Training Effectiveness: it's the follow-up that counts

[Michael Wilkinson]

Have you ever wondered why much of your training doesn’t seem to deliver the results you want?

You know how it is. You’ve done the appraisals, you have a good idea of what and where the skill gaps are so you book some training. The workshop is great (believe me, it is!) and everyone comes back fired up and enthusiastic. And that’s it. With luck some of the new skills and approaches will stick, but given the investment is that really enough?

So why doesn’t training deliver the transformational results you’d like? Why don’t the team return as a group of superheroes? Why is it so hard to transfer learning into business results?

Recent research has suggested that the key to really successful training is in the follow-up:

According to Dr Brent Peterson, the CEO of Apollo Consulting Group, Pre Course activity makes a 26% Contribution to the Successful Outcome of training and accounts for 10% of the Typical Learning Investment. The workshop itself accounts for 24% of the outcome but 85% of the investment, whilst follow-up accounts for 50% of the outcome, but just 5% of the investment!

50% of the contribution to success, 5% of the typical learning investment. It’s not the training that delivers success, it’s the follow-up! And yet it’s the follow-up that gets the least thought, consideration and investment (and here we’re talking time, effort and commitment, not necessarily just cost).

David Brown's comments are key (read his forum post). When it comes to planning training, don't just plan the training, plan the follow-up because it's the follow-up that counts. So what do you offer in terms of follow-up that helps to deliver real training value to your clients?

[Len Horridge]

How I agree!! For the last two years, we have been doing sales training followed by sales coaching... and the results have been fantastic (for a blue chip company who keep coming back for more!). Follow ups are a MUST and should be built into all training interventions.

[Andy McBurnie]

Hi

Just to add a little bit to the discussion. I note that Kirkpatrick is mentioned (and is obviously not known by all). I think follow-up is essential and, just to iterate it, Kirkpatrick's ideas may be relevant. He basically said that there are 4 levels of training evaluation:
1. Immediate from trainee - i.e. happy forms
2. Is the training used in the workplace? - has trainee taken in enough to use it?
3. Has training made an impact in the department/team environment? - does it permeate to others?
4. Has training had a long term impact on the organisation? - is it beneficial to the org?

Most training evaluation finishes at stage 1 (I'm sure you all know this, but it is just a reminder).

What has this got to do with follow-up? Well, if you incorporate follow-up into all the levels of evaluation, by whatever method you choose to use, you have a much better chance of the training having the desired effect (assuming that the training was relevant in the first place) and of the organisation seeing the impact on the bottom line or efficacy or whatever criteria they are judging the training on. I think it is important to not only evaulate training, but to address any failings or issues arising from such evaluation. Follow-up coaching or mentoring can be especially effective here, but is obviously not suitable for all situations.

As has been noted previously...the major difficulty is often getting the organisaiton to pay for it, rather than simply sating their feeling of needing to provide something.

Andy

[sharpendtraining]

Good summary Andy - (and I feel that we have gone way off the OP).

One of the reasons we got out of classroom training is that we turn up, deliver what the client asked for but it was blinding obviously to us as consultants (or even just outsiders) that that was not what they wanted.