Training programs and performance measurement

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to present an exploratory study of the evaluation of training programs, based on a theoretical framework reviewing both the training literature and the strategic performance measurement (SPM) literature. The purpose of the paper is to analyse whether the operational approach (suggested by the training literature) and the strategic approach (suggested by the SPM literature) are actionable and feasible to measure the performance of training programs, and which relationships occur between these approaches. Design/methodology/approach The methodology supporting the paper is largely oriented to action research. The research project took about 12 months, working with five Italian healthcare organisations in order to develop an actionable system for measuring the performance of selected training programs. Findings The results suggest that the operational and the strategic approaches are actionable and feasible to measure the performance of selected training programs; that these approaches are complementary, and not alternative; and that their contextual use is mutually beneficial, because it allows alignment of the evaluation of training programs towards organisational priorities. Research limitations/implications The limitations of the paper concern its explorative nature. The paper does not expand its focus from the training programs to the training function, and from the training literature to the strategic human resource literature. Research on these topics may contribute to further analysing the links between training evaluation and SPM systems. Practical implications The paper shows the feasibility of a systematic evaluation of selected training programs at an organisational level of analysis, aiming at increasing organisational effectiveness. Originality/value The paper suggests the relevance of evaluating training programs according to an SPM framework based on the Balanced Scorecard.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 16 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.