Assessment Methods for Training and Performance

Most companies have a training process in place with the intention of developing and guiding employees to meet company performance and ethics standards. Despite the prevalence of training programs, they are largely inconclusive without applying assessment methods to understand how the process will impact employee outcomes and what needs to be addressed to accomplish performance goals. Training needs assessments provide the foundation for all training projects. Without it, one cannot be sure of what training is needed and if training objectives will be beneficial to intended performance measures. As a result, it is crucial that needs assessment is very first step in creating any type of training program. The following will provide an analysis of the research of major needs and assessment methods used for training and performance interventions. The advantages and disadvantages of the various types of methods are evaluated to provide a comprehensive understanding of the topic and provide the foundation to compare and contrast the different methods. Discussion around blending options is also addressed in order to fully understand the role and potential benefits of assessment methods for training and performance. Needs assessments are absolutely necessary in order to develop an effective and solid training structure that aligns with the individual and high-level performance goals of any organization.

Literature Review

Assessment methods include surveys, focus groups, interviews, and observations. Surveys can help to provide leaders with relevant data relating to employee attitudes about training as well as how effective it was. This can be accomplished by passing out a paper form or sending out an e-survey link. Either way, it is recommended that the surveys remain anonymous with regards to highlighting individual responses. This will allow respondents to feel confident responding honestly. A survey’s questions can be built around a perceived problem or used as a generic way to take note of employee attitudes before a training module is developed (Cekada, 2011). Surveys should focus on individual perceptions and feelings in order to capture the sentiment of the team. While they can be limited to pre-selected options, adding an area for comments allows respondents to clarify and specify their views, allowing reviewers to structure training processes around the perceived need.

The benefit of using the survey method to provide needs assessment for training and performance is that it provides valid and specific data from a potentially broad range of people. This provides reviewers with a comprehensive understanding of respondent sentiment, enabling them to make strategic and targeted decisions around them (Barbazette, 2006). In addition, behavioral information and opinions are provided, helping reviewers understand respondent thought processes. This type of information is beneficial because it can be immediately applied to programs and training proposals. It can also be used to assess company morale so that trainers can determine the best approach to deliver the message. If the survey is completed manually, it will take a significant amount of time and may not be as effective as using an electronic system. Building it may also be tricky in terms of structuring the questions properly and providing unbiased questions and answer options to the respondents. It will require substantial time for effective development.

Focus groups incorporate formal or informal group sessions to identify and analyze, ideas, issues, and opinions. Focus groups are beneficial to needs assessment because they allow for interaction between multiple viewpoints, providing a range of discussion and responses. In addition, the group setting enhances the potential for group “buy-in”, allowing a consensus to be reached more often (Klane, 2007). This is beneficial because it streamlines group needs and makes it easier to understand what the objectives of the overall training need to be. Another advantage of focus groups is that they help members listen, analyze, and solve problems better than if they were to work individually. As training developers need a clear understanding of sentiment, wants and needs, this will help them to better understand how to deliver it. Despite these benefits, the drawbacks include the time-consuming nature of focus groups. Attempting to incorporate the ideas and opinions of multiple people can be extensive, and is effective but not always time-efficient. In addition, it is often difficult to quantify data from a focus group session, which can make it difficult for program developers to set measurable goals for training and performance. Those hosting focus groups for needs assessment purposes must be careful to select a range of individuals that can represent the population. Otherwise, the assessment results will be skewed, resulting in ineffective training processes. Attendees may also come in with a negative attitude relating to their morality within the company, affecting the end results of the assessment. With this assessment method, a skilled moderator is absolutely necessary to maintain communication flow and structure member comments and views in a way that can be synthesized after the session.

Interviews can also be formal or casual, as well as structured or unstructured. There is significant flexibility when using interviews for a needs assessment for training and performance because it can be completed in person, by phone, or online. The benefit of using interviews as needs assessment is that it can uncover individual attitudes and underlying problems that may never have been discovered. The feedback gathered is rich in data, especially if the interview is in person (Mc Ardle, 1998). Reading body language and experiencing immediate and spontaneous feedback allows interviewers to get a more genuine response. Interviews can be very time consuming because of the one-on-one nature of this method. It may also be difficult to quantify results, forcing researchers to incorporate only qualitative data into their outcomes. Having skillful interviewers is also essential in order to relate to the interviewee and encourage them to express themselves. Depending on the number of employees, it may be difficult to interview each one, making it important to choose a subject sample that will effectively represent the whole of the population. Otherwise, the assessment results will be skewed and training and performance objectives will not align with the true needs of the team.

