A Case Study Approach For Evaluation Of Employee Training Effectiveness And Development Program

TheInternational J
ournal Of Business& Management (ISSN 2321 – 8916) www.theijbm.com
201 Vol 2 Issue6 J
une, 2014
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF
BUSINESS & MANAGEMENT
A Case Study Approach for Evaluation of
Employee Training Effectiveness and Development Program
1. Introduction
Training effectiveness comprises of two basic terms that are training and its effectiveness on the trainees. This effectiveness can
be a measure of training evaluation. So in general effectiveness measurement has two major factors associated with it and they are
training program and the evaluation of the training.
1.1. Training
Training may be defined as the systematic acquisition of skills, rules, concepts, attitudes that should result in improved
performance of the trainee (Aamodt, 2007;Goldstein and Ford, 2002).Training is vital for various reasons for every employee of
the organisation for the new process implemented or if the employee is new to that particular process. Employees selected for a
particular job often need to get appropriate knowledge and skills about the work to be done. It always helps an employee to know
about the organization process, work content, importance and awareness about the work assign. And their liking toward the job
helps organisation to grow. As well as, when job changes, training helps employee to adapt to the new environment. Training is
always necessary to understand, grow and get success in a new job role in an industry. Also there is always a scope for current old
employees to undergo a training process so as to improve and succeed in different job role to grow career as an individual.
Therefore, training may find to be profitable not only to associates but also to the organizations in which they work. Training
results in mutual growth of employees and organization.
1.2. Evaluation
Evaluation can be defined as a systematic way of valuation which ultimately gives the necessary information required for the
continuous improvement and the growth. Although, in current scenario professionals are not much bothered about knowing how
many new employees had undergone training, and how much they liked it and what they have learned through the training. But in
Abstract:
Employee training and development creates positive impact on basic functions of an organisation to expand human capital
and contend in a quickly changing business world. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of employee training
program in the MNC. Utilizing the Kirkpatrick’s four levels of evaluation model, this study particularly inspects the
responses of the employees to the training programs, the level of employees learning, the employee’s behaviour on the job
effect of the training on the worker’s state of mind that is attitude of the employees. The research was carried to evaluate the
effectiveness of training program in quality department at multinational company. This case study approach explores the
effectiveness of a training programme of an organisation by using Kirkpatrick model. The research methodology used in this
study was survey data collection method. The Data survey questionnaire based on Kirkpatrick model. Present study includes
all employees of Quality department as sample for this study. Data analysis was carried out utilizing the SPSS 20 softwere
and questionnaire reliability was tested using the (Cronbach's alpha) test and was found more than (Alpha=0.7). A paired
sample T-test was directed and it has been found that the employees find the training program more effective. This study
analyzed experimentally four stages of measuring training effectiveness with the help of questionnaire. The result of
hypothesis determines four levels have significant impact on training program.
Keywords: training, effectiveness, evaluation
Neeraj S. Borate
PG Research Scholar, Manipal Institute of Technology, Karnataka, India
Dr. Gopalkrishna
Professor, Humanities & Management, Manipal Institute of Technology, Karnataka, India
Dr. Shiva Prasad H. C.
Professor, Humanities & Management, Manipal Institute of Technology, Karnataka, India
Sanjay L. Borate
Quality Head, Cummins India Ltd. (PMUC)

