Reaction Outcome Evaluation - Assignment Example

Reaction Evaluation By Technology and programs present in the work environment during recent years havebeen changing in a fast pace. It would sometimes be difficult for professionals to keep up with the changes. Companies and organizations are keen to make their employees in step with these modifications by letting employees attend training programs. However, how effective are these programs? REACTION EVALUATION Often times, trainings and conferences are conducted to ensure the competitiveness of employees in the professional environment.

With the limited amount of time that these professionals have, it is not quite possible for one to absorb such information having a narrow window of schedule. As per Kirkpatrick’s Reaction Outcome Evaluation, the first level of evaluation would be to identify how the participants responded to the training program. One can say that this is the most important part of the evaluation as to pin-point at which area the program is needed to be modified. This is despite the fact that a number of reviewers are not agreeing at this level and acknowledging individuality as the reason.

As the latter statements being declared, the evaluation system by Kirkpatrick would need tedious observation and an equal amount of understanding before one could conclude if the training conducted was successful or not (Rae, 2002). In evaluating the training program conducted, there seems to be a lack of interest within the employees themselves. One reason for this could be the fact that there are fewer interactions between participants in the program as the training was computer-based. Another factor, which could have affected the attitude of the employees, would be the fact that the training was to be done during an available time for an employee.

Instead of enjoying a well-deserve break, two hours of it would be spent doing the computer-based training program. Also, if a module is not that much understood by the employee, only a limited number of resource person can be approached with an immediate response. This fact does affect the comprehension of an employee as the concern was not answered in a timely manner. Another reason is that, a person can just scan through the module without fully understanding it just to say that the employee has finished the training.

The reason for the failure of the program was it was not properly supervised (Toney, 2002). Though paper-less training could be more practical, it should be properly executed and supervised. As per the recently concluded training, the execution was not on the basis of training employees yet it was presumably aimed to just inform concerned parties of the changes. With the outcome of the training, it is still safe to assume that a supervised training is still advisable for the employees of the company.

Conducting a computer-based unsupervised program should be slowly introduced. As a result of the training program conducted, one can say that it was not successful if the aim of the company is to let their employees to be fully aware of the new word processing sos ould be more practical, it should be properly executed and supervised. t just to say that the employee has finisftware. As initially stated, one disadvantage of the evaluation type is individuality. The evaluation and reaction of the program would vary from one individual to another.

In such cases, results can also vary as per the topic/theme of the training. There would be instances that the training program would deem to be successful for one situation but would fail in another. An advantage would be that one can address at what particular point the training failed or succeeded. Unlike Likert’s, one can just put in average in all the points being questioned without further explanation as to why it was put in a particular way. The latter type of evaluation seemed more of an open-ended question and would not elaborate further into details (Rae, 2002).

Another advantage is that details are looked upon thoroughly therefore making the conclusion more accurate. Even if at first, the evaluation would seem to be just merely reporting as to what have occurred, it is more looking deeper into the training’s points avoiding presumptuous endings just to please the people who conducted or approved the training program.ReferencesNoe, R. A. (2013). Employee Training and Development. 6th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.Mind Tools. (2013). Kirkpatricks four-level training evaluation model: Analyzing training effectiveness.

Retrieved from http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/kirkpatrick.htm.Rae, L. (2002). Assessing the Value of Your Training: The Evaluation Process from Training. England: Gower Publishing, Ltd.Toney, F. (2002). The Superior Project Manager: Global Competency Standards and Best Practices. New York, NY: Marcel Dekker, Inc.