case study quiz mrs kirkpatrick

Michele's Reflections on OD and Change

Just another Sites At Penn State site

Lesson 4: Applying Kirkpatrick’s Model to Case Study

Using a model helps build in structure and align the elements of the OD process. Kirkpatrick’s Four Level Training Model is a popular model to identify and measure training efforts and can provide structure to my proposed case study change effort and process. The four levels of Kirkpatrick’s Training Model are: reaction, learning, behavior and results or financial return. Like any model it also has limitations. Although I am still formally defining specifics within my case study, I know that it has levels of complexity, and potentially have objectives that go beyond Kirkpatrick’s four levels.

The main goal of my case study is understand how the flow down of 747/767 program communications and perceptions of communication efforts affect the opportunity for factory production employees and multiple levels of leadership to be engaged and involved in a common vision of continuous improvement that support the Boeing Vision. Applying what I know about my case study to each level of Kirkpatrick’s model would reveal the following at each level.

The first level is Reaction and it is based on understanding how well people like your change effort. The case study focuses upon manufacturing employees and multiple levels of leadership who will need to change current communication flow and impact to create better alignment and engagement. We would want to include some type of training to ensure consistency and meeting communication needs of manufacturing employees that receive the communications. These are the people who will be most impacted by the changes of better aligned communication and increasing continuous engagement to meet on time and first quality production goals. Reaction and potential culture change can be measured through baseline and periodic 1:1 interviews, focus groups, surveys, communication artifacts, HR artifacts such as hourly employee absenteeism.

The second level is Learning and it is based on understanding on how much people learned from the training and overall program communication expectations. To determine the if training supported the objectives I would use a criteria / scorecard to compare outgoing communication artifacts and well as a survey and 1:1 feedback from leadership. I would also want to use a pulse survey with communication recipients and the leaders to determine understanding and impact.

The third level is Behavior and it is based on how much people changed on-the-job behavior as a result of the change effort. Will the five levels of leadership change their behavior after training? Unfortunately, statistics often tell us the answer is no to long term change. Yet I am hopeful that due to the sheer amount of leaders that enough leaders will recognize the benefits of the change and develop a better habit of creating more alignment and engagement as their teams are more engaged, which can be measured by artifacts such as absenteeism rates, team projects focusing upon continuous development which improves first time quality and overall production goals. The bottom line being recognizing some type of correlation between communication and impact and thereby continuing to take action to better communicate flow down and align it to the team needs. Unfortunately there are always multiple initiatives happening in this complex environment that may also affect these items and it is difficult to arrive at direct proof of one initiative.

The final and fourth level is Results and it is based how much change benefited the organization. As stated above the results of the behaviors can be increased alignment to a common goal and increased continuous team engagement which improves first time quality and overall production goals. A program communication plan to share big and small “wins” and stories could be helpful in creating increased awareness and focus upon the sustaining implementation of the desired behaviors with the leaders and potentially create a pull from the first line leaders from more senior levels of leadership.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Kirkpatrick Model: Four Levels of Learning Evaluation

The Kirkpatrick Model is probably the best known model for analyzing and evaluating the results of training and educational programs. It takes into account any style of training, both informal or formal, to determine aptitude based on four levels criteria.

Level 1 Reaction measures how participants react to the training (e.g., satisfaction?). Level 2 Learning analyzes if they truly understood the training (e.g., increase in knowledge, skills or experience?). Level 3 Behavior looks at if they are utilizing what they learned at work (e.g., change in behaviors?), and Level 4 Results determines if the material had a positive impact on the business / organization.

This model was developed by Dr. Donald Kirkpatrick (1924 – 2014) in the 1950s. The model can be implemented before, throughout, and following training to show the value of training to the business.

As outlined by this system, evaluation needs to start with level one , after which as time and resources will allow, should proceed in order through levels two , three, and four. Data from all of the previous levels can be used as a foundation for the following levels’ analysis. As a result, each subsequent level provides an even more accurate measurement of the usefulness of the training course, yet simultaneously calls for a significantly more time-consuming and demanding evaluation.

