  Now, the need to rigorously evaluate training and development initiatives in economic terms is becoming more apparent.  As the training and development efforts in many organisations continue to expand and grow, many new competing programmes will be proposed, and senior management and board members will continue to ask hard questions about the projected value or likely financial impact of training and development investments.    

Evaluation of the economic and   non-economic benefits, and the investments associated with the training and development programmes is absolutely critical to determining how training and development initiatives contribute to corporate performance.  Many are currently struggling to evolve a valid, reliable and operationally viable model to measure and evaluate the effectiveness of training and development programmes (Phillips, 1997, 1999; Taylor & associates, 1993; Lawson, 1993, 1994;  Cronshaw & Alexander, 1991; Crawford & Webley, 1992).

Sackett and Mullen, (1993) suggested a broader perspective on a variety of aspects of training process. The purpose of evaluation is to help organisations make decision about future training activities, and provide tools needed to assess the type of evaluation possible in a given situation, to conduct the most informative evaluation possible given the constraints of the situation, and to communicate to organisational decision makers both the strengths and the limitations of whatever evaluation data is obtained.

Kraiger et. al (1993) Proposed cognitive, skill-based and affective learning outcomes (relevant to training) and recommended potential evaluation measures. They integrated theory and research from a number of diverse disciplines and have provided a multidimensional perspective to learning outcomes and advanced the theory of training evaluation by providing a conceptually based scheme of learning constructs, measurement foci, and measurement techniques.

Lewis and Thornhill (1994) Examined the relationship between training evaluation, organisational objectives, and organisational culture. Explicit recognition of organisational objectives linked to an integrated approach to training evaluation will certainly improve the

effectiveness of evaluation. The absence of or ineffective practice of training evaluation within so many organisational is directly related to the nature of organisational culture.

Pearce (1995) Evaluation tends to be a neglected part of training. If it is considered at all, it is usually at a last stage in the training process. The absence of at least some evaluation can lead to an enormous waste of resources.

Mann and Robertson (1996) conducted a study in Europe to answer the question ‘What should training evaluations evaluate?’ They selected 29 subjects (10 female and 19 male) from a three-day training seminar for European nationals run in Geneva. The results showed that the trainees did learn from the training sessions and, although they did not retain all they learned, they did know more one month after training than they did before training. They recommended that an effective way for practitioners to evaluate training is to measure self-efficacy regarding the trained tasks, immediately after training.

 Saxena (1997, a.) cited a study conducted by American Society of Training and Development (ASTD) on the practice of evaluation.  It was reported that the actual practice of evaluation did not often follow the strict recommendations of evaluation literature.  This was largely explained by the fact that many training practitioners had not found the literature’s advice applicable or useful for their organisation.  Most of the training managers who participated in ASTD’s research effort believed that there was value in a concerted effort to increase the practice of employee training evaluation.

  All the organisations represented in the study evaluated some aspect of their training programmes.  In terms of the four-level Kirkpatrick model, 75 to 100 per cent of them evaluated training programmes at the participant’s ‘reaction’ level.  Virtually all of them also evaluated participant’s ‘knowledge gains’ in some of their training programmes.  Twenty-five per cent of their training programmes were evaluated at the ‘learning’ level.  ‘Behaviour’ change on the job was the least measured among companies surveyed, only about 10 per cent evaluated training at this level.  Employee training was evaluated at the ‘organisational results’ level about 25 per cent of the time, despite new pressures on training practitioners to assess the economic worth of HRD activities.  Sixty-six per cent of the training managers reported that HRD professionals were under increasing pressure to show that programmes produced favourable bottom line results.  Although most training programmes were evaluated at the reaction and learning levels, these levels were not always consistent with the reasons for evaluation.  ‘Impact on job performance’ and ‘economic gains within organisation’ were evaluated the least.  Most organisations evaluated training programmes to meet the training department demands, employee demands, and management demands.   

Saxena (1997, b.) undertook a study on the role of evaluation of training in designing training programmes in institutions of government, private, public and banking sectors.  A total of 100 training and development programme participants were selected randomly by the investigator.  They represented the four clusters: (1) Government training institutions, (2) HRD centers of private sectors, (3) HRD centers of public sectors, and (4) Training institutions of banks.  Data were collected by administering the questionnaires.  In addition, structured and unstructured interviews were conducted by the investigator with both the top managers of training institutions and the trainees.  It was found that:1. the institutions and HRD centers defined the scope of training evaluation from trainee’s

development level to the organisational effectiveness level;

2. the training institutions were very clear about the purpose of evaluating the training programmes;

3. ‘lack of adequate evaluation methodology’, ‘lack of expertise’ and ‘fear of exposure to weaknesses’ were cited as the constraints for obtaining and collecting evaluation data;

4. ‘overall impact on the performance of organisations’, ‘change in skills and attitudes of trainees’, and ‘quality of subject matter in courses’ were cited as the most important indicators of course effectiveness;

5. training institutions concentrated their evaluation efforts mostly on reaction and learning levels; and

6. training institutions and HRD centers were found to have plans to improve the courses by effective evaluation procedures. 

 Campbell (1998) suggested evaluation can provide a sense of satisfaction and accomplishment to the personnel associated with a course or programme. Every one needs feedback on how they are doing, and evidence that training is worthwhile is a source of pride. Apart from this, periodic evaluations are necessary to assure optimum training relevance, effectiveness, and cost efficiency.

