Solving the Evaluation Dilemma
This event will be different. It’s not a panel discussion; it’s not a presentation. This event is a facilitated exploration, involving all participants. We will address the question:
How do we in Learning and Development prove our worth—and who do we need to prove it to?
We are constantly reminded that the Learning and Development function must get better at showing its value. Articles, workshops, and conferences offer a variety of methods to prove the value of our courses and programs. Still, our efforts either seem to be:
- Yet training as a part of company expenses has increased dramatically over the years.
- Merely existing, because it’s unusual for a company of any size to NOT have a Learning and Development function.
- Training is still often the first cut when companies look to slash expenses.
- Leaders meet Implementation of new programs with high resistance.
- The answer, “The participants had a great time,” is not a good measure of a leadership program’s effectiveness.
- For example, a consultant recommends an approach that would reduce costs and increase results, but is told, “Please just deliver the presentation.”
Using the expertise of all attendees, we’ll examine these issues, referencing three approaches to course/program evaluation:
- Kirkpatrick/Phillips multi-level models
- Brinkerhoff’s Success Case method
- Gilbert, Measuring Human Competence
We recognize that, in our short 50 minutes, we will not come to a definitive conclusion; we will recognize that method(s) used depends on the culture of the organization. But we will walk away with insights gained during the exploration.
ATD Competency Model - Area of Expertise This Session Supports: Performance Improvement, Instructional Design, Evaluating Learning Impact
Speaker: Many years ago, Kent Nuttall told his father that he wanted to be a teacher. His father, having served several years as a teacher, principal, and district positions, told him to get a job that paid more money.
Kent tried engineering, but his passion led him back to graduating and pursuing a career in corporate learning and development. His technical capabilities didn’t go to waste; he developed courses, qualification, and competency programs for engineering and operations groups. He also had the pleasure of developing leadership and financial courses.
Kent has loved this line of work, because he has been able to learn so much, although he doesn’t yet feel ready to be a Jeopardy contestant. Above all, Kent loves to discuss the application of theories related to learning and development, and then apply what he has learned.