Undoubtedly, the most widely used and in-demand method for the assessment of training in businesses nowadays is Kirkpatrick’s system based around the four levels as guidelines. The Kirkpatrick model has been used for over 30 years by many different types of companies as the major system for training evaluations. It is evident that Kirkpatrick’s vision has made a positive impact to the overall practice of training evaluation.

See also: Instructional design models

Listed below is an in-depth look into the four levels of the Kirkpatrick Model:

Level 1 Evaluation – Reaction

In what ways participants liked a particular program / training? How participants feel?

The objective for this level is straightforward, it evaluates how individuals react to the training model by asking questions that establishes the trainees’ thoughts. Questions will figure out if the participant enjoyed their experience and if they found the material in the program useful for their work. This particular form of evaluation is typically referred to as a “smile sheet.”

As outlined by Kirkpatrick, each program needs to be assessed at this level to help improve the model for future use. On top of that, the participants’ responses is essential for determining how invested they will be in learning the next level. Even though an optimistic reaction does not ensure learning, an unfavorable one definitely makes it less likely that the user will pay attention to the training.

Examples of resources and techniques for level one :

• Online assessment that can be graded by delegates/evaluators.
• Can be done immediately after the training ends.
• Are the participants happy with the instructor(s)?
• Did the training meet the participant’s needs?
• Are the attendee’s happy with the educational tools employed (e.g., PowerPoint, handouts etc)
• Printed or oral reports provided by delegates/evaluators to supervisors at the participants’ organizations.
• “Smile sheets”.
• Comment forms determined by subjective individual reaction to the training course.
• Post-training program questionnaires.
• Verbal responses that can be taken into consideration and considered.
• Especially encourage written comments
• Try to get honest responses and feedbacks

Read more…

Level 2 Evaluation – Learning

New skills / knowledge / attitudes? What was learned? and What was not learned?

Evaluating at this level is meant to gauge the level participants have developed in expertise, knowledge, or mindset. Exploration at this level is far more challenging and time-consuming compared to level one.

Techniques vary from informal to formal tests and self-assessment to team assessment. If at all possible, individuals take the test or evaluation prior to the training ( pre-test ) and following training ( post-test ) to figure out how much the participant comprehended.

Examples of tools and procedures for level two:

• Measurement and evaluation is simple and straightforward for any group size.
• You may use a control group to compare.
• Exams, interviews or assessments prior to and immediately after the training.
• Observations by peers and instructors
• Strategies for assessment should be relevant to the goals of the training program.
• A distinct clear scoring process needs to be determined in order to reduce the possibility of inconsistent evaluation reports.
• Interview, printed, or electronic type examinations can be carried out.
• An interview can be carried out before and after the assessment, though this is time-consuming and unreliable.

Level 3 Evaluation – Transfer

Was the leaning being applied by the attendees? 

This level analyzes the differences in the participant’s behavior at work after completing the program. Assessing the change makes it possible to figure out if the knowledge, mindset, or skills the program taught are being used the workplace.

For the majority of individuals this level offers the truest evaluation of a program’s usefulness. Having said that, testing at this level is challenging since it is generally impossible to anticipate when a person will start to properly utilize what they’ve learned from the program, making it more difficult to determine when, how often, and exactly how to evaluate a participant post-assessment.

This level starts 3–6 months after training.

Examples of assessment resources and techniques for level three:

• This can be carried out through observations and interviews.
• Evaluations have to be subtle until change is noticeable, after which a more thorough examination tool can be used.
• Were the learned knowledge and gained skills used?
• Surveys and close observation after some time are necessary to evaluate significant change, importance of change, and how long this change will last.
• Online evaluations tend to be more challenging to integrate. Examinations are usually more successful when incorporated within present management and training methods at the participant’s workplace.
• Quick examinations done immediately following the program are not going to be reliable since individuals change in various ways at different times.
• Assessments can be developed around applicable scenarios and distinct key efficiency indicators or requirements relevant to the participant’s job.
• Observations should be made to minimize opinion-based views of the interviewer as this factor is far too variable, which can affect consistency and dependability of assessments.
• Taking into consideration the opinion of the participant can also be too variable of a factor as it makes evaluation very unreliable, so it is essential that assessments focus more defined factors such as results at work rather than opinions.
• Self-assessment can be handy, but only with an extensively designed set of guidelines.

