Human resource management practice I also available by michael armstrong

Chapter 

23

  The Practice of Learning and Development

313

learning. This means focusing on return on expecta-

tion measures, which assess the extent to which the 

anticipated benefits of any learning investment have 

been realized. As described by Anderson (2007: 33): 

‘This  involves  focusing  on  establishing “up  front” 

the anticipated benefits of learning interventions or 

investments with key stakeholders, and then assessing 

the  extent  to  which  the  anticipated  benefits  have 

been realized.’

The problem with evaluation

The need for evaluation is generally recognized by 

L&D specialists and the Kirkpatrick model is well 

known,  but  Grove  and  Ostroff  (1990)  noted  that 

there  were  five  barriers  that  appeared  to  explain 

why training evaluations were not carried out very 

effectively in organizations:

1 

Senior management often not insisting on or 

requesting information on the impact of the 

training that was provided.

2 

The lack of expertise among L&D 

professionals on how to carry out training 

evaluations.

3 

A lack of clear objectives attached to training 

programmes so that actually knowing what 

to evaluate against is difficult if not 

impossible.

4 

The limited budgets available to training 

departments means that resources are 

devoted to training provision rather than 

training evaluation.

5 

The risks associated with evaluation may be 

too great, given that the evaluation data 

might reveal that the training had little impact.

The following comment on the limitations of tradi-

tional  approaches  to  evaluation  was  made  by 

Anderson (2007: 3):

Traditional approaches to evaluation set out to 

prove the merit of specific learning interventions 

and to demonstrate their cost-effective delivery. 

Such proof, however, while identifying that the 

trainer has done good work, does not necessarily 

assess the extent of the training intervention with 

the organization’s strategic priorities... Whereas a 

traditional approach to evaluation focuses on the 

reactions and consequences for learners and 

trainers resulting from discrete and individual 

the  fundamental  objectives  of  the  training  have 

been achieved in areas such as increasing sales, raising 

productivity,  reducing  accidents  or  increasing  cus-

tomer  satisfaction.  Evaluating  results  is  obviously 

easier when they can be quantified. However, it is 

not  always  easy  to  prove  the  contribution  to  

improved results made by training as distinct from 

other factors and, as Kirkpatrick said, that evaluators 

should be satisfied with evidence, because proof is 

usually impossible to get. Perhaps the most powerful 

method of demonstrating that ‘learning programmes 

pay’ is to measure the return on investment, as dis-

cussed below.

In  practice,  organizations  find  it  difficult  to  

advance above level 1. That is why there have been 

moves to use an overall measure such as return on 

investment or return on expectations.