TheInternational J
202 Vol 2 Issue6 J
une, 2014
more numbers they are really interested to know that whether employees are implementing what they have learned during the
training, and very importantly in what percent it has helped in improvement of institutional results..Evaluation involves various
types of analysis and also important models and methodologies usually applied to significant impact on performance.The usually
stated definition of evaluation is:“Evaluation is the systematic assessment of the worth or merit of some object or aim”(Willams,
1976)
1.3. Training Evaluation
The term training evaluation is described as a systematic anthology of descriptive as well as judgemental information needed to
take effective training decisions related to the selection, adoption, value and modification of various instructional activities
involved in training (Werner & De-Simone, 2006). This definition mentions not only descriptive but also combined available
information. Training evaluation is also necessary in order to understand and ensure that the information and material shared with
the team is useful as well as appropriate (Merwin, 1992). Evaluation of the training is the resource generally used to decide the
value of it. Broadly it can be stated a procedure of assessing the results of the training (King & Rothwell, 2001). It helps to
understand the importance of the training whether it is aligning with the goals of an organisation. At a glance, it focuses especially
on outcome of the learning; also it gives a micro analysis of training results (Alvarez, Salas & Garofano, 2004). Each and every
training program should undergo the evaluation process because this is the best way to ascertain that the financial investments are
worth (Abdel-Wahab, Dainty, Ison & Hazlehurst, 2008). Evaluation of training is a tedious process to carry out in fine however; it
should be conducted for enhancing the standard of the training (Aminuddine, 1997). Evaluation should not be treated as a separate
part but it should be incorporated within the training process only so as to check the effectiveness of the training, said by the
experts (Kirkpatrick, 1998).The systematic process of examining a training programme is stated as training evaluation and none of
the training programme can be said organised completely without evaluating its effectiveness (Harper & Bell, 1982). Some author
refers to the planned collection, collation and analysis of information to enable judgments about value and worth. A wise
technician defines evaluation as the assessment of value or worth (B. Worthen, 1997). Evaluation ensures whether training has
done the expected effect and employees are well capable of implementing the same in their tasks assigned. Evaluation is a
comparison of observed/actual obtained value to a standard or criteria of comparison (Phillips 1991). On other way round it can be
stated as training evaluation is a procedure of analysing the collected feedback data in order to decide at what extent the
objectives/goals are achieved and at what extent the training has become successful in its aim (Schalock, 2001).The training unit,
in a successful programme is aware of company's tactical direction and can devise and execute innovative approach of aligning
individuals in required track. Training is a place where new skills are going to develop also attitude toward work is changing new
creative ideas evolve and the organisation is redeveloped. It frequently takes a quite high expense to coach a critical crowd of
workforce. Ultimately training must be judged so as to understand its impact on the functions of the organisation (B. Becker,
1996).As time passed, the scientific researchers have invented the method of evaluating the training effectiveness in optimize
manner. Few of the methods are written below.
 Four level model of Kirkpatrick’s
 Virmani and Premila’s evaluation model
 Aimao Zhang’s peer approach to evaluation
 Peter bramely’s evaluation model
 David Reay’s approach to evaluation
 Hamblin’s five level model
 Warr’s framework for evaluation
Out of these, Kirkpatrick’s four level models is a widely used and accepted framework for the purpose of training evaluation. This
is the framework which has now become most popular model for training evaluation in among various industries. Kirkpatrick’s
four-level model of training evaluation and criteria continues to be the most widespread (Salas & Canon-Bowers, 2001).
1.4. Model for Evaluation of Training Effectiveness.
Discussion on the topic of various types of evaluation may sound like little academic but this has a significant importance in
evaluation as this finally direct towards the strong different models and schemes for evaluation. The very popular and used model
for evaluation was invented by Donald J. Kirkpatrick. Now a days this is the most famous way used to evaluate the trainings. This
model deals with four levels of training outcomes: reaction, learning, behavior, and results.Kirkpatrick (1959) designed a model
with four levels of evaluation:The Four Levels of Evaluation, sometimes referred as the Kirkpatrick’s Evaluation Model, can be
stated as follows:
 Reactions to the training: the reaction as well as thoughts and views of the employees, trainees about the training
experience;
 Learning measures: the trainees results of learning and increase in knowledge from the training experience;
 Behavior measures: the employees behavioral change and improvement after implementing the skills on the job; and
 Results: the effects on the organization from job of participants with respect to performance improvement.
1.5. Motivation for Research Work
It has been observed that, most of the time trainer and training programs are only evaluated based on the employee feedback.
However it has a limitation. In practice the most widely and commonly used method for training evaluation includes measuring
employee feedback and reactions towards training given, and most of the time is done on the last day of the training. Reactions