Level 4 Evaluation – Results

What are the final results of the training?

Commonly regarded as the primary goal of the program, level four determines the overall success of the training model by measuring factors such as lowered spending, higher returns on investments, improved quality of products, less accidents in the workplace, more efficient production times, and a higher quantity of sales.

From a business standpoint, the factors above are the main reason for the model, even so level four results are not usually considered. Figuring out whether or not the results of the training program can be linked to better finances is hard to accurately determine.

Types of assessment strategies and tools used for level four:

• It should be discussed with the participant exactly what is going to be measured throughout and after the training program so that they know what to expect and to fully grasp what is being assessed.
• Use a control group
• Allow enough time to measure / evaluate
• No final results can be found unless a positive change takes place.
• Improper observations and the inability to make a connection with training input type will make it harder to see how the training program has made a difference in the workplace.
• The process is to determine which methods and how these procedures are relevant to the participant’s feedback.
• For senior individuals in particular, yearly evaluations and regular arrangements of key business targets are essential in order to accurately evaluate business results that are because of the training program.

Kirkpatrick, D. (1996). Revisiting Kirkpatrick’s four-level-model. Training & Development, 1, 54-57.

Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1994). Evaluating training programs: the four levels. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

I am a professor of Educational Technology. I have worked at several elite universities. I hold a PhD degree from the University of Illinois and a master's degree from Purdue University.

Similar Posts

Diffusion of innovations theory.

Innovation is captured by Rogers as “an idea, practice, or object that is perceived as new by an individual or other unit of adoption”. Rogers defined diffusion as “the process in which an…

Lev Vygotsky – Sociocultural Theory of Cognitive Development

Lev Vygotsky (1896-1934) was a Russian teacher who is considered a pioneer in learning in social contexts. As a psychologist, he was also the first to examine how our social interactions influence our cognitive…

Social Learning Theory: Albert Bandura

Albert Bandura’s “Social Learning Theory” and Its Impact on Teachers and Learning Think back to your childhood. Do you remember learning to ride a bike, how to play checkers, and do simple addition…

Lev Vygotsky: Who He Was and What He Has Done

Lev Vygotsky was a Russian psychologist who is most known for his theories on developmental psychology. He published on a wide variety of topics. His ideas changed over the years. He pioneered the…

Dick and Carey Instructional Model

Instructional models can vary widely. While some may focus on how to make the lesson plans and others focus on the delivery of the content itself, the Dick and Carey instructional design model…

Theory of Multiple Intelligences – Gardner

The Theory of Multiple Intelligences was first presented in 1983 by Howard Gardner, a psychologist, when he published his book Frames of Mind. He declared that learning occurred through many types of intelligences,…

Kirkpatrick’s Model: Case Study

Anticipated business results, kirkpatrick’s model, reflection on the findings and recommendations.

Kirkpatrick’s model is a framework that is widely used to measure learning outcomes. It features five levels, each of which represents a category that can be evaluated, including participants’ emotions, learning, behavior, results, and the return of investment (ROI).

This paper features a case study of a training program conducted in Braun Oral B Ireland. It presents the goals and anticipated business results of the program and discusses how the results were evaluated using Kirkpatrick’s model. Moreover, the report features the reflection on the findings and suggests recommendations for evaluation of the impact and value of training. The paper concludes that the used model shows effective results and may be improved by considering more aspects during calculation.

The selected case study is the one performed in Braun Oral B Ireland. The case study involves the development of a pilot training program with the company’s employees. The program was implemented in the Lens Filter area, which was responsible for the processes of thermoforming and packaging. The section involved 30 employees, 18 of which worked there directly, while the rest of the individuals were engaged in the process remotely (Ward, 2005).

