Training Industry Magazine - July/August 2019 - 19

Alisa beamed as she presented the
final report for the year-long leadership
development initiative she spearheaded
at her organization. She recapped the
thoughtfully designed, blended training
curriculum and its related test scores
and comments. She highlighted positive
results in key company metrics, including
employee retention, customer satisfaction,
product sales volume and promotions of
the program's participants.
She eagerly awaited the management
team's reaction. After some pleasant
nodding, someone asked, "Alisa, please
explain
how
training
specifically
influenced the organizational results
you have presented, such as customer
satisfaction. I would think there are
multiple contributors to that outcome."
Alisa began to sweat; she didn't really have
any supporting data.
If this story sounds familiar, you are in good
company. Many training plans, even those
for award-winning programs, are missing
one critical element that will both ensure
their success and demonstrate value to
stakeholders: Level 3 data connecting onthe-job performance to program results.
This common omission has cast doubt on
the value of training and is a key factor
in the cyclical nature of training budgets.
However, creating and implementing a
plan with the all-important Level 3 data is
not as difficult as some assume.

THE BASICS OF
TRAINING VALUE
Begin designing your program using the
four levels of training evaluation, or the
Kirkpatrick Model (see Figure 1 on page
20). Savvy training professionals know
that every training request should first be
considered through the lens of what Level
4 result it will support, meaning, what
high-level organizational outcome the
training should positively influence.
From there, the elusive missing piece
should be designed: the Level 3 plan.
Both the training professional and the
organization should work together to
define what needs to change in the onthe-job environment and employee
performance to yield the training's
desired results.

factors. One plus two does not equal
four, meaning that formal training alone,
no matter how good, will not produce
a meaningful level of organizational
results and cannot be credited with
results without sufficient data showing
the connection.

FORMAL TRAINING ALONE
CANNOT BE CREDITED WITH
ORGANIZATIONAL RESULTS
WITHOUT SUFFICIENT
DATA SHOWING THE
CONNECTION.

THE MISSING PIECE

There is strong agreement that formal
training alone yields a fairly small
portion of any program's organizational
results. On-the-job experiences are the
biggest source of learning for employees,
according to the "Deconstructing 70-2010" research report published by Training
Industry. An organization's on-the-job
environment and culture significantly
impact what employees will or won't do,
regardless of their knowledge.

Alisa's final report, like many similar
reports, was missing the Level 3
component. She jumped from a detailed
explanation of the training program to
taking credit for organizational results
that, by nature, have many contributing

During the next round of budget cuts
training will likely be on the list, because
no one can really tell if it was successful
or not through anecdotal evidence
alone. This is why creating a Level 3 plan
and defining roles and responsibilities

Then, the training professional can
design the training program (Level 2),
and consider the type of environment
that would best support the learning
effort and eliminate unnecessary
distractions (Level 1).

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

| 19

https://www2.trainingindustry.com/Deconstructing_70-20-10 https://www2.trainingindustry.com/Deconstructing_70-20-10 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