How to ensure training programmes deliver measurable firmwide benefits

It is often a challenge to ensure people who have been in training take their enthusiasm for their newly-acquired knowledge and skills back to their day
jobs (and often-hectic environments)
and put it to good use.

Many are familiar with the Kirkpatrick model of learning evaluation, but few take time to truly understand the intention behind the model.

The model, which was first developed by Donald L Kirkpatrick in the 1950s, has four levels:

Level 1: Reaction - to what degree participants react favourably to the training;

Level 2: Learning - to what degree participants acquire the intended knowledge, skills, attitudes, confidence and commitment based on their participation in a training event;

Level 3: Behaviour - to what degree participants apply what they learned during training when they are back on the job; and

Level 4: Results - to what degree targeted outcomes occur as a result of the training event and subsequent reinforcement.

Level 1 focuses on moment-in-time reflections on the benefits of the training event or activity. Level 2 involves an assessment to ascertain the 'before' and 'after' level of knowledge or capability of the individual. This often takes the form of a short quiz or interview on the topic, to be addressed through the training. This is normally the point at which people's familiarity and engagement with learning evaluation stops.

Level 3 relates to behavioural change, while level 4 explores the results or overall impact of the training. I find it difficult to bring to mind a law firm that routinely evaluates the behavioural changes of individuals and the overall impact on the firm of the training undertaken.

Why is this the case? Is there blind faith in the training having been designed appropriately, delivered effectively and fully embraced and responded to, as the trainers intended, by the learner? Are
there simply too many time pressures
to implement Kirkpatrick's levels? Is there
a misguided reliance on the answer to the question 'do you know more now than you did before?', with 'yes' considered sufficient evidence of its impact?

Clearly, the skill sets of law firm managers need to be robust if they are to carry out appropriate and specific observation and assessment of the behavioural competence of their learners. The managers need to be able to refer to and rely on clearly-defined behavioural competences required of employees and partners in their firm.

Creating a culture of behavioural competence is important to the success
of the firm, not just as an assessment
of legal and technical ability, and can
have an impact on the success of the training activity.

Culture of learning

Training will not always solve a problem if it is used as a bolt-on solution rather than as part of a greater strategy to solve the problem. For example, giving people a couple of hours of feedback training as part of a two-day programme on broader aspects of managing oneself and supervising others will not make a significant difference to the way that learners give and receive feedback. Learners need the opportunity to put their new skills into practice, to reflect on how they did and to discuss their approach with their managers or peers so that they can repeat what worked or change what didn't. In effect, an entire team needs to support the learning of the individual in order for learning from classroom, online modules, seminars or workshops to be seen to make a difference.

If teams and managers learn how to develop themselves and others, they learn how best to learn and they develop their coaching capabilities and their mentoring skills, the firm will naturally embrace Kirkpatrick's level 3 and will soon be able to demonstrate the ultimate evaluation at level 4, where the actual impact on the business can be evidenced.

This strategy of developing 'learning teams' will rely on teams being effective and not dysfunctional. They will need to
be populated with individual team
members who:

• trust one another;

• hold one another accountable;

• are committed to doing a great job;

• are focused on achieving the required results; and

• can challenge their fellow team members without generating a level of conflict which impacts the trust in the team or the quality of their work.

This level of team working, cooperation and support will generate a positive environment where individuals are comfortable with learning, failing and learning from mistakes to their own benefit, that of their team and the firm as a whole.

Successful learning, it would appear, starts with highly effective teams and not at the design stage of a new training intervention.

Sue Beavil is UK learning and organisational development manager at international law firm Slater & Gordon (www.slatergordon.co.uk)