CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.13 Measuring the Effectiveness of Training (Training Effectiveness)
2.13.1 Level 1 - Reaction
The reaction is either a single dimension such as the satisfaction of trainees about the training (Diamantidis & Chatzoglou, 2012), or a multi-dimensional construct such as enjoyment, utility, affection and difficulty (Warr & Birdi, 1999). Harrison (1992), Warr and Birdi (1999) suggested that the reactions should include enjoyment, utility and difficulty dimensions. Furthermore, Alliger et al. (1997) assert that the reaction consists of utility perceptions and affective constructs. Most studies focus on the trainee reaction construct for assessing the multi-dimensional constructs (Brown & Sitzmann, 2011). The current research uses reaction as a multi-dimensional construct, as suggested by Brown and Sitzmann (2011) .
Table 2.4 gives a summary of the trainee reaction dimensions, which are discussed extensively in the literature. Brown (2007) asserts that understanding the participants about certain aspects of the training can be beneficial to trainers to identify problems and measurement of satisfaction with the training and this understanding of how they feel can be useful in detecting motivation or diagnosing the trainees ‘ issues. Morgan and Casper (2000) added six distinct factors when measuring the trainees ‘reaction to the training. According to Brown (2007), as indicated earlier on in this chapter, the reaction can measure one dimension, such as satisfaction, or multiple dimensions, such as training content, materials, delivery methods, trainer, instructional activities, duration, evaluation, and improvements.
46 | P a g e In the same vein, trainee reaction indicates the trainee ‘s perception of participating in a training programme by measuring elements of the training programme, such as trainer performance, training environment (Diamantidis & Chatzoglou, 2012); and training components, goals (Sitzmann, et al., 2008); content, material, process, and design and delivery, to redesign and develop an instructional programme (Saks & Burke-Smalley, 2012). The initial response of trainees about the training is essential and represented by three elements: expectations, desire, and perception (Tannenbaum, et al., 1991).
Table 2. 4 Trainees’ Reaction Dimensions
Dimensions Authors/Sources
Satisfaction only (Liking the training) Alliger and Janak (1989); Kirkpatrick, (1994); Noe (1986); Ghosh et al., (2011); Lin et al., (2011).
The extent to which the participants can apply the content to their job (enjoyment, utility), and difficulty.
Alliger and Janak (1989); Harrison (1992); Giangreco et al., (2010); Warr and Bunce (1995), Warr et al., (1999).
Utility and affective (the extent to which a participant ―liked or was satisfied with different aspects of the training) reactions
Alliger and Janak (1989); Alliger et al., (1997); Arthur et al., (2003a); Morgan and Casper (2000), Tracey et al., (2001), Sitzmann et al., (2003), Tan et al., (2003), Yoon (2018)
Overall satisfaction (The perceived efficiency (effectiveness) and usefulness of training, and the perceived trainer performance)
Giangreco et al., (2009), Giangreco et al., (2010)
Satisfaction and ease of use Kettanurak et al., (2001); Giangreco et al., (2010).
The utility of training only Bhatti and Kaur (2010).
Researcher’s Summary of Reaction Dimensions of Trainees
47 | P a g e Patrick (1992) asserts that the feelings and motivation of trainees toward training plays a critical role in determining their level of success in the training programme. The reaction is another way of trainees ‘feedback with regards to the training they have attended (Blanchard et al., 2000). The evaluation of reaction, on the other hand, is merely finding out the extent to which trainees liked or disliked the training that they participated (Morgan & Casper, 2000) Therefore, evaluators assess the reactions of trainees for various reasons which the details are in the subsections below:
Receiving Feedback
Receiving feedback about a training programme assists the trainers or instructors to improve their training efforts and further demonstrate the effectiveness of the training programme. The strength of measuring reaction lies in getting feedback from the trainees and judging the effectiveness of training so that the training instructor/trainer can recognise the trainees ‘needs from the training programme (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2006). Accordingly, by analysing the trainees ‘feedback results, the trainer can be able to adjust the programme as required and share the results with the organisation (Mavin & Robson, 2014). Trainee reactions provide immediate and valuable feedback about how well the training was delivered (Turner et al., 2017). Hence, the trainer can get a quick understanding of how the learners felt about the training session in terms of the content, structure and delivery method (Mavin & Robson, 2014).
Improving future training programmes
Morgan and Casper (2000) assert that the reaction of trainees on the training can provide meaningful input for the design and improvement of training efforts. Measuring the reactions of trainees about the training can assist the organisations in improving their future training programmes through recognition of the weaknesses in the current training programmes (Goldstein
& Ford, 2002; Tannenbaum & Woods, 1992). Quantitative information provided by trainees through their reaction responses can be useful in setting out the performance standards of future training programmes (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2006). Trainee’s reaction gives information that is of limited value to the trainer. Henceforth, it is vital to use other levels in measuring the effectiveness of training programmes rather than focusing only on level one of the model.
Therefore, in this study, all four levels will be analysed to understand the individual and organisational needs, objectives, and outcomes. The reaction data that is credible can be an
48 | P a g e excellent diagnostic tool in the design and delivery of training interventions (Morgan & Casper, 2000). Trainee reactions provide insights about the degree of satisfaction of the trainees concerning the design and implementation of the training programme (Lee & Pershing, 2002). Change in reaction has a significant influence on training effectiveness (Borate, et al., 2014). The training objectives, methods, environment, trainer and training content are important factors related to the training programme design (Nikandrou, et al., 2009). Therefore, in evaluating the reaction of trainees on the training, the participants must be asked to comment on these factors (Kirkpatrick, 1959; Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2006, Lee & Pershing, 1999). Thus, one of the study objectives is to investigate the impact of training characteristics on Level one (reaction) of Kirkpatrick‘s model.