The primary challenges for this unit were enhancing efficiency, maintaining workers’ key performance indicators (KPI), and improving quality, material usage, machine utilization, and overall equipment effectiveness (OEE). The design of the training program was determined by these issues, as well as the need to implement a multifunctional approach to teamwork and increase employees’ ability to find solutions to possible problems quickly.

Moreover, other needs, such as the effective management of meetings, the implementation of the cross-fertilization of ideas, and the direct engagement of the technical group, were considered. The pilot group included 8 participants who received training for five and a half days (Ward, 2005).

The organization’s objectives related to the training program were to achieve higher KPIs, elevate technicians’ roles, and enhance Material Usage Variance (MUV) savings. The goals of trainees were to increase their engagement in the working process, gain an understanding of business needs and the significance of KPIs, acquire strong problem-solving skills, and learn to conduct productive meetings. Moreover, the program aimed to improve interpersonal relationships within the group, enhance participants’ commitment, implement cross-fertilization of ideas, and help the employees to see the “bigger picture” (Ward, 2005).

Currently, Kirkpatrick’s model is considered one of the most credible evaluation methodology (Bailey, n.d.). To perform the evaluation, the questionnaires for the first two levels were used; the other data was obtained through observation. The analysis of the first level, reaction, showed that participants received the training well, reporting 4 points out of 5 (Ward, 2005). Employees considered coaches’ approach impressive; they admitted that the proposed techniques were relatable and useful. The evaluation of the second level, learning, revealed that participants gained the necessary knowledge related to problem-solving and management and were able to practice their skills. Tutors noted the full participation of trainees and provided positive feedback.

The analysis of behavior, the third level, showed tangible developments; the team learned to have productive meetings and implement problem-solving skills. Moreover, a significant enhancement of technicians’ engagement was observed as they developed an innovative recording system. In addition, all members of the personnel, including supervisors and human resources staff, were involved in the teamwork. To analyze the results, the fourth level of Kirkpatrick’s model, the contributors of loss, were analyzed. The evaluation revealed improvements in the use of materials and the reduction of scrap levels.

To calculate the ROI of the training, which is a fifth level of the model, the analysis was performed using the data that could be converted to a monetary value. The first data item was scrap levels, which, before training, had been estimated at around €23,200 per month (Ward, 2005). After the intervention, the figure decreased to approximately €3,100, which allowed for the saving of €20,100 a month. The projected annual saving was about €241,600 (Ward, 2005).

Notably, apart from the training program, no other factors could affect the variables. The second data item that was analyzed is a trend line associated with scrap levels. It showed that the scrap level had fluctuated before the training, but the projected monthly scrap value would be stable and would reach around €23,000. When compared to the actual numbers, the data showed a significant increase in monthly and annual savings. The total cost of the training program was around €30,000, and the lowest projected saving was approximately €239,000 (Ward, 2005). Thus, the ROI calculation showed a 695% of investment return.

Besides the presented significant benefits of the training program, there were several other advantages not included in the evaluation. During training sessions, the multifunctional team was established, the tool room became highly involved, employees gained knowledge about materials, and the new recording systems for sorting and scrap were developed. It means that the program allowed for multidimensional changes within the organization.

The findings of the evaluation show that the problem-solving training program was effective and allowed the organization to achieve its goals. The results reveal that Braun Oral B Ireland was able to increase its savings by investing in training, as well as establish close relationships between its employees and motivate them to achieve better results in their work. Notably, the intervention not only allowed for improvements in the processes of packaging and thermoforming but also enhanced participants’ productivity.

It means that before training, the company might have lacked the necessary knowledge on how to create an environment in which individuals will generate effective business ideas. Moreover, the findings may show that the organization had probably lacked a strong corporate culture. However, all of these problems were solved during the training program, which means that the investment was reasonable.

