Evaluating Training Effectiveness - 6.2.2 Competence, Awareness and Training

[DrM2u]

Re: 6.2.2 Competence, awareness and training - Evaluating the Effectiveness of Traini

Your method is fine. But could you please elaborate on how to practically implement the method through documents. If you can give some practical example with associated documents it will be immensely helpful.

Thanks,

Vedalaveni

It is not my method. I think that the four levels of evaluating training were formalized by A.J. Romiszowski in his book 'Designing Instructional Systems', but I might be wrong. I am not sure what you mean by "how to practically implement the method through documents". Are you looking for examples of evaluations at each level?

 

[Stijloor]

Thank you! Here is a format to record the observations of the supervisor.Could you please comment on that please?

I like that "performance" is included in the training assessment.
I just hope that supervisors and managers understand what "performance" means and that they apply this in a consistent manner. In other words, the performance evaluation criteria should be defined and agreed upon. I also understand that there is always some subjectivity involved. Start a trial of this process, get feedback from the users, and improve.

Stijloor.

 

[Richard Pike]

Re: 6.2.2 Competence, awareness and training - Evaluating the Effectiveness of Traini

Yes it was. And assessment of competency is essential to measuring/quantifying effectiveness of training. I do not see that meaningful assessment or measurement of training effectiveness can be done without paying attention to the competencies required - eg, have they been developed? Do the trainees know them/can demonstrate them, etc.

One does NOT have to have training in order to be competent! prior skill or experience may suffice.

Training can address the areas to which competence may be enhance - preparation for a new position / correction of poor performance / etc etc.

Any assessment of competency (in regard to training) must only be conducted against the specific purpose of the training conducted. Any training worth anything will have predefined outcomes- BUT - the purpose of attending the training may well have been to absorb only "specific" outcomes.

Many Auditors get bogged down in this area. The question is - in simple terms - how is it known if the Training is effective -

(yes I know its not a direct quote - but thanks be i NEVER use direct quotes in any QMS its a sure fire way to gain adversaries.

The Question is ? why was the person sent on the training, were they told what to expect - were they told in what context they would be expected to contribute the new knowledge to their performance - and after the Training -- some time after - were they interviewed to establish if the intent of the training was actually met - including increased competence of the individual who was "trained"

While they are at it they can be given the opportunity to suggest weaknesses, strengths and improvements to the actual training and the training system itself.

All that, can be achieved on one piece of interactive paper-

give that paper a few headings - and it becomes a process -

evaluate - summarize and file it, and it becomes a record.

Review it - and it forms part of overall training effectiveness evaluation!

 

[JaneB]

Re: 6.2.2 Competence, awareness and training - Evaluating the Effectiveness of Traini

One does NOT have to have training in order to be competent! prior skill or experience may suffice.

No, of course one doesn't.
You appear to have formed an impression that I said competency is only acquired through training. I'm not sure what led you to draw that conclusion, but it is completely erroneous.

 

[Richard Pike]

Re: 6.2.2 Competence, awareness and training - Evaluating the Effectiveness of Traini

No, of course one doesn't.
You appear to have formed an impression that I said competency is only acquired through training. I'm not sure what led you to draw that conclusion, but it is completely erroneous.

I think you perhaps picked up on one line only. After re-reading my post I cannot see how - if the full post is read in context - I led you believe that I formed that opinion. However I am sorry if you were offended.

original quote = I am interested to learn how some companies are evaluating the effectiveness of training

The issue was "effectiveness of training" and my point was that "competence" is not "necessarily" a measure of "training effectiveness".

The training can be hopeless but the person competent or vice a verse.

My point was - what was expected from the training? - was that told in advance to the "trainee"? and was it evaluated (perhaps by interview with the trainee) sometime after the training?

In this case quote = "assessment of competency is essential to measuring/quantifying effectiveness of training" could under various circumstances, indeed be misleading.

 

[JaneB]

Re: 6.2.2 Competence, awareness and training - Evaluating the Effectiveness of Traini

Richard,
No, I wasn't offended. But felt a need to clarify.

 

[Sparklesp1]

Re: 6.2.2 Competence, awareness and training - Evaluating the Effectiveness of Traini

Thanks for the tools Sam. Has anyone heard of a bare minimum procedural training such as having the employee "read and Acknowledge" in writing that they read and understood a procedure? If so, what are ways we can measure the effectiveness?

 

[Stijloor]

Re: 6.2.2 Competence, awareness and training - Evaluating the Effectiveness of Traini

Thanks for the tools Sam. Has anyone heard of a bare minimum procedural training such as having the employee "read and Acknowledge" in writing that they read and understood a procedure? If so, what are ways we can measure the effectiveness?

Employees will (always) sign a piece of paper that they "read and acknowledged" the procedure. Why would they do otherwise?

The best way to verify COMPETENCY are observations by their immediate supervisor. If an employee can indeed PERFORM the job safely, effectively and efficiently, then competency is verified and can be recorded.

Stijloor.

 

[JaneB]

Re: 6.2.2 Competence, awareness and training - Evaluating the Effectiveness of Traini

Employees will (always) sign a piece of paper that they "read and acknowledged" the procedure. Why would they do otherwise?

As you say, yes, of course they will.

The best way to verify COMPETENCY are observations by their immediate supervisor. If an employee can indeed PERFORM the job safely, effectively and efficiently, then competency is verified and can be recorded.

Good advice - can they do the job? Or are they needing to redo things/making mistakes? What you say will verify competency.

The question could also have meant - can we measure the 'effectiveness' of this training approach (vs another). If that was the question, supervisor observation wouldn't do it.

One might do different approaches on different groups and compare results. One might ask both supervisor & employees for feedback in such a case. But unless the company culture is one that invites and welcomes negative feedback and is willing to respond positively to comments such as "no, just reading & signing a procedure isn't as useful as having an instructor-led session"), it would be pointless.

 

[Richard Pike]

Hi Jane

original quote = " I am interested to learn how some companies are evaluating the effectiveness of training .. "

Fully agree with your comments ref individual competency.

I would however be interested to hear your view on evaluating the "effectiveness of training". e.g. say 100 people had gone through a training program - how do we evaluate how good that program is?

If everybody passes (competent) is it a good program? My opinion is that we have a typical - input - output situation. If the Input is poor (delegate) then this will effect the output.

It is my opinion that pre-selection for training is often deficient -The base requirements for the employee "to become competent" forms a major part of ensuring overall employee competence. Too often we blame the employee or the trainer - when it is often the management selection process and the effectiveness of that process should in my opinion be part of the Audit criteria.