Development and delivery
6
Training and Evaluation for Shell Company
Name
Department, Institutional Affiliation
Course
Instructor
Date
Training and Evaluation for Shell Company
Training programs can sometimes be costly endeavor for modern firms. In the United States, for example, firms often allocate a total of approximately $170 billion in human resource development and professional courses. These investments are often necessary for attracting and retaining highly talented and qualified employees, and keeping up with contemporary technological requirements. Furthermore, employee participation in high-quality training increases their opportunities for advancements, skill development, as well as professional growth. During financial crises, however, firms often tend to cut the funds that are apportioned for training employees in new skills and competences. These decisions are often regarded as unaffordable luxuries. Thus, evaluation programs should be established to assess the success of training initiatives. Shell Company requires an elaborate and effective evaluation plan to determine if the training benefits justify the financial investments, and if the knowledge and skills that are gained in the training courses are indeed applied in real-work settings.
Link to the first evaluation form
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1_ulhJ1Mf6OgxufxH5GG1YhK41C50hlRTsF247UAaKgY/edit
Reasons for Selecting the first Evaluation Instrument
There are various reasons why I selected the above evaluation instrument. This instrument was informed by the Kirkpatrick’s Taxonomy model, which provides a comprehensive framework for designing an efficacious assessment criteria. The model or example, provides a four-level approach that can be employed to assess the success of any training course. These levels include reaction, learning, behavior, and results (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrickm, 2016). At the reaction level, my assessment focused on gauging the degree to which the participants respond to the training. This included asking them to complete a short survey, which enabled them to determine if the conditions for learning were met or were present. In particular, feedback forms were created, which utilized different tools, such as comment boxes and five-point Likert scales.
Link to the second evaluation
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1j4ms_OlWx09OHB7dVUyqVle2c0vppjunpKZqSlpuWSE/edit
Reason for Selecting the Second Evaluation
The second instrument focused on determining the extent to which the participants learned from the training exercise. Most precisely, a few questions were provided, which required them to state some of the areas that they learned. This was particularly helpful in determining their level of skills acquisition and retention. In particular, practical tests were utilized to determine their levels of knowledge before, during, and after the training programs. The assessment also placed emphases on the behavioral aspects of the program. This was initiated after the training. It utilizes various evaluation models, which seek to examine whether the training courses that the participants were administered can be translated into real-world practice environment. To attain this objective, the employees were asked to mention some of the concepts that they had learned and how they are going to utilize them in the work contexts. Additionally, they were given practical examination, which involved the translation of their knowledge to practice. Finally, the results aspect of the training and evaluation tool explored whether the program met all the stakeholders’ expectations. In the firm, the stakeholders are often the management executives who decided to allocate a lot of financial resources towards implementing the training in the first place. The purpose of determining the return on such expectations, can be done by undertaking a cost-benefit analysis.
Discussion
Many firms often allocate millions of dollars to fund training courses, which may not be applied in the job settings. This practice creates a large gap between learning outcomes and the actual training transfer, such as the degree to which training contents are applied to practice. Moreover, a lack of training transfer can also increase the financial costs, and is highly time-consuming. To determine the promising trainings, it is important for Shell and its human resource team to assess and document the potential training benefits.
The evaluation of training programs should not be based solely on the participants’ responses, which are examined shortly after a training course. This is because determining the actual benefits is important in examining not just the short-term effects, but also participants’ long term outcomes back at work (Grohmann&Kauffeld, 2013). As such, future human resource development professionals will be tasked with assessing the benefits of trainings systematically since the purpose and benefits of such initiatives are often continually questioned by stakeholders.
In light of the above, the evaluation model that the firm will embrace will be critical in meeting the practical demands of employees. Additionally, it has high usability, because the questionnaires can be well accepted by the respondents and easily applicable to a wide range of training programs that the company offers. Moreover, it is time-efficient, thus, important for the company’s fast-moving business environment. There are various benefits of the evaluation tool that has been designed for the company. For instance, it is efficacious in justifying the financial input made, and serves as quality management instrument. Moreover, it can provide feedback to human resource departments and trainers for enhancing their training initiatives. In so doing, it helps to inform the process of making more accurate decisions regarding the continuation of training programs. The firm can also utilize the evaluation outcomes as marketing tools for human resource departments and training institutes to attract possible job candidates.
The company has made various steps to ensure that the evaluation is effective. The questionnaires, for example, illustrate a high usability in terms of time efficiency. Moreover, it addresses broader issues, such as examining determinants of successful training transfers. This aspect is especially important in optimizing future training programs. The training courses have also been evaluated with the utilization of standardized assessment metrics and training-specific models.
References
Grohmann, A., &Kauffeld, S. (2013). Evaluating training programs: development and correlates
of the Q questionnaire for Professional T raining E valuation. International Journal of
Training and Development, 17(2), 135-155.
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick's four levels of training evaluation.
Association for Talent Development.