Observations can also be used as a needs assessment method. Observational methods can provide significant qualitative or quantitative feedback, but will not provide explanations for functions or behaviors reviewed. This method minimizes interruptions of activity or workflow and can generate real-life data if the respondents are unaware that they are being observed. Otherwise, behaviors may change, making the observation data invalid. This assessment method requires an observer that is highly skilled in order to capture and record behaviors that relate to the assessment. This method is the weakest assessment method of the group because it only provides outside review of employee behaviors and tasks. As training is inherently focused on changing or teaching, it is essential to comprehend how employees think and discover how they learn in order to develop a successful training program that will lead to improved performance. Observation lacks the depth and interaction necessary to capture the thoughts and feelings of a group, making it an ineffective assessment method for training and performance.

Comparisons and Contrasts

Each method has individual characteristics that impact the depth and quality of the information attained. While questionnaires are an easy way to capture the sentiments of the whole group, it does not provide the in-depth communication relay that a personal interview does. In the same sense, it is typically time-consuming and infeasible to interview everyone on the team, requiring that just a few interviews represent the entire population. There are potential biases in both methods as well. Interviewers may present bias by the way they ask questions, and survey outcomes may be skewed if only a few people participate. In the same way, focus groups may misrepresent the needs of the population and observations lack the element of “why”. As each of these assessment methods provides different benefits and have different risks associated with them, blending them strategically will provide maximum effectiveness for establishing needs assessment for training and performance. One blended option is to use surveys and interviews together. The surveys can be sent to the entire population and tabulated using a survey system. Researchers can then follow up on these survey questions by conducting interviews with a smaller population in order to gain insight into why participants responded the way they did. Another opportunity is blending survey and focus group methods. The survey will provide a foundation for population sentiment, and the focus group will provide insight into thought processes and mindsets which resulted in the survey responses. Understanding this will allow researchers to cross-check and evaluate responses in order to get a more accurate idea of what type of structure will effectively run an employee training program and motivate employees as well as line up with the organization's individual and high-level performance goals.

Compared to the other needs assessment method alternatives, the observation method is weak and does not provide a clear comprehensive understanding of employee needs. It is not recommended that this method stand alone or even be a second method option for assessment purposes. Observation may be beneficial as a third addition to the other blending options to provide added context to the evaluation of the data. However, used alone or blended with only one other method, it lacks the depth necessary to provide data-rich information that can effectively be applied to support training and performance development.

Conclusion

In conclusion, training should never be conducted without first conducting a needs assessment. This will provide a foundation for trainers to understand the sentiment, attitudes, and competence level of participants. If this is not conducted prior to the training being developed, there is a significant risk that the trainer will not understand what needs to be covered and how it needs to be addressed. It will result in wasted time and effort, and the outcome will not be effective. In order to align effective training structures to individual and high-level organizational performance goals, effective needs assessments must be applied. The options of surveys, focus groups, interviews and observations all have different benefits and drawbacks, as well as different levels of quality and comprehensiveness. While they are one dimensional on their own, blending two or more of these assessments provides researchers with a comprehensive understanding of need, leading to more targeted and effective training structures. This blending also enhances the ability for training structures to closely align with organizational performance goals, providing a benefit all around. In order to establish learning objectives, developing design, and evaluating outcomes for training programs, assessment methods must be incorporated. While there are many more methods available than what was addressed in the above literature review, surveys, focus groups, interviews, and observation methods are the most common. In addition, when they are blended, the richness of the data values is enhanced, leading to streamlined training methods that establish positive performance outcomes.

References

Barbazette, J. (2006). Training needs assessment: methods, tools, and techniques. San Fransisco. Pfieffer.

Brown, J. (n.d) Training needs assessment: A must for developing an effective training Program. Rice University. Retrieved from http://ipma-hr.org/sites/default/files/pdf/hrcenter/Training%20Needs%20Assessment/cpr_needs.pdf

Cekada, T. (2011). Conducting an effective needs assessment. ASSE. Retrieved from http://www.asse.org/education/

Klane, J., Pearson, G. (2007). Training needs assessments – who, what, when, where, why, and how!. ASSE.

McArdle, G. (1998). Conducting a needs analysis. Menlo Park, Ca. CrispLearning