Learning & Performing Development in Asia - a Study of the Evaluation of Mcdonald's and Breadtalk's Training Programs

Topics: Evaluation, Program evaluation, Donald Kirkpatrick Pages: 32 (11613 words) Published: November 13, 2008
Learning and Performance Development in Asia:
A Study of the Evaluation of McDonald’s & BreadTalk’s Training Programs

Executive Summary
This report reviews the current methods on evaluating training programs by BreadTalk, with an aim of improving its evaluation methods. Through a search of literature and an analysis of current methods, the report summarises the latest thinking on evaluating training programs and provides insights on how BreadTalk can improve the quality and management of its evaluations. A comparison with an overseas company, McDonald’s, was also done to provide suggestions for improvement for BreadTalk’s evaluation methods. There are three key objectives of the report: first, to identify models, frameworks, methodologies, and approaches as well as their uses and feasibility in evaluating training programs; second, to summarize how the quality and effectiveness of these evaluations are assessed in theory and in reality, and mainly, what cutting-edge methods and approaches other organisations use to maintain the quality and effectiveness of their evaluations; and, third, to outline some common practices of corporate evaluation units. Latest models. The review found that the reigning framework for evaluating training programs – and the subsequent models, methods and approaches – is one outlined more than forty years ago by Donald Kirkpatrick. His framework evaluates training programs in terms of four levels – reaction, learning, behavior, and results. Subsequently, Jack Philip’s five level Return On Investment (ROI) model became the conventional model for evaluating training. Basically it is similar to Kirkpatrick’s framework, with an additional level, the calculation of ROI. Other models analysed include the CIRO model and a few others. Critiques of the models are also mentioned. Quality and effectiveness. The report found that there were no new, cutting-edge methods and approaches beyond the Kirkpatrick framework used by the two organisations to maintain the quality and effectiveness of training program evaluations. In general, most organisations rely on simple evaluations of participants’ perception of learning. Common management practices. The role and management of evaluations of training programs are similar within organisations, and the responsibilities of the management teams are similar. It is common to use annual work plans and quarterly reports to develop work objectives and results and to report on progress toward those results. The organisations that appear to be the most effective in implementing training programs and in enhancing the impact of recommendations from evaluations are those that fully integrated training, evaluation, and administration in one unit and/or have developed strong partnerships with operational managers within the organisations (Evans, March 2007).

Table of Contents
Executive Summary1
1. Introduction2
1.1 Description of BreadTalk2
1.2 Significance of Training Evaluation2
1.3 General Trends of Training Evaluation2
1.3 Training Evaluation trends in Singapore2
1.4 Methodology2
2. Literature Review2
2.1 Definition of Training Evaluation2
2.2 Theories and Models in Training Evaluation2
2.2.1 Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Evaluation2
2.2.2 Jack Philip’s Five Level Return On Investment (ROI) Model2 2.2.3 CIRO (Context, Input, Reaction, Outcome) Model2
3. Current Practices of BreadTalk2
3.1 Challenges Faced and Strategies Taken2
3.2 Future Path2
4. Summary and Recommendations2
4.1 McDonald’s Evaluation Strategies2
4.2 Comparing BreadTalk with MacDonald’s2
4.3 Our recommendations to BreadTalk2
4.3.1 Kirkpatrick’s four level Evaluation Model2
4.3.2 Jack Philip’s ROI model2
4.3.3 Making Evaluation Work in Your Organisation2
4.4 Recommendations for McDonald’s2
4.5 Limitations2
5. Conclusion2
Bibliography2
Appendix A – The Success Case Method2
Appendix B – MOM report on Employee Supported Training: Charts2...

Bibliography: BreadTalk. (2008). Competitive Strengths. Retrieved from BreadTalk: http://breadtalk.listedcompany.com/strengths.html
Brinkerhoff, R
(2006). Certification in the ROI Methodology. ROI Institute.
Chapman, A. (1995). Retrieved September 24, 2008, from Donald L Kirkpatrick 's Training Evaluation Model : http://www.businessballs.com/kirkpatricklearningevaluationmodel.htm
Clark, D
Dave Jennings, C. (November 2001). Proving Your Worth. Professional Development Forum Online.
Holton, E. (1996). The Flawed Four-Level Evaluation Model. Human Resource Quartely , 21.
Kirkpatrick, D. (1993). Evaluating Training Programs.
Kirkpatrick, J
Kirkpatrick, J. (Aug 2007). The Hidden Power of Kirkpatrick 's Four Levels. Training & Development , 34.
M.Osman-Gani, A. (2008). Performance Development & Training with Asian Perspective. Singapore: McGraw-Hill Education (Asia).
Manpower, M. R. (September 2007). Employer Supported Training 2006. MOM.
Philips, J. J. (April 1996). Measuring ROI: The Fifth Level of Evaluation. Technocal & Skills Training , 1.
Phillips, J. J. (August 2007). Using ROI to Demonstrate HR Value in the Public Sector: A Review of Best Practices. Strategic Planning , 14.
Pollitt, D. (2007). McDonald 's serves up better customer care and lower employee turnover: Two-stage training for more than 4,000 staff. Human Resource Management International Digest , 23-26.
Schmalenbach, M. S. (2005, January 24). trainingzone.co.uk. Retrieved from Training Evaluation: http://www.trainingzone.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=136034
Steve Mapp, S
Tennant, C. B. (2002). The design of a training program measurement model. Journal of European Industrial Training , 230-241.
Travis K. Brewer, A. B. (August 2007). USE OF PHILLIPS’S FIVE LEVEL TRAINING EVALUATION AND RETURN ON INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK IN THE U. S. NON-PROFIT SECTOR.
Exhibit B1: Proportion of Training-providing Establishments that Evaluated Effectiveness of Staff Training, 2003-2006 (Manpower, September 2007)

Exhibit B2: Common Evaluation Procedures, 2003 - 2006 (Manpower, September 2007)
Exhibit B3: Main Reasons (%) for not having Evaluation Procedures, 2003 - 2006 (Manpower, September 2007)
Exhibit D1: Summary of Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Evaluation (Chapman, 1995; M.Osman-Gani, 2008)
Continue Reading

Please join StudyMode to read the full document

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Types and Significance of Evaluation of Training Program Essay
  • Development of Training and Mentoring Program Essay
  • training and development Essay
  • Essay about training and development
  • Essay about Program of Study
  • Training & development in a organization Essay
  • Training and Development Essay
  • Development Study Essay

Become a StudyMode Member

Sign Up - It's Free