TheInternational J
203 Vol 2 Issue6 J
une, 2014
captured are surely not enough to establish a solid bridge between training given and better performance. For necessary
improvement in the training, the trainer and training department should have the information about not only the training
effectiveness but also the quality of training provided. Industries which involve evaluating the effectiveness of the training given
are also responsible for knowing the learning of the participants as well as checking whether the knowledge shared in training is
being implemented in their working area. Hence, training program and its periodic evaluation would certainly help an organisation
to be in flash light for achieving the objectives, goals. This study is basically based on training program evaluation of employees
of multinational engine manufacturing industry to verify that the training program has been succeeded in getting the expected
result that was anticipated as main basis of obtaining the real opinion for the calculating training effectiveness. Hence, study has
given prominence to their views.
1.6. Research Objectives
The main Objective of this research is to apply the Kirkpatrick’s model of training evaluation to measure the effectiveness of
training of continuous quality improvement to find the variables which have a impact on training effectiveness. The following are
the objectives.
Measure the effectiveness of training by using Kirkpatrick’s model with four levels of training evaluation.
 Reactions to the training.
 Learning Measures.
 Behavior Measure.
 Results.
2. Literature Review
Evaluation of tour guides training programs of Tehran based on Kirkpatrick four levels i.e. reaction, learning, behavior, results.
Findings of this study was tour training courses have found effective as the learners thereof have succeeded in conveying positive
attitude and reply towards the training program and were content with the offered training program and they had fixed their
professional manners changing (K. Mohamadkhani, 2013).Evaluation of training effectiveness to calculate how soft skills training
program can be assessed from the viewpoint of the students of engineering colleges to check its usefulness based on Kirkpatrick
model (S. Ezhilan, 2013).Evaluated training effectiveness of teacher training program based on Kirkpatrick model.(Karri S. et. Al,
2011). Factors relationship between indicated training design, evaluation features and the efficacy of training in the in the industry
based on Kirkpatrick model (Arthur W. et. al, 2003).It was suitable to use the Kirkpatrick's four-level model to assess the e-
training (Zheng L. et. al 2013). Management.By using two groups such as control group and experimentel group management
training was evaluated based onfour levels of Kirkpatrick model (Steensma H. et.al, 2010). Evaluation of the usefulness of a
program of faculty development for PBL tutors using multiple levels identified by Kirkpatrick. Moving through Kirkpatrick’s
levels was intended to permit for sequentially more specific and meaningful measures of effectiveness (Paslawski T. et. al, 2014).
3.Research Methodology
Conceptual Model
Figure 1: Conceptual Model
3.1. Hypothesis or Research questions
The following hypotheses are framed in order to achieve the research objectives
 Hypothesis 1
H0: Change in reaction has no significant influence on training effectiveness.
Ha: Change in reaction has significant influence on training effectiveness.
 Hypothesis 2
H0: Change in learning has no significant influence on training effectiveness.
Ha: Change in learning has significant influence on training effectiveness.

