Training Industry Magazine - July/August 2019 - 17

BUILDING LEADERS
SAM SHRIVER & MARSHALL GOLDSMITH

JUSTIFYING THE
INVESTMENT IN
LEADERSHIP TRAINING
After reflecting on the philosophy classes
that we took in college, and comparing
notes, we realized our experiences
were strikingly similar. When it came
time for the final exam, our professors
dramatically turned to a chalkboard
and wrote out a version of the question:
"Why live?"

to publicly suggest the following
parameters of impact analysis for a
training intervention:

And, tempted though we were to respond
by writing down something like
"Why not?" and head for the door, we
succumbed to traditional expectations
and filled blue book after blue book
recounting what we had learned from
reading the work of one philosopher
after another throughout the semester.

* Behavior: Did the learners change
behavior because of what they
learned?

WHEN YOU BEGIN
WITH THE BUSINESS
RESULTS, THERE IS
AN ELEMENT OF
CONSISTENCY THAT
SURPRISES NO ONE.

Now, fast forward to this very moment
and let's consider the question: "Why do
leadership training?" We'll come back
to what we think is a viable answer
shortly but, first, a little side story. In
large part because of the model that
has been ascribed to him since the
1960s, there is a natural inclination
to attribute measurement strategy
for leadership training to Donald
Kirkpatrick. He was the first person

* Reaction: Did learners
learning experience?

the

* Learning: Did the learners learn
anything?

* Results: Are there any results we can
tie to the behavior change?
In the mid-1980s, there was a highly
disruptive article published by training
guru Bob Pike that essentially posed the
question: "What if we turned the Four
Levels Model upside down?"
Donald Kirkpatrick was initially resistant
to the suggestion, but later came
around to the idea. Donald's successors,
Jim and Wendy Kirkpatrick of Kirkpatrick
Partners, analyzed the model and
inverted the starting point for effective
measurement strategy.
When you begin with the results most
organizations seek, there is an element
of consistency that surprises no one.
There is a bottom-line, productivity
measure that needs to continue
migrating upward and to the right; there
is the organization's ability to attract
and keep key talent. There are also the
transformational commitments many
organizations make to positively impact
the world in any number of creative

and imaginative ways. Regardless of
what those strategic initiatives happen
to be, they are the starting point for
measuring the impact of training. You
literally ask questions, and get answers,
that cascade from results to behavior to
learning instead of the other way around
- for example:
* What are our key strategic initiatives?
- How can training help us achieve the
objectives dictated by our strategy?
* If employees implemented what they
learned in training, what would be
different?
- What would people at all levels start
doing? Stop doing? Do more of?
* Given the answers to those questions,
what form should our training take?
- Is it both relevant and engaging?
- Does our design intentionally include
and feature extended stakeholders
(e.g., the managers of the trainees
who possess the potential to drive
desired behavior change)?
So, why do leadership training? You
do leadership training to enable your
organization to achieve its strategic
objectives. We are well past the point in
life where regurgitating what we know in
a blue book or two matters to anyone.
Marshall Goldsmith is the world authority
in helping successful leaders get even better.
Sam Shriver is the executive vice president
at The Center for Leadership Studies. Email
Marshall and Sam.

T R A I N I N G I N DUSTR Y MAGAZ INE -LEARNING ANALYTICS 20 19 I WWW. T RAININGINDU S T RY . C OM/ MAGAZ I NE

| 17

https://www.situational.com/ https://www.trainingindustry.com/magazine

Training Industry Magazine - July/August 2019

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Training Industry Magazine - July/August 2019