By M Nair

Too many times organizations expect training to provide the “one-size-fits-all” cure for their staff’s non-performance.

From our experience we have found that:

1. Training, in isolation, is not able to rectify performance problems.
2. A one-off event without a follow-up measurement program cannot sustain change.
3. Ensuring that there is a right fit for the job is fundamental for a successful training program. Recruitment is key.

In development of our programs we recommend three levels of measurement to ensure that learning has taken place and is sustained. The training evaluation model is composed of three levels of training evaluation. The illustration below summarizes the levels:

Training Evaluation Model

Level One: Reaction

Evaluating reactions is the same things as measuring customer satisfaction. If training is going to be effective, it’s important that participants react favorably to it. This measurement is taken directly after the program completes at the end of the day.

The guideline for Level One are as follows:

• Determine what you want to find out
• Design a form that will quantify the reactions
• Encourage written comments and suggestions
• Get honest responses
• Take appropriate action based on feedback
• Program acceptance needs to be above 80%

Level Two: Learning

Level Two is like a test to determine if the learning transfer occurred. It is important to measure learning because no change in behavior can be expected unless one or more of these learning objectives have been achieved. Measuring learning means determining one of more of the following:

• What knowledge was learned?
• What skills were developed or improved?
• What attitudes were changed?

Measuring learning can be done as either an assessment module as part of the program or on-the-job assessment.  The guideline for Level Two is as follows:

• Evaluate knowledge, skills and / or attitudes both before and after the program (if possible)
• Strive for 100% response
• Use the results to take corrective actions.

Level Three: Behavior

Level Three evaluates the job impact of training: “What happens when trainees leave the classroom and return to their jobs? How much transfer of knowledge, skill and attitude occurs?” In other words, what change in job behavior occurred because people attended a training program?

The guideline for Level Three is as below:

• Allow time for behavior change to take place
• Evaluate both before and after the program if practical
• Survey or interview trainees, supervisors, subordinates and others who observe their behavior
• Strive for 80% response
• Repeat the evaluation at appropriate times (should become part of your standards measurement process)

The easiest way for you to discover the right evaluation process for your organization is by having us reviewing your current Training Strategy and processes. We can show you how you can get the most out of investments in employee training.

By Vincent Bouw MSM, CPC

Athletes are not the only ones who need coaches.

In today’s business world we now can compete with each other in a virtual market space where time and space get a whole different meaning. However, amongst all these changes, some things remain the same. Business is essentially still about making money or saving money and therefore about managing the performance of the organisation and perhaps more accurately managing the human capital performance.

When we think of human capital performance, coaching is one of the first things that come to mind. In the last decade, coaching has firmly taken its seat in the business world and has proven that it is here to stay. But what is “coaching for performance”? How do you do that? There is still a lot of confusion and misconception around it and people are wondering if coaching really is the Holy Grail of performance management.

Having explored performance management, it seems to be mainly a process driven system that is externally imposed on the employee i.e. outside-in. However, introducing coaching creates an inside out approach, for the power of coaching lies very much in the fact that it works exactly the opposite way. With coaching the employees themselves are the centre and starting point for performance management and they are asked to evaluate themselves. This particularly works well when you have a high-trust culture, helpful systems that are tools not goals in themselves (Stephen Covey, The 8th Habit).

For many organizations and managers it might feel as a paradox, but it seems that to get your employees to become more self-evaluating, self-developing and ultimately self-managing, you need to loosen the grip and start getting used to being in command but out of control (Malcolm Gladwell, Blink).

We have seen that a balanced approach is needed in performance management, between measurement and development, left and right brain approach. In coaching, great breakthroughs in reframing an employee’s perception and letting them move forward (i.e. develop) are made when balancing the left and right brain approach to things. The typical left brained person will look at things in a narrow and deep way, while the right brained person tends to take a wide and shallow view. The combination of left and right (not necessarily both at the same time, as it can be very powerful to switch sides multiple times) will give the person a wide and deep view. Therefore a person who is extremely left brained in their view of a certain situation will benefit hugely by shifting their perception through looking at things from a right brain perspective (and visa versa).

So there is only one last thing to do and that is to answer the question… is coaching the Holy Grail of performance management? Based on my research, the answer is ‘No’, it is not. Although coaching has brought balance to performance management by shifting the focus towards performance development, we also need to be realistic and admit that the corporate world at this point in time is still dominated by the focus on either making money and/or saving money. Therefore businesses will ultimately remain aligned and organised to support that goal.

However, coaching has not just shifted the balance, it is very much shifting the balance towards performance development and focus on people. It might just be a matter of time before we reach the tipping point, that magical moment when the concept of coaching has reached a critical mass and tips the scales. How far we are removed from that moment is unsure, but perhaps later in hindsight we are able to say… ‘Yes’ coaching was indeed the Holy Grail, not just for performance management but for the entire corporate world.

This article is a summary of Vincent’s research paper for the International Coaching Association. If you like to receive a copy of the full paper, please contact us.