Training Evaluation Models (Essay Sample)

Training Evaluation Models
Student Name
University
Course
Professor Name
Date
Training Evaluation Models
Talent Development Reporting (TDR) refers to an ambitious passion by organizations to improve an individual's ability. Implementing TDR by Corporate training directors enables them to enhance the firm's performance adequately and precisely. They, therefore, embrace different training evaluation models that allow them to achieve the desired outcome. The essay will concentrate on three major training evaluation models created by Kirkpatrick, Brinkerhoff, and Phillips. It will assess training models and justify the best model for a training director to maximize output in their organization.
Donald Kirkpatrick initially proposed the Kirkpatrick Model of Evaluation in 1959. It is a widely accepted way of assessing the effectiveness of instructing and studying schedules. It evaluates formal and informal methodologies used to train individuals and categorizes them according to the identified levels of response, learning, behavior, and outcomes (Alsalamah & Callinan, 2021). During the first level, the assessment determines how the trainees tend to respond to the training. The trainer needs to observe whether the participants respond positively or not. The second level includes the learning stage. At this level, one needs to examine whether there was an improvement in the participants' information, skills, or experience. The trainer is, therefore, able to determine any progress made as a result of the training. The third level involves observing the behavior and assessing whether the subjects are using the knowledge acquired. One, therefore, examines how an individual performs their activities. The last stage of the model is concerned with the results achieved. The level helps determine whether the training and learning were successful. The success of the exercise would therefore reflect on the organization's output that would be of high quality, hence steering it in the right direction.
In 2003, Robert O. Brinkerhoff pioneered a whole new approach to assess the training efficacy. Brinkerhoff's model, The Success Case Method (SCM), entails finding and analyzing the extremes in a program. The model's primary purpose is to evaluate the effects of organizational mediations such as training and apprenticeship(Lee et al., 2017). The model examines the program's most outstanding and least successful participants. The goal is not to glance at average performance; instead, it is to find answers to the questions: 'How well does the training scheme work whenever it works?' by discovering and evaluating extreme examples. 'How do you know what works and what doesn't?' Trainers will be unable to determine the effectiveness of their programs if they do not know the answers. If the desired outcomes are not being achieved, they can decide what aspects of the program need to be changed.
According to Phillips, once a training program is in operation, a sequence of influences should develop. He believes this to be the case since skills and information are taught and used on the job, resulting in business impact and, eventually, positive return on investment (ROI). According to him, Kirkpatrick's Learning Evaluation Model lacked a measure of assessing the output (Philips et al., 2020). As a result, as one of the most significant improvements, he incorporated the fifth level of analysis, return on investment. He also went over the previous four levels again and made some minor adjustments.
The Phillips model has five stages similar in breadth and chronology to the Kirkpatrick model. The level of reaction is the first stage. The model evaluates the subjects' responses to their training, much to the Kirkpatrick taxonomy. It frequently uses brief quizzes to collect data on how participants felt regarding their training. The second stage is comparable to Kirkpatrick's. During their training, the participants should gain skills and knowledge through learning. The third level is the application and implementation stage. It examines workplace behavior to determine whether participants are applying what they have learned. The primary critique of the Kirkpatrick model is its inability to collect adequate data to aid in training improvement. It merely indicates whether or not participants' put the instruction into practice. Philip, therefore, broadened the level to include both application and implementation. While the Kirkpatrick model's fourth level focuses solely on outcomes, the Phillips Return on Investment (ROI) model is significantly more all-inclusive and considers the training's influence on the company. It is possible to determine whether the outcomes result from the activity or due to any other variables. Unlike the Kirkpatrick model, it allows the training director to decide whether changes in performance measures are due to training or not(Philips et al., 2020). The model's fifth level, ROI, tends to compare training results to stakeholder expectations. The model allows for training efficacy evaluation. It keeps track of the program from start to finish, allowing the trainer to make changes early to maximize the ROI.
Despite all the three models focusing on training and how it will positively impact the organization, the