Public and private nonprofit organizations are increasing training efforts to build individual and organizational capacity to carry out and utilize outcome evaluation. Evaluators of training are challenged to find comprehensive evaluative frameworks. Traditional training evaluation tend to focus individual change, while organization-focused efforts tend to incorporate individual change as a necessary sub-component of the larger entity’s change. Neither approach adequately incorporates a developmental context within the evaluative framework. This article presents an integral, developmental approach that links individual and collective attributes. The use of the framework is illustrated with examples from Check Points, an outcome evaluation training program of Michigan State University and United Way of Michigan. The article concludes with suggestions for improving training and evaluative efforts.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alliger, G. M., Tannenbaum, S. I., Bennett, W., Jr., Traver, H., & Shotland, A. (1997). A meta-analysis of the relationships among training criteria. Personnel Psychology, 50, 341-358.
2.
Andrews, M. P., Reed, C. S., Brown, R. E., Hembroff, L. A., Seabrook, L., & Villarruel, F. A. (Undated). Check Points—a training manual for the evaluation of educational and human services organizations. East Lansing, MI: ADS@MSU and United Way of Michigan.
3.
Baldwin, T. T., & Ford, J. K. (1988). Transfer of training: a review and directions for future research. Personnel Psychology, 41, 63-105.
4.
Bumpass, S. (1990). Measuring participant performance—an alternative. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 6(2), 99-107.
5.
Cheng, E. W. L., & Ho, D. C. K. (1998). Transfer of training: some practical thoughts from theoretical studies. International Journal of Management, 15(1), 14-19.
6.
Clement, C. W. (1982). Testing the hierarchy theory of training evaluation: an expanded role for trainee reactions. Public Personnel Management Journal, 11, 176-184.
7.
Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (1997). Organization Development and Change (6th ed.). Cincinnati, OH: South-Western College Publishing Company.
8.
Facteau, J. D., Dobbins, G. H., Russell, J. E. A., Ladd, R. T., & Kudisch, J. D. (1995). The influence of general perceptions of the training environment on pretraining motivation and perceived training transfer. Journal of Management, 21(1), 1-25.
9.
Horsch, K. (1996). Results-based accountability systems: opportunities and challenges [6 paragraphs]. The evaluation exchange: emerging strategies is evaluating child and family services [On-line serial], 2(1). Available FTP: Hostname: hugse1.havard.edu Directory: /%7Ehfrp/eval/issue3/horsch.html.
10.
Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1959). Techniques for evaluating training programs. Journal of ASTD, 13(11), 3-9.
11.
Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1998). Evaluating training programs (2nd ed.). San Franciso: Berrett-Koehler.
12.
MSU Asset Workgroup (2000). Michigan State University’s Asset/Outcome Workgroup Model: Overview of a Work in Progress. Working Paper. East Lansing, MI.
13.
Morgan, P. (1997). The design and use of capacity development indicators. Paper prepared for the Political and Social Policies Division, Policy Branch, CIDA. Que., Canada: Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA).
14.
Noe, R. A., & Schmitt, N. (1986). The influence of trainee attitudes on training effectiveness: test of a model. Personnel Psychology, 39, 497-523.
15.
Onyx, J., & Bullen, P. (2000). Measuring social capital in five communities. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 36(1), 23-42.
16.
Plantz, M. C., Greenway, M. T., & Hendricks, M. (1997). Outcome measurement: showing results in the nonprofit sector. Outcome Measurement Resource Network. Available: http://www.unitedway.org/outcome/ndpaper.htm.
17.
Pratt, C. C., McGuigan, W. M., & Katzev, A. R. (2000). Measuring program outcomes: using retrospective pretest measures. American Journal of Evaluation, 21(3), 341-349.
18.
Rockwell, K., & Kohn, H. (1989). Post-then-pre evaluation: measuring behavior change more accurately. Journal of Extension, 27(2).
19.
Rouiller, J. Z., & Goldstein, I. L. (1993). The relationship between organizational transfer climate and positive transfer of training. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 4(4), 377-390.
20.
Scott, A. G., & Sechrest, L. (1989). Strength of theory and theory of strength. Evaluation and Program Planning, 12, 329-336.
21.
Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: the art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday.
22.
United Way of America (1996). Measuring program outcomes: a practical approach. Alexandria, VA: Author.
23.
Wilber, K. (1999). The collected works of Ken Wilber: integral psychology, transformations of consciousness & selected essays (Vol. 4). Boston: Shambhala Publications.
24.
Wilber, K. (2000). The collected works of Ken Wilber: sex, ecology, spirituality (Vol. 6). Boston: Shambhala Publications.
