Abstract
In program evaluation, limitations often preclude the utilization of sophisticated methodologies that assure the integrity of research findings. When rigorous method ologies are not applicable, theoretical or situationally driven evaluations have been developed. In such cases, the situation itself can serve as a useful research guide. In a study of a managerial training program, two subsamples of coworkers—supervisors and subordinates—were used to validate the participants' assessments of program impact. Both samples supported in direction and magnitude the participants' assessments. In addition, the subsamples separately revealed a similar ability to judge specific as well as overall impact. The methodology strengthened the validity of the findings.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.