Are we doing the right thing?

Abstract

PurposeThis paper aims to advance the debate regarding the use of training evaluation tools, chiefly the Kirkpatrick model, in reaction to minimal use of the tools reported in the literature and the economic changes that have characterised the industrialised world in the past 20 years.Design/methodology/approachThe main argument – the need to design new evaluation tools – emerges from an extensive literature review of criticism of the Kirkpatrick model. The approach is deductive; the argument emerges from extant literature.FindingsThe main findings of the literature review show that the major criticisms of the Kirkpatrick model, though rigorous, are not relevant in today's post‐industrial economy. Issues of complexity, accuracy and refinement, which are relevant in stable industrial organisations, must be revised in the new economic world.Research limitations/implicationsThis paper is based on a literature review and presents a call for new research. As such, it is not grounded in original empirical evidence, beyond that presented in the cited articles.Practical implicationsThe paper calls for training evaluation tools that align better with modern organisational reality. If the research community responds to this call, the results will benefit practitioners directly. This paper also presents practical advice about the use of existing evaluation techniques.Originality/valueA new angle on criticisms of existing training evaluation systems does not reiterate classic criticisms based on logic and mathematics but rather takes a pragmatic and economic approach. Thus, this paper offers evidence of theoretically grounded paradoxes of the consequences of existing criticisms of training evaluation.

Introduction to domestic violence, abuse, and coercive control for counselors: An evaluation of the impact of training

“…This research identified an increase in reaction over time. This is a fundamental finding as research has suggested that positive reactions can lead to effective learning (Giangreco, Carugati, & Sebatiano, 2010;Rajeev et al, 1996).…”

Analyzing the Effectiveness of Training Programs of BCS Administration Academy: Prospects and Challenges

“…There are various theories or models which have been developed by scholars for evaluating training effectiveness. These include- However, among all these, Kirkpatrick's (1959) model continues to be the most preferred framework to evaluate training effectiveness, either by researchers or practitioners of its simple and practical approach (Holton, 1996;Leach & Liu, 2003;Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2010;;Giangreco, et al 2010;Griffin, 2010) (Cited in Aziz, 2013; Dash, Das & Dash 2019). Kirkpatrick (1976) four stage model (See figure 02) include (1) trainee reactions (i.e., what trainees think of the training), (2) learning (i.e., what trainees learned) (3) behaviour (i.e., how trainees behaviour changes), and (4) organizational results (i.e.…”

Modify the Redefined: Strategic Human Resource Development Maturity at a Crossroads

“…The evaluation of all HRD initiatives is a crucial component of SHRD maturity as a critical element in enhancing its credibility, as well as being a mechanism to indicate the path of transforming training into HRD and accordingly to SHRD in organizations (Rao, 2014; Walton & Valentin, 2014). For HRD to become strategic, it should continuously demonstrate how its investments could pay off through the associated benefits for the organization, all stakeholder groups, and society (Giangreco, Carugati, & Sebastiano, 2010).…”