Use of evaluation tools
Research by The Industrial Society (2000) has shown that the Kirkpatrick model was
used by 35 per cent of the 487 participants. Research by Twitchell et al(2000) found
that many US organizations use levels 1 and 2 evaluations for at least some
programmes, fewer than half even try level 3 and only a small percentage use level 4
evaluations.
The number of respondents to the IRS 2004 training survey using different types of
evaluation is shown in Table 41.2.
Application of evaluation
As Reidet al(2004) comment: ‘The more care that has been taken in the assessment of
needs and the more precise the objectives, the greater will be the possibility of effec-
tive evaluation.’ This is the basis for conducting evaluation at various levels.
Like the similar levels of evaluation suggested by Hamblin in 1976 (reactions,
learning, job behaviour, impact on unit and organizational performance) the levels
defined by Kirkpatrick are links in the chain. Training produces reactions, which lead
Formulating and implementing learning and development strategies ❚ 619
Activity No of organizations
using ‘regularly’ or
‘sometimes’Immediate post-course questionnaire 74
Monitoring appraisal results 50
Observation of participants at work 49
Interviewing participants 48
Employee attitude surveys 44
Monitoring qualifications gained 42
Follow-up questionnaires 41
Monitoring test results 35
Survey line managers 34
Assessment of participant’s action plans 31
Evaluation framework/model 28
Customer surveys 28
Analysis of output/quality data 25N = 79Table 41.2 Use of evaluation tools (Source:IRS, 2004f)