There are several recommendations that can be suggested to enhance the analyzed approach to evaluation and measure the impact and value of training sessions. First, it is vital to not only conduct personal interviews with the participants but also to analyze their performance. Employees’ reactions to training may be different from the knowledge they can apply to practice. For example, after the educational session, many individuals may feel inspired or motivated, but this effect is temporary.

To gain evidence-based findings on the efficiency of training, it is vital to observe the long-term changes in workers’ performance. In my opinion, it may be feasible to perform an evaluation not only three months after the training program but after 12 months too. The obtained results may reveal stable changes in employees’ performance and allow for a precise estimation of their KPI in the future. Moreover, since some workers may leave the job during a one-year period, the organization can also evaluate what knowledge from the program the team uses to train new workers.

Another recommendation that would enhance the measurement process would be the consideration of intangible variables that cannot be converted into monetary benefits. The reason to include them in the calculation is that these items may improve employees’ or customers’ satisfaction, which would, indirectly, improve the monetary profit too. For example, one of these variables can be stress reduction for the organization’s workers. If a training program allows employees to decrease their stress levels, their performance can be enhanced too (Scott et al., 2015). Similarly, the elimination of complaints as a result of training can improve the organization’s position in the market and, consequently, enhance monetary gains.

Finally, I believe that a vital recommendation for measurement would be to collect follow-up surveys of employees that can be performed after a one-year period. Such a measure would allow the organization to get a different perspective on the benefits and limitations of the training program. For example, participants may report on what challenges related to new working strategies they encounter and how these may be eliminated. Moreover, their responses will be based on the observed facts, not emotions, compared to the feedback collected during and immediately after the training. Such an approach would also allow for the enhancement of employees’ dedication and involvement in the organization’s decision-making process.

The presented case study reveals that the training program enhanced employees’ performance, knowledge, and skills significantly. It suggests that due to this effective intervention, the company was able to enhance its savings and obtain a high level of investment return. The possible recommendations for evaluation may be the consideration of intangible variables, detailed analysis of employees’ performance based on observation of long-term changes, and the implementation of follow-up surveys after a one-year period.

Bailey, A. (n.d.). The Kirkpatrick/Phillips model for evaluating human resource development and training . Web.

Scott, S. B., Graham-Engeland, J. E., Engeland, C. G., Smyth, J. M., Almeida, D. M., Katz, M. J.,… Sliwinski, M. J. (2015). The effects of stress on cognitive aging, physiology, and emotion (ESCAPE) project. BMC Psychiatry , 15 (1). Web.

Ward, B. (2005). Applying an ROI analysis to a pilot problem-solving training program. Case studies from the Skillnets pilot project . Web.

Cite this paper

• Chicago (N-B)
• Chicago (A-D)

StudyCorgi. (2021, July 14). Kirkpatrick’s Model: Case Study. https://studycorgi.com/kirkpatricks-model-case-study/

"Kirkpatrick’s Model: Case Study." StudyCorgi , 14 July 2021, studycorgi.com/kirkpatricks-model-case-study/.

StudyCorgi . (2021) 'Kirkpatrick’s Model: Case Study'. 14 July.

1. StudyCorgi . "Kirkpatrick’s Model: Case Study." July 14, 2021. https://studycorgi.com/kirkpatricks-model-case-study/.

Bibliography

StudyCorgi . "Kirkpatrick’s Model: Case Study." July 14, 2021. https://studycorgi.com/kirkpatricks-model-case-study/.

StudyCorgi . 2021. "Kirkpatrick’s Model: Case Study." July 14, 2021. https://studycorgi.com/kirkpatricks-model-case-study/.

This paper, “Kirkpatrick’s Model: Case Study”, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: July 28, 2021 .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal . Please use the “ Donate your paper ” form to submit an essay.

This site uses cookies to improve your experience. By viewing our content, you are accepting the use of cookies. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country we will assume you are from the United States. View our privacy policy and terms of use.