TheInternational J
204 Vol 2 Issue6 J
une, 2014
 Hypothesis 3
H0: Change in behaviour has no significant influence on training effectiveness.
Ha: Change in behaviour has significant influence on training effectiveness.
 Hypothesis 4
H0: Change in result has no significant influence on training effectiveness.
Ha: Change in result has significant influence on training effectiveness.
 Hypothesis 5
H0: Change in reaction has no significant influence on learning.
H1: Change in reaction has significant influence on learning.
 Hypothesis 6
H0: Change in learning has no significant influence on behaviour.
Ha: Change in reaction has significant influence on behaviour.
 Hypothesis 7
H0: Change in behaviour has no significant influence on training result.
Ha: Change in behaviour has significant influence on training result.
3.2. Population and sampling
All quality department employees of the constituted and defined population for this study. All the employees of quality
department have been taken as the sample for this study. There were total 33 employees in quality department. The continuous
quality training was given to all employees for decreasing quality issues and to increase product quality of the product. For
evaluating training effectiveness of programme four levels of Kirkpatrick model was used .All the completed questionnaires were
received from the employees after the training programme. Hence data from 33 respondents were taken for the data analysis.
3.3. Data collection
The research used questionnaire as medium to obtain the quantitative data needed. There are four sections in the questionnaire,
consisting of section A: Evaluation of Employee training effectiveness against the four Kirkpatrick levels (Reaction, Learning,
behaviour, Results)
3.3.1. Measurement scale:
The questionnaire consisted of a series of statements, where the employee respondents needed to provide answers in the form of
agreement or disagreement to express their attitude towards the training programme. A Likert scale was used so that the
respondent could select a numerical score ranging from 1 to 5 for each statement to indicate the degree of agreement or otherwise.
Where 1, 2,3, 4 and 5 denote ‘Strongly agree’, ‘agree’, ‘neither agree’ nor disagree (Neutral)’, ‘Disagree’, and ‘Strongly disagree’
respectively.
3.3.2. Data Analysis
This research uses quantitative data and quantitative analyses has been carried out using the Statistical package for social sciences
(SPSS) software version 20.the study also tested the reliability of the survey instrument so that the desired and valid results are
obtained. for this the Cronbach’s Alpha has been used. Descriptive statistics like mean and standard deviation have been used for
the analyses.To test the hypotheses Paired sample T- tests have been used.
4. Results and Analysis
Figure 2: Dependent and independent variables
These independent variables have been used as items in the survey instrument. The various variables under each construct are as
follows.
4.1. Reliability of the survey Instrument (Questionnaire)
This research uses quantitative data and quantitative analyses has been carried out using the Statistical package for social sciences
(SPSS) software version 20.the study also tested the reliability of the survey instrument so that the desired and valid results are

TheInternational J
205 Vol 2 Issue6 J
une, 2014
obtained. For this the cronbach’s Alpha has been used. The below table consists reliability statistics of questionnaire of
Kirkpatrick’s four levels.
Reliability Statistics
Levels Cronbach’s Alpha N of Items
1.Reaction 0.838 6
2.Learning 0.702 4
3.Behaviour 0.721 6
4.Results 0.785 6
Overall Reliability 0.902 22
Table 1: Reliability of the Questionnaire
4.2. Hypothesis Tests
Hypothesis 1
 H0: Change in reaction has no significant influence on training effectiveness.
 Ha: Change in reaction has significant influence on training effectiveness.
Paired Samples Statistics
Pair 1
Reaction Total
Training Effectiveness total
Mean N Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
1.9152
1.7282
33
33
.51728
.50352
.09005
.08765
Paired Samples Correlations
Pair 1
Reaction Total &
Training Effectiveness Total
N Correlation Sig.
33 0.621 0.000
Paired Sample Test
Paired Differences t df Sig.(2-
tailed)
Mean Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
95% Confidence Interval
of the Difference
Lower Upper
Pair 1
Reaction Total –
Training Effectiveness
Total
0.18697 0.44433 0.07735 0.02942 0.34452 2.417 32 0.022
Table 2 : Paired samples Statistics, Correlations and Paired sample T-Test (Hypothesis 1)
As it can be seen in table, this hypothesis has been approved at 95% confidence and α =0.5 level. The significant level is 5% i.e.
0.05.In hypothesis 1 result shows significant (2-tailed) level is 0.022 i.e. less than 0.05 (0.022 < 0.05).Hence reject null hypothesis
and accept alternative hypothesis at 5% significance level. Hence Change in reaction has significant influence on training
effectiveness.
Hypothesis 2
 H0: Change in learning has no significant influence on training effectiveness.
 Ha: Change in learning has significant influence on training effectiveness.