Blanchard et al. (2000) studied training evaluation practices at both management and non-management level in Canada through a survey of 202 organisations, employing a total of over 4,70,000 employees, thus representing a significant portion of the Canadian workforce. The survey data indicated that only one-fifth of the Canadian organisations evaluated their training as suggested by academic standards. The researchers presented practitioner perspective as a supporting rationale for the survey results.

 Yadapadithaya (2001) studied the current practices of evaluating training and development programmes in the Indian corporate sector on the basis of data collected from written questionnaires mailed to 252 respondent companies – 127 private, 99 public, and 26 multinational corporations (MNCs).  The major findings of his study   include the following:

High pressure for increased quality, innovation, and productivity acts as a major driving force for the Indian corporate training and development programmes.

Most of the key result areas of training and development function are related to the measurement and evaluation of training effectiveness.

Nearly 86 per cent of the private sector, 81 per cent of the public sector, and all the MNCs evaluate the effectiveness of training in one way or the other.

The major purpose of evaluation is to determine the effectiveness of the various components of a training and development programme.

Organisations rely mostly on the participants’ reactions to monitor the effectiveness of training.

An overwhelming majority of the organisations use “questionnaires” as an instrument to gather relevant data for evaluation.

In most of the cases, evaluation was done immediately after the training. Majority of the private and public sector organisations use one-shot programme design and

more than half of the MNCs also use single group, pre-test and post-test design for evaluating the effectiveness of training and development programmes.

Absence of transfer of learning from the place of training to the workplace has been a major perceived deficiency of the corporate training and development system.

Indian corporate sector is currently facing the challenge of designing and developing more valid, reliable and operational measures to evaluate the effectiveness of training and development.

Srivastava. et al. (2001) evaluated the effectiveness of various training programmes offered by the in-house training centre of Tata Steel, Shavak Nanavati Training Institute (SNTI), India.  Effectiveness of training was measured in terms of various outcomes such as satisfaction level; reaction and feedback of participants; and change in performance and behavior as perceived by participants, their immediate supervisors, and departmental heads.  The sample consisted of sixty departmental heads, fourteen hundred participants and thirteen hundred immediate supervisors from various departments.  The data were collected through structured interview schedule.  It was found that the satisfaction levels of participants, their superiors, and divisional heads were above average for all types of programmes.  The participants were benefited from the programmes, but transfer of learning was not as expected from their supervisors.  There were changes in the post-training performance ranging from 10 to 37 per cent.  Training programmes could meet the objectives only to a limited extent.

Ogunu (2002) in his study titled “Evaluation of Management Training and Development Programme of Guinness Nigeria PLC” examined the management training and development programme of Guinness Nigeria PLC, Benin City with a view to ascertaining its relevance, adequacy, and effectiveness. A convenience sampling design was adopted, whereby the researcher used all the 50 management staff of the company’s Benin Brewery as subjects for the study.  Data were collected by administering a questionnaire titled ‘Management training and development questionnaire’ (MTDQ) developed by the researcher.  Hypotheses testing in the study revealed that facilities for staff training were adequate for effective training of management staff, training programmes for management staff were relevant to the jobs they performed, and the training programmes undergone by staff did indeed improve their performance and effectiveness at works.           

Interestingly, much of the existing literature on training and development has lamented the failure of organisational efforts to significantly improve the knowledge, skills, and attitudes of employees or affect business performance (Campbell, Dunnette, Lawler, & Weick, 1970; Greiner, 1987; Hall, 1984).  As Hall (1984, p. 159) pointed out more than a decade ago, “if strategic human resource management is rare in contemporary organisations, then the strategic development of managers is virtually non-existent”.  Greiner (1987, p. 37) similarly concluded that “entertainment without development” accounts for about 75 per cent of the management development budget.

Shelton et al., (2001) This research analyzes the significance of employee development programs on employee retention and job satisfaction. It also takes business success into consideration. The method for this project consisted of an analysis of two studies, one conducted by the Gallup Organization and the other conducted by the American Society for Training and Development and the Society for Human Resource Management. The study determined that training and development increase employee satisfaction and are significant in an employee’s decision to stay with a company. It also indicated that the impact of training

decreases without the organizational culture to support employees in the development process.

Ashton et al., (2004) This publication deals with the impact of organizational structures on workplace learning. A qualitative empirical study was carried out to explore the relevance of this model for an understanding of the impact of organizational structures on learning. The methodology comprised face-to-face, semi-structured interviews with a sample of 195 employees of a mayor multinational corporation in South-East Asia. At the time of the research there was an attempt to move away from the rigid hierarchy of the past toward a more flexible structure. The findings of this qualitative case study indicate major differences in the organizational restriction between staff on top and on the bottom of the hierarchy. The access to information and knowledge is influence by the attitude and behavior o management, supervisors and co-workers as they were all in a position to act as“gatekeepers” to knowledge. Informal knowledge sharing was limited as knowledge was perceived as a personal competitive advantage.There was a high variability of the perceived quality regarding the support for learning. This was attributed to the current shift in the responsibility for training from the training department to the line managers within the company. Many supervisors were not aware of the importance of supporting the learning process of their colleagues and also missed the skills and knowledge about how to support learning. Ashton closes his article with the suggestion on measures to improve learning and skill development, such as the training of staff in how to support learning, the introduction of self-managed teams and performance related pay.