• Instructional Design
• Authoring Tools
• Blended Learning
• Virtual Classroom
• Learning Strategy
• Remote Learning
• Gamification

Case Study: Impactful Learning for Higher Ratings

• Upside Learning

FEBRUARY 22, 2024

It’s also a step up the evaluation ladder, in this case from not evaluating at all! In this case study , we share an example of such an impact. Situation A core framework is the so-called Kirkpatrick model (with caveats about the legitimacy of the claim to fame). Several elements were considered critical in design.

How to Measure and Optimize eLearning ROI: Strategies, Tools, and Case Studies

eLearningMind

NOVEMBER 27, 2023

In this blog post, we will explore the strategies, tools, and real-world case studies that can help you effectively measure and optimize eLearning ROI. Kirkpatrick model: Utilize the four levels of Kirkpatrick ’s model to assess reaction, learning, behavior, and results.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

• InSync Training
• Julian Davis
• Experiencing eLearning
• Fly Plugins

Kirkpatrick Revisited | Social Learning Blog

Dashe & Thomson

APRIL 17, 2011

I have included Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Evaluation in every proposal I have ever written, and I wanted to hear from Kirkpatrick himself regarding his take on the current state of evaluation and whether his four levels are still viable. Well, based on where Kirkpatrick and his son James are today, I was completely wrong.

Chief Learning Officer’s most viewed stories of 2021

CLO Magazine

DECEMBER 28, 2021

By Jim Kirkpatrick and Wendy Kayser Kirkpatrick . Case study : PepsiCo leverages minecraft for lean six sigma training. Chief Learning Officer announces its 2021 LearningElite finalists. By Elizabeth Loutfi. 6 steps to lead a successful change management initiative. By Sarah Fister Gale. By Dede Henley.

Free learning & development webinars for May 2023

Limestone Learning

MAY 2, 2023

PT: A Webinar with the Kirkpatricks : Getting the Resources and Support you Need for Key Programs Are you struggling to get the support you need from stakeholders and managers for your programs to be successful? Join Kirkpatrick Partners’ Senior Consultant, Jim Kirkpatrick , Ph.D, Tuesday, May 9, 2023, 9 a.m.–10

Free eBook: Practical Approaches To Determine The ROI Of eLearning – Using Kirkpatrick’s Model Of Training Evaluation

DECEMBER 14, 2018

Practical Approaches To Determine The ROI Of eLearning – Using Kirkpatrick’s Model Of Training Evaluation. NOTE: In this updated release, a Case Study has been added. The Case Study uses the practical approaches and tips outlined in the eBook. What is Kirkpatrick’s model of training evaluation?

Make Learning An Experience. Blend It! | Social Learning Blog

MARCH 6, 2011

While some activities such as breakout groups, team presentations, and in-depth case studies are still good ways to encourage collaboration in the learning environment, incorporate new activities which support technology integration and social learning such as a team blog or web-based project portal. Be Tech Savvy; Be Creative.

Training Evaluation – 5 Best Ways to Evaluate Training Effectiveness and Impact

JULY 14, 2020

There are several types of training evaluation methods to measure the effectiveness of enterprise training, such as surveys, post-training quizzes, participant case studies , and official certification exams. The Kirkpatrick Taxonomy Model. Related Read: 5 Ways to Boost Training ROI with Evaluation Tools. Level 1: Reaction.

How to Link Your Statement of Corporate Intent and L&D Strategy

FEBRUARY 14, 2023

But the point of the facilitator sessions is to give them, the learners, an opportunity to ask the questions, to do some activities, do some case studies , do some breakout rooms, and really sort of bring it to life, and then think about how it applies to them when they go back in the workplace. Have we written the case study ?

JANUARY 15, 2023

Measurement?

Clark Quinn

APRIL 2, 2015

First, if you haven’t seen it, you should check out the debate I had with the good Dr. Will Thalheimer over at his blog about the Kirkpatrick model. So here’s one reflection on the conference last week. Great comments, too! If there is a gap, you have a natural metric. strategy'

How to Structure a Custom eLearning Course

NOVEMBER 14, 2023

Case Studies : Real-life scenarios promote critical thinking and practical concept application. Case studies : Use real-life cases to illustrate practical application of concepts. You can incorporate diverse learning activities by adding. Calculate ROI: Measure financial benefits and costs of the course.