TheInternational J
206 Vol 2 Issue6 J
une, 2014
Pair 2 Learning Total
Mean N Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
1.5052
1.7282
33
33
0.47271
0.50352
0.08229
0.08765
Pair 2
Learning Total &
N Correlation Sig.
33 0.555 0.001
Paired Sample Test
Paired Differences t df Sig. (2-
tailed)
Mean Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
99% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
Pair 2
Learning Total –
Total
0.22303 .46147 .08033 0.44302 0.00304 2.776 32 .009
Table 3: Paired samples Statistics, Correlations and Paired sample T-Test (Hypothesis 2)
0.01.In hypothesis 2 result shows significant (2-tailed) level is 0.009 i.e. less than 0.01 (0.009 < 0.01).Hence reject null hypothesis
and accept alternative hypothesis at 1% significance level. Hence Change in learning has significant influence on training
effectiveness.
Hypothesis 3
 H0: Change in behaviour has no significant influence on training effectiveness.
 Ha: Change in behaviour has significant influence on training effectiveness
Pair 3 Behaviour Total
Mean N Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
1.4909
1.7282
33
33
0.36087
0.52352
0.06282
0.08765
Pair 3
Behaviour Total &
N Correlation Sig.
33 0.565 0.001
Paired Sample Test
tailed)
Mean Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
99% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
Pair 3
Behaviour Total –
Total
0.23727 0.42240 0.07353 0.43863 0.03591 3.227 32 .003
Table 4 : Paired samples Statistics, Correlations and Paired sample T-Test (Hypothesis 3)
0.01.In hypothesis 3 result interprets significant (2-tailed) level is 0.003 i.e. less than 0.003 (0.003 < 0.01).Hence reject null
hypothesis and accept alternative hypothesis at 1% significance level. Hence Change in behaviour has significant influence on
training effectiveness.

TheInternational J
207 Vol 2 Issue6 J
une, 2014
Hypothesis 4
 H0: Change in result has no significant influence on training effectiveness.
 Ha: Change in result has significant influence on training effectiveness.
Pair 4 Results Total
Mean N Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
1.4100
1.7282
33
33
0.36063
0.50352
0.06278
0.08765
Pair 4
Result Total &
N Correlation Sig.
33 0.576 0.000
Paired Sample Test
tailed)
Mean Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
of the Difference
Lower Upper
Pair 4
Result Total –
Total
0.31818 0.41781 0.07273 0.51736 0.11901 4.375 32 .000
Table 5: Paired samples Statistics, Correlations and Paired sample T-Test (Hypothesis 4)
hypothesis and accept alternative hypothesis at 1% significance level. Hence Change in results has significant influence on
Hypothesis 5
 H0: Change in reaction has no significant influence on learning.
 H1: Change in reaction has significant influence on learning.
Pair 5 Reaction Total
Learning total
Mean N Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
1.9152
1.5052
33
33
0.51728
0.47271
0.09005
0.08229
Pair 5
Reaction Total &
Learning Total
N Correlation Sig.
33 0.599 0.000
Paired Sample Test
tailed)
Mean Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
of the Difference
Lower Upper
Pair 5
Reaction Total –
Learning Total
0.41000 0.44511 0.07748 0.19781 0.62219 5.291 32 0.000
Table.6: Paired samples Statistics, Correlations and Paired sample T-Test (Hypothesis 5)
hypothesis and accept alternative hypothesis at 1% significance level. Hence Change in reaction has significant influence on
training learning.

