While I never meant for this to happen, I am head over heels in love with a model. Shallow? I would not say so. He’s thoughtful and patient, curious and insightful. He helps me understand my worth and never fails to articulate and reinforce the value of what we create together…yes, I am speaking of the one and only Kirkpatrick Model, the best-in-class training effectiveness measurement tool well respected in the learning and development field since the 1950s. (Did you think I meant something else? No! This is strictly a HR Talent blog.)
During my early days in the Learning and Development (L&D) field, I first heard of Mr. Kirkpatrick. Whispers hung in the air; a celebrity only few personally knew…then, the Model became a key point of discussion and applicable throughout my HR-centered MBA studies. As I dove further into the field of L&D, I anticipated that everyone must use some level of this framework. What I found surprising is that many have not met my dear beau. Perhaps, he’s an acquired taste.
To the Point
Most organizations regularly use Level 1; exceedingly few seek to measure effectiveness and value through Level 4. From my view, Level 1 shows respect for the learner and provides an invaluable pulse point for the facilitator. Do more of this, less of that. A confidence boost when you may need it most. Despite how much L&D professionals may want to use Level 4 to derive ROI measurements, organization’s financial practices may not maintain granular enough records to separate learning expenses from other overhead or HR costs. When such data is not available, L&D professionals can turn to other creative solutions, including waste reduction cost savings, reduction in voluntary turnover which produces a saving in talent acquisition expenses (ranging from 50-200% of a new hire’s salary), increases in promotion ready candidates, measured change in performance reviews, etc. As organizations take a hard look at budgets and expenses, L&D professionals need to be ready to prove the value of their work both qualitatively AND quantitatively. Both are critical in an ever-competitive environment with scare resources. Overlooking or viewing Level 4 of the Kirkpatrick Model as too lofty is a risk. Organizations suffer, talent is underserved and L&D professionals may find themselves in the job market.
From experience, the most insightful levels of Kirkpatrick in my instructional design and strategy decisions are Levels 2 and 3. These are also the levels where I see learners realize real-time “aha” moments. By embracing Level 2 of Kirkpatrick, instructional designers can put lecture-centric courses that put employees to sleep to rest for good…may such courses rest in peace! Level 2 forces designers and facilitators to promote learning through doing. Active, guided practice builds confidence in students; they can play, fail, get back up and try again in a safe simulated environment. Without utilizing Level 2, learners can easily write off a new concept as impossible for them. Using case studies, role-play, discussions, gamification, etc. provides learners with the time and space to try new ideas on for size. (Level 2 is both the soccer field and fitting room for learning!)
Level 3 of the Model takes considerably more time to record results, roughly 3-6 months; however, it measures effectiveness in an even more robust way. Since Level 3 focuses on a period for practice or an extension project, learners are held accountable to applying the lessons of the course to their jobs. Ongoing practice forms habits and has the ability to create sustainable behavioral change. My favorite way to record the results of Level 3 is to hold focus groups where learners can share their reflections and success stories. Invite a few senior leaders to the session and watch the magic unfold. Lightbulbs go off, real-time recognition takes place and leaders leave as first-hand witnesses of the “wins” the team has achieved thanks to learning and development programming.
Call to Action
As organizations seek to measure the tangible, balance sheet value of L&D initiatives and evaluate the benefits of funding internal L&D headcount vs outsourced programming, as the training industry cyclically experiences, L&D professionals now more than ever must commit to measuring the ROI of their work. This amount of transparency is both humbling and challenging. The effectiveness of training must be measured by more than tushes in seats or star rankings in learning management systems. These tell us relatively little. We must open ourselves to vulnerability, lean closer into our stakeholders and ensure that the result of the passion we bring to work everyday results in measured talent and organizational improvements. It is a tall order, but Kirkpatrick, clad in shining armor, is ready to ride in on a unicorn.
Interested in learning more?
Kurt, S. (2018). Kirkpatrick Model: Four levels of learning evaluation. Educational Technology. https://educationaltechnology.net/kirkpatrick-model-four-levels-learning-evaluation/
Image Source: http://adamjacobsphotography.com/page-m
Comments