The Training Evaluation Framework of the Future: The GEvaluation Framework

Growth Engineering

MARCH 10, 2017

When Donald Kirkpatrick first formed his training evaluation framework, it was 1964 and the world was a very different place. Back in these simple times, The Kirkpatrick Model worked well – because learning took place in a classroom it was much easier to measure its success. Case Study : Wayne Enterprise.

Become a Strategic Partner Through Effective Training Evaluation #ASTD2014 @Jim_Kirkpatrick

Learning Visions

MAY 7, 2014

James Kirkpatrick , Senior Consultant Kirkpatrick Partners Sometimes we have to do the politically incorrect thing. These are my live blogged notes from a concurrent session (W104) at the ASTD International Conference & Expo, this week in Washington, D.C. Forgive any typos or incoherencies. If not why? take action to correct it.

Can you attribute business results directly to training?

AUGUST 30, 2018

We can all recite the four levels of the Kirkpatrick Model (reaction, learning, behavior, results), but we still can’t prove the impact of training on business results. And if you still don’t believe me, check out this case study from Bloomingdale’s to see how they used the strategy I just explained to attribute $2.2

Learning Measurement: A Work in Progress

AUGUST 24, 2013

Learning evaluation and measurement have come a long way since Donald Kirkpatrick , widely credited as a trailblazer in the field, first introduced his four levels of learning evaluation in 1959. But the industry’s pace in modernizing the practice to fit evolving business needs has lagged. Some organizations have shown progress.

Learning Culture & Human Capital: The Reality, the Myth and the Vision

The Performance Improvement Blog

NOVEMBER 7, 2017

In this respect, I am glad to say that we are now making big strides implementing the Kirkpatrick model over here and addressing the 70:20:10 rule in our L&D projects. The authors go on to look at several case studies , in order to identify best practice of managing minds. More on this in my next article).

9 Blended Learning Best Practices for the Corporate Environment

Obsidian Learning

NOVEMBER 5, 2018

Use examples, case studies , exercises, and scenarios to relate the content to the learners’ actual job. Best Practices for Use of Blended Learning ↩ Best Practices for Designing Blended Courses ↩ Ebbinghaus Forgetting Curve ↩ Kirkpatrick Model: Four Levels of Learning Evaluation ↩

eLearning ROI Case Study: How To Maximize Your Returns

JANUARY 9, 2019

I share an eLearning ROI case study that demonstrates how L&D teams can improve and maximize the ROI of corporate training. This demonstrates how you can maximize the ROI by adopting our approach, based on Kirkpatrick’s model of training evaluation. How To Maximize ROI In Corporate Training: A Case Study .

Why Investing in Learning Analytics Makes Business Sense

MAY 23, 2018

Most of us may be familiar with the Kirkpatrick Model of Training Evaluation as shown here. NOTE: Its variation with Level 5 featuring the ROI determination is another commonly used approach ( Kirkpatrick -Phillips Evaluation Model of training). Case Study On How You Can Validate The Learnability Of Online Courses.

Free L&D webinars for January 2020

DECEMBER 27, 2019

Friday, January 24, 2020, 8AM – 9AM PT: The Kirkpatricks Say Only Fools Rush In…. to Tie Learning to Kirkpatrick Level 4 Results Learning and performance professionals the world over are receiving the same mandate: show the organizational value of your efforts. Attend this informative webinar with Jim Kirkpatrick , Ph.D.,

5 Best Employee Training Books

WalkMe Training Station

JULY 9, 2015

They can range in topics from practical business practices with case studies and research, to more subjective insights into human behavior. Transferring Learning to Behavior: Using the Four Levels to Improve Performance, by Donald L Kirkpatrick and James D Kirkpatrick , 2005.

Free L&D webinars for January 2021

DECEMBER 30, 2020

You Can Evaluate Soft Skills Training with the Kirkpatrick Model Have you been tasked with showing the value of a major soft skills initiative, such as leadership development, onboarding or change management? Learn best practices from peers, as we spotlight real-life enterprise onboarding case studies .

