Measuring Bottomline Impact
It’s time for Bob to show results. Something as subjective as training is difficult to measure, especially when ROI needs to be calculated. But as rightly said, “If you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it”; Bob’s task was to show the Board the ROI on this new L&D initiative. This was the only way to prove the success of this new training initiative.
Learning Analytics (LA) helps organizations understand the activity, effectiveness, and impact of learning and training. LA, with its 4 levels, assures some degree of measurement and results. Bob widely researched about LA and formed a team to administer and implement it within the organization. The most striking feature of LA was it would give different users the information they would need to make decisions. Bob formulated a balanced scorecard that articulated the understandings of the stakeholders’ perception of ROI.
The team went about evaluating level-by-level of the Kirkpatrick’s model. Level 1 of measurement involved administering “happy sheets” for 100% of the coursed rolled out. The feedback forms measured the satisfaction levels of the learners. At level 2, 60% of the courses are covered with a report to line managers on all the mandatory courses, such as compliance and regulatory courses. Bob’s preparation on this was truly commendable. He made the participants undergo pre-assessment test and, post the training, made them undergo the same assessment to check the increase in knowledge. This showed him how much the learners learnt from the training. Level 3 involved stakeholder surveys. This was conducted after 3 weeks of training delivery. Also called perception survey, it involved studying the training impact on the job from the learner, his/ her superior, colleagues, and subordinates. The evaluation was determined based on the various parameters defined in the learners Key Result Areas (KRAs) of the annual performance appraisal system. Level 4, the final one, involved MIS analysis. Bob used MIS data along with Sales departmental survey information to find out post training if the sales (booking) increased. Similar trends were studied for Quality department where the fall in number of rejects was recorded. Survey from Finance department helped him plot the income (collections) hike post training. Increase in Delivery (billing) was recorded from the Production department, and finally what mattered to the business the most, i.e., customer satisfaction index, was measured from the Marketing department.
The 4 levels of Kirkpatrick’s model helped Bob immensely in drawing conclusions on training effectiveness. As this model is scientific in nature and produced measurable results, Bob had some very positive results to show to the Board.
Wow … LA did wonders for Bob. It helped him measure the subjective tasks (training). Measuring the training is not the end, there are lessons learnt from this exercise. Find this out in my next post.
