Evaluation of a Training Program

The specification of values forms a basis for evaluation. The basis of evaluation and the mode of collection of information necessary for evaluation should be determined at the planning stage. The process of training evaluation has been defined as any attempt to obtain information on the effects of training performance and to assess the value of training in the light of that information. Evaluation helps in controlling and correcting the training programs. Hamblin suggested five levels at which evaluation of training, can take place viz., reactions learning, job behavior organization and ultimate values.


Trainee’s reactions to the overall usefulness of the training including the coverage of the topics, the, method of presentation techniques used to clarify things often throw light on the effectiveness of the program. Potential questions to trainees might include: (1) what were your learning goals for the programs? (2) Did you like this program? (3) Did you like this program? (4) Would you recommend it to others who have similar learning goals? (5) What suggestions do you have for improving the programs? (6) Should the organizations continue to offer it?


Training programs and trainer’s ability are evaluated on the basis of quantity of content learned a time in which it is learned and learner’s ability to use or supply the content learned.

Job behavior:

This evaluation includes the manner and extent to which the trainee has applied his learning to his job.


The evaluation measures the use of training, learning and change in the job behavior of the department / organization in the form of increased productivity, quality, morale, sales turnover and the like.

Ultimate value:

It is the measurement of ultimate result of the contributions of the training programs to the company goals like survival, growth, profitability etc and to the individual’s goals like development of personality and social goals like maximizing social benefits.

Decision Points in Planning, Training, Evaluation:

They are:

1) Should an evaluation be done? Who would evaluate?
2) What is the purpose of evaluation? There are mainly two purposes of doing evaluation. They are justification evaluation and determination evaluation. Justification evaluations are undertaken as reactions to mandate other purposes that will make evaluation efforts more fruitful. These purposes include training needs assessment program improvements and impact evaluation.
3) What will be measured? The focus of the evaluation will be on training and delivery program content, materials, impact of training on individuals though learning behavior or performance change. Learning can measured through pre test and post tests. Evaluate the effects of training after the trainee returns to the workplace using changes in between or the work results as indicators.
4) How comprehensive will the evaluation be? The scope or the duration and comprehensiveness of the evaluation are influenced by available support, communication and evaluation purpose.
5) Who has the authority and responsibility? Who has the authority and responsibility at different stages of evaluation will be determined by the factors like personnel, credibility of internal staff, and communication objectivity of internal staff to do an evaluation regardless of results.
6) What are the sources of data? The most common sources of evaluation data are reactions opinions and /or test results of the participants managers, supervisors, production records, quality control, financial records, personnel records, safety records etc.
7) How will the data be collected and compiled? Data can be collected before training for need analysis or pre testing purposes, during programs to make improvements along the way and after training for evaluation. Next step is selection of treatment or control groups and determination of nature of samples. Data can be compiled either manually or by computers.
8) How will the data be analyzed and reported? First reporting issue is concerned with audiences like participants or trainees, training staff, managers’ customers etc. Second and third issues are concerned with analysis and results and accuracy policies and formats respectively.

Source: HRM

  • P Vijayaraghavan

    how one can measure the effectiveness of the program in due course of time as its effects may wear off with time.

  • kshantaram

    evaluating a training programme is a postmortem excercise. rather a sample survey in the form a structured group dialogue with the stake holders be done to design a need based programme keeping both short-term and long-term objectives in view – with the prospective participants, their managers and supervisors, some top management members.

    a similar exercise could be briefly done some two months of the programme to evaluate the impact of the programme on the participants, in the departments, and the perception of the top management – while suggestions could be taken to make such programme design and implementation more effective and relevant for organisational goals and productivity. this will also promote reinforcement of learning which is very important for the programme outcomes to become productive on the ground.

    knowledge management, learning organisation, are cultures to be built while generally one tends to be cynical while talking of training and training programmes talking in the language of outcomes and ROI which are well placed concerns, but we need not stop the schools in the country threrefor. the child has to finish his formal education to launch him into this world in general terms and each child learns at his own pace based on the variables in the environment around him.

    while in general participants by themselves do feel a value of the programme brushing their thought processes, the value of the interaction in the programme, and scope for team building across the organisation, the social value of the programme in bringing people together, the scope for ventilation of organisational problems and issues, etc

    to make programmes effective in terms of ground outputs the managers need to be selective in nominations, prepare the participant for the programme, discuss the programme with him after the programme, set agenda for implementation with time frame, offer implementation projects, give feedback to hr and the top management on successful implementation and improvisations done and behaviour modifications that took place,etc.

    but doing all this needs time at the disposal of the managers and the participants while the hands are full with operational agenda time falling short generally while manpower is planned at a sub-optimum level, while expecting that innovation, training, learning, communications, etc will happen within the 8 hours day planned. probably manpower planning should take into account time needed for all these purposes on the part of the managers and employees and the organisation as a whole as part of the industrial engineering exercise rather than pushing all developmental agenda into the 8 hours overloading the organisation and it’s people. people are not spared for training programmes or are called in between and disturbed, or one attends the programme partially only, or rushes to the job and operations at hand immediately after the programme.

    or in case if it is felt people are not really that busy than there is something wrong with the culture and morale in the organisation, while managers need to be trained in time management and hr skills in coaching, mentoring, counseling, leadership skills etc to enhance the work environment where things like training, performance appraisals, etc can flower effectively as part of organisational values and priorities.

    may be it is fair enough if the training programme is a well thought out one, and sufficient time is spent at the end of the programme with the participants in understanding what they have absorbed, the goals they have set for themselves, and their suggestions for enhancing the future effectiveness of a programme which can be factored while launching the programme next – rather than collect written feedbacks, make a heap of compilations, and review on paper sometime later when the context is lost and the programme no more exists perhaps. it is perhaps enough as long as there is a perception that the programmes are relevant for the orgnasiation, are generally well received, improvements are being made, management support exists, and the programmes are making a posive contribution in general in promoting learning and development in the organisation enhancing the quality of manpower and their morale while also adding to the employer brand value, and the programmes are happening at reasonable costs and are not a total waste. humble regards.