TheInternational J
208 Vol 2 Issue6 J
une, 2014
Hypothesis 6
 H0: Change in learning has no significant influence on behaviour.
 Ha: Change in reaction has significant influence on behaviour.
Pair 6 Learning Total
Behaviour Total
Mean N Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
1.5052
1.4909
33
33
0.47271
0.36087
0.08229
0.06282
Pair 6
Learning Total &
Behaviour Total
N Correlation Sig.
33 0.467 0.006
Paired Sample Test
tailed)
Mean Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
99% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
Pair 6
Learning Total –
Behaviour Total
0.30707 0.49186 0.08562 0.13266 0.48148 3.586 32 0.001
Table.7: Paired samples Statistics, Correlations and Paired sample T-Test (Hypothesis 6)
hypothesis and accept alternative hypothesis at 1% significance level. Hence Change in results has significant influence on
Hypothesis 7
 H0: Change in behaviour has no significant influence on training result.
 Ha: Change in behaviour has significant influence on training result.
Pair 7 Behaviour Total –
Results Total
Mean N Std.
Deviation
Std. Error Mean
1.4909
1.4100
33
33
0.36087
0.36063
0.06282
0.06278
Pair 7
Behaviour Total &
Results Total
N Correlation Sig.
33 0.554 0.001
Paired Sample Test
tailed)
Mean Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
Pair 7
Behaviour Total –
Results Total
0.08091 0.34082 0.05933 0.03994 0.20176 1.364 32 0.043
Table 8 Paired samples Statistics, Correlations and Paired sample T-Test (Hypothesis 7)
As it can be seen in table, this hypothesis has been approved at 95% confidence and α =0.5 level. In hypothesis 6 result interprets
significant (2-tailed) level is 0.043 i.e. less than 0.05 (0.043 < 0.05) Hence Change in behaviour has significant influence on
training results at 5% significance level. But fail to reject the null hypothesis at the 1% significance level

