Can anyone tell me how to measure the impact of training?

Hi Leca,

Yes, this is a very big challenge facing many organizations. TrainingCheck.com has some useful guidance materials on how to measure learning, application of skills, business impact and ROI here:

www.trainingcheck.com/help-centre-2/guide-to-training-evaluation/

You can also sign up to a free account to send out example evaluation surveys aimed at each of these areas which allow you to collect and analyze feedback from both participants and managers: http://www.trainingcheck.com/

Hope that's helpful to you.

The biggest reason that it's so hard to measure the value of training is that it very rarely is put into use. How many seminars have you gone to where you learned some new skill, then went back to your job and never used it?

Training has the most immediate value it it's something that a person needs to do NOW. If someone, say an architect, needs to use a new modeling program tomorrow afternoon, the training will be put to good use. If they need to use it in March and are trained today, they will forget about 99% of it before they use it.

Another example: I took a product management course in November. While PM is my next likely position when I'm promoted, I'm not a PM (nor is there a slot currently open in my department). Will I remember what I learned? Probably not.

What is the value of that training to my company? It might not be zero, but it's a lot less than the cost (three days of my time plus the cost of the class)

I've spent most of my career training staff and volunteers in my nonprofit and headed up my division's Learning & Development Department for five years. I've since moved into another role involving CRM which means I'm very interested in software training.

IMHO, focus less on the smiley faced evaluations given out at the end of seminars and training sessions which tend to measure only emotional response. Focus more on the actual behavior changed. This means that a period of time should pass in order for the learners to apply what they've learned. Then use a variety of methods to solicit feedback including online surveys, feedback from supervisors and others who observe the learners in their native habitats, and whatever metrics might be useful (sales up 3% for those who went through sales training over those who didn't).

Google Kirkpatrick's Levels of Evaluations. I believe we're talking about a level 3 evaluation here.

Things I strongly believe. First, TOMW, above, is dead on right. Second, the people in charge of training must have excellent relationships with their counterparts in those departments where they're training staff. Above all, training should be relevant and aligned with business goals. Third, the training department had better be able to defend the resources it uses or they will be slashed the next time the budget is cut.

My first boss used to hammer into my thick skull, "You pay for training whether you do it or not!" I still believe that. It's up to the trainers to provide relevant training in a timely fashion.

To answer your question, focus on the behavior change using a variety of sources. Did change occur? If so, how much. Does that change make it easier to reach your business goals?

Warning: Few organizations focus on behavior change because it requires more resources that just sending out that smiley face survey. But it's darn well worth it, especially when you have to defend your training department in times of scarce resources. After all, if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the pollution.

Leca,

Can you point to a recent accomplishment of your directs following a training activity?

When I observe recent training leading to an accomplishment (that otherwise had not been possible)...I make sure it is noted with feedback. Further, I may mention it in passing to my boss...and document the accomplishment in the annual review.

Perhaps you were seeking something more quantitative...but this is what I have done in the past.

Would it be easier to measure the effect of not training? Would that be more effective? I just turned it from a conversation about making a profit into a conversation about managing risk.
Here is how I think you could take that and do something with it. You have a few performers that are top notch, the top 10-20%. What is the risk (or cost) of not developing them more…investing in them more?   You could teach them…and I bet you coach them on some things, but you don’t have the time or knowledge to develop them fully. Get an expert to do that. What’s the risk to your own effectiveness if you try?
That’s what I suggest, flip it. You need (must do) to invest in your top performers. You can’t afford to do it all or enough yourself.  
RC