KIRKPATRICK’S EVALUATION MODEL MODEL

EVALUATION OF TRAINING - KIRKPATRICK’S MODEL

There are numerous paradigms and designs developed to measure Human Resource Development and training effectiveness, but the most recognized paradigm is developed by Dr. Donald Kirkpatrick. Kirkpatrick recommended that there are four levels of measurement, which can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of a training programme and these are: emotional reaction, the achievement of objectives, behavioural changes and impact on the organization (AlYahya & Mat, 2013).

Video-3 below simply and clearly explains the four-levels of training evaluation designed by Dr.Donald Kirkpatrick. The evaluation is designed as a sequence to evaluate training programmes subsequently the organizations will not invest their time and money on training which does not have a return on investment. The video highlights that by analyzing each of these four levels a trainer can gain an in-depth understanding of how effective the training was and how it can be enhanced in the future.       

Video-3: Kirkpatrick's 4 Levels of Evaluation 

                                             (Source: The Daily Project Manager, 2015) 

The four-level of evaluation explained by various authors are given below for further understanding; 

Emotional Reaction :

This level measures how the participant of the training programme responded to the training and is imperative to gauge the response since it helps to recognize how well the training was received by the participant. Furthermore, it helps to enhance the training for future participants, including recognizing essential areas or subjects that are omitted from the training (Ikramina & Gustomo 2014). 

Achievement of Objectives (Learning) :

The knowledge gained as a result of attending the training programme is measured at this level. This level measures the results of learning; however, it does not measure the result of job performance. The technique for measuring this level’s viability is through “paper pencil-test”. It is not the pre-imperative criteria for behavioural efficiency or change. The response of training assesses at first whether the objective of the training was met by identifying the: knowledge gained after training or how much of learning has actually occurred, how adequately the knowledge is being utilized after a training programme, back support for the utilization of knowledge, the pertinent substance of the training, participant’s desire from the training programme and the outcome of overall programme (Rafiq, 2015). This level of training assessment of Kirkpatrick paradigm is carried out after three months of training (Rafiq, 2015).     

Behavioural Changes :

Behavioural evaluation is focused on monitoring the transformation of employee behaviour after the training at the workplace. The assessment criteria for this level is the change in disposition when the employee has been through training and apply the skills acquired thereof, hence behavioural evaluation is external in nature (Badu, 2013).

Impact on Organization (Results) :

The final level of assessment is to monitor the impact on the Organization or Results, this alludes to the advantages of the organization’s viewpoint and Kirkpatrick (1994) identified this as the “final outcome that took place because the participants attended the training programme’’. The final outcomes are related to cost-effectiveness of training or return on investment and include an enhanced level of production, improved quality, diminished costs decreased frequency and/or severity of mishaps, enhanced sales, decreased labour turnover and higher profits. Normally these results are the reason behind attending the training programme. As per Kirkpatrick, when moving from level to level, the assessment procedure turns out to be more troublesome and time-consuming, however, it gives more vital information (O’Neil, Wainess & Baker 2005).

Reference List: 

AlYahya, MA & Mat,NB.(2013) Evaluation of Effectiveness of Training and Development:The Kirkpatrick Model. Asian Journal of Business and Management Sciences,2(11),pp.14-24. Available from http://www.ajbms.org/articlepdf/2ajbms20132112743.pdf [accessed 20 September 2018].

Badu,S.Q.(2013) The Implementation of Kirkpatrick's Evaluation Model in the Learning of Initial Value and Boundary Condition Problems.International Journal of Learning & Development,3(5),pp.74-88.Available from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.685.9593&rep=rep1&type=pdf   [accessed 20 September 2018].

Ikramina,F. & Gustomo,A.(2014) Analysis of Training Evaluation Process using Kirkpatrick's Training Evaluation Model at PT.Bank Tabungan Negara (Persero) Tbk. Journal of Business and Management,3(1),pp.102-111.Available from https://journal.sbm.itb.ac.id/index.php/jbm/article/download/1088/739 [accessed 20 September 2018].

O'Neil,H.F.,Wainess,R. & Baker,E.L.(2005) Classification of learning outcomes: evidence from the computer games literature.The Curriculum Journal,16(4),pp.455-474.Available from http://www.fi.uu.nl/publicaties/literatuur/endnote_ecgbl_935_o_neil.pdf [accessed 20 September 2018].

Rafiq,M.(2015) Training Evaluation in an Organization using Kirkpatrick Model: A Case Study of PIA.Journal of Entrepreneurship & Organization Management,4(3),pp.1-8.Available from https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/training-evaluation-in-an-organization-using-kirkpatrick-model-a-case-study-of-pia-2169-026X-1000151.pdf [accessed 20 September 2018].

The Daily Project Manager (2015) Kirkpatrick's 4 Level of Evaluation [video].Available from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aw9sqEvfuf8&t=44s [accessed 14 January 2020].