TheInternational J
209 Vol 2 Issue6 J
une, 2014
5. Conclusion
 This study inspected exactly four levels of measuring training effectiveness with the assistance of a survey utilizing a
sample of the employees who present to the training program. The names of the variables for the test of hypothesis were
reaction, learning, and Behavior and Results. It could be led that Kirkpatrick's model of preparing assessment holds
decently well in this context.
 The outcome of paired sample T-test analysis interprets that the four factors namely reaction, learning, learning,
Behaviour and outcome derived in hypothesis test analysis are statically significant in explaining the training
effectiveness. These four elements can impact the trainees' perspectives on the effectiveness of the training program.
 The first level concentrated on worker's responses to the training program. The second level concentrated on learning and
aptitudes picked up from the training. The third level concentrated on the progressions in the task behaviour of workers
after accomplishing the training program. The fourth level concentrated on the changes in the working of parts or the
whole work which have resulted from changes in the task behaviour beginning in training.
 The study additionally endeavoured to distinguish some of the variables that assistance in analyzing the accomplished
level of effectiveness. As indicated by the finding of the first research objective, the Paired sample t-test results outlined
that; continuous quality improvement course for workers in multinational organization had been effective regarding
making positive attitude and response in learners. The findings identified with this segment of the study showed that, the
expectations of the members in these training program, who were new in the framework, had been met in a satisfactory
level.
 Second level in making positive attitude among the learners and push learners’ fulfilment. Regarding the findings of the
second research question, Paired sample T- test results showed that employees had palatable advancement in their
learning. They had recognized that the level of learning of the training system had increased.
 Regarding the findings of the third research objective, Paired sample T-test results demonstrates that, taking the
continuous quality improvement training course had prompted learners' professional behaviour from the participants'
perspective. The employees had confirmed that, in the wake of fulfilling the continuous quality improvement training
course and starting their expert profession in this respect, they would be able to practical knowledge and apply their
uncommon information of their viewpoint or passing on the knowledge to others.
 Regarding the finding of the fourth research objective, the after-effects of the paired sample T-test analysis lead to the
conclusion that after few months of training program, the practical knowledge on the job and confidence of the
employees increased significantly.
6. References
1. Mohamadkhani, K., & Ashrafi, M. (2013). A Study on the Effectiveness of Tour Guides Training Programs in Iran-
Tehran. Business & Economic Research (BER), 3(1).
2. Ezhilan, S (2013). Soft Skills Training Programme: Evaluation of Engineering Students ‘expectations And Experience,
Research Journal of English Language and Literature, Vol.1.Issue.3.
3. Karri, S. K. R., & Kode, S. (2011, July). Effectiveness of" Learning by Doing" Methodology in Training Programs-An
Evaluation of a Teacher Training Program for Information Technology Education. In Advanced Learning Technologies
(ICALT), 2011 11th IEEE International Conference on (pp. 227-231). IEEE.
4. Arthur Jr, W., Bennett Jr, W., Edens, P. S., & Bell, S. T. (2003). Effectiveness of training in organizations: a meta-
analysis of design and evaluation features.Journal of Applied psychology, 88(2), 234.
5. Zheng, L., Huang, R., & Yu, J. (2013, July). Evaluation of the Effectiveness of E-Training: A Case Study on In-Service
Teachers' Training. In Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), 2013 IEEE 13th International Conference on (pp.
229-231). IEEE.
6. Kasim, R. S. R., & Ali, S. (2011, December). Measuring training transfer performance items among academic staff of
higher education institution in Malaysia using rasch measurement. In Humanities, Science and Engineering (CHUSER),
2011 IEEE Colloquium on (pp. 756-760). IEEE.
7. Steensma, H., & Groeneveld, K. (2010). Evaluating a training using the “four levels model”. Journal of Workplace
Learning, 22(5), 319-331.
8. Gujarathi, R., & Wankhede, M. M. (2012). Evaluation of Training: Need to Focus. Journal Of Business Management &
Social Sciences Research, 1(2), 1-15.
9. Paslawski, T., Kearney, R., & White, J. (2014). Measuring the Effectiveness of Faculty Facilitation Training in Problem-
Based Learning in a Medical School.Creative Education, 5(4).
10. Priyanka Upadhyay, Ashutosh Priya, Saazia Naaz.(2013).Training Effectiveness Of Kirkpatrick Training Evaluation
Model. International Journal of Basic And Advanced Research,2013; 2(3); 57-65
11. Ekta Srivastava.(2012) Evaluation Of Training Programme. International Journal of Applied Research & Studie.
12. Berg, M. E., & Karlsen, J. T. (2012). An evaluation of management training and coaching. Journal of Workplace
Learning, 24(3), 177-199.
13. Giangreco, A., Carugati, A., & Sebastiano, A. (2010). Are we doing the right thing?: Food for thought on training
evaluation and its context. Personnel Review, 39(2), 162-177.
14. Blanchard, P. N., Thacker, J. W., & Way, S. A. (2000). Training evaluation: perspectives and evidence from
Canada. International Journal of Training and Development, 4(4), 295-304.

TheInternational J
210 Vol 2 Issue6 J
une, 2014
15. Pineda, P. (2010). Evaluation of training in organisations: a proposal for an integrated model. Journal of European
Industrial Training, 34(7), 673-693.
16. Topno, H. (2012). Evaluation of Training and Development: An Analysis of Various Models. IOSR Journal of Business
and Management, 5(2), 16-22.
17. Chaudhry, N. I., & Roomi, M. A. (2010). Accounting for the development of human capital in manufacturing
organizations: A study of the Pakistani textile sector. Journal of Human Resource Costing & Accounting, 14(3), 178-195.
18. Attia, A. M., & Honeycutt Jr, E. D. (2012). Measuring sales training effectiveness at the behavior and results levels using
self-and supervisor evaluations. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 30(3), 324-338

A Case Study Approach For Evaluation Of Employee Training Effectiveness And Development Program

More Related Content

Similar to A Case Study Approach For Evaluation Of Employee Training Effectiveness And Development Program (20)

More from Stacy Taylor (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

A Case Study Approach For Evaluation Of Employee Training Effectiveness And Development Program