7 tips for developing a successful learning analytics strategy post-Covid

Learning Pool

JUNE 11, 2021

It is easy to be baffled by the plethora of evaluation methodologies that have been thrown up in the 60 years since the four-step model known by the shorthand ‘ Kirkpatrick ’ was first introduced. You can view more of our learning analytics examples via our case studies page.

Determining The ROI Of eLearning – Using Kirkpatrick’s Model Of Training Evaluation

JULY 11, 2018

How Can You Practically Use The Kirkpatrick Model Of Training Evaluation To Determine The ROI? To use the Kirkpatrick model of training evaluation , we need to identify two aspects at each level namely: What are we measuring? How Can You Use Kirkpatrick’s Model Of Training Evaluation To Measure ROI?

Free learning & development webinars for October 2021

SEPTEMBER 30, 2021

PT: Win Your Case : Validating Training Program Value Using The Kirkpatrick Model Do you need to show the value of a major soft skills initiative, such as leadership development or change management? You’ll learn the keys to making training effective by applying the Kirkpatrick Model before, during and after your program.

Free learning & development webinars for April 2021

MARCH 29, 2021

In this webinar, Dr. Ray Jimenez, Chief Learning Officer of Vignettes Learning, will share case studies and pilot projects on “hands-on learning in remote learning.” However, these are inadequate in dealing with helping learners and trainers gain the necessary hands-on experiences. Monday, April 26, 2021, 11 a.m.–12

Commonly Used Training Evaluations Models: A Discussion with Dr. Will Thalheimer

Convergence Training

NOVEMBER 19, 2019

Four Common Learning Evaluation Models– Kirkpatrick , Kaufman, Philips & Brinkerhoff. Well, of course, the most common, the most well-known, is the Kirkpatrick four-level model. The Kirkpatrick Four-Level Training Evaluation Model. So this is this is a picture of Donald Kirkpatrick . Dr. Will Thalheimer: Sure.

48 Books Every Aspiring Chief Learning Officer Should Read

It offers clear and practical guidance as well as detailed case studies to help you develop effective social game-based learning solutions. Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Training Evaluation by James D. Kirkpatrick and Wendy Kayser Kirkpatrick . A fascinating case study . Kirkpatrick . Find it here.

6 Ways to Add Sizzle to Your Classroom

Learning Rebels

JANUARY 30, 2015

Complete a case study , fix a broken item, create something – actually having people apply the skills they are studying will create a stronger sense of connection with the material, strengthening retention. No, not a level one Kirkpatrick survey. Your participants feel the same way. Assess Yourself.

Calculating the ROI of training – ensuring the L&D budget

AUGUST 1, 2017

The Kirkpatrick model of training evaluation has the fourth level that is aiming to measure the results but it only takes things as far as checking if the information taught is being transferred on the job. If that’s not possible, a case study or a well-designed role-play can be used instead.

Kraft Heinz CLO Pamay Bassey is reimagining corporate learning with laughter and passion

SEPTEMBER 11, 2019

“From the launch of Ownerversity through the end of 2018, when I joined Kraft Heinz, our measurement of learner impact primarily fell under Kirkpatrick level 1 — reaction,” Bassey said. We are now moving into Kirkpatrick levels 2 and 3 — measuring learning (skill development) and behavioral change.

Isolating the Results of eLearning Impact

Integrated Learnings

NOVEMBER 30, 2011

In the spirit of scenario-based instruction, the authors provide several case studies that illustrate the various approaches they describe. They emphasize the importance of making training impact estimates conservative, and they explain how using confidence ratings can help you make estimates appropriately conservative.

What Is Reskilling? +Benefits, Challenges, How-To (2022)

JULY 25, 2022

Some of the most effective employee training methods are eLearning On-the-Job Training Instructor-Led Learning Roleplaying Coaching Simulation Training Group Activities Video Training Cross-Training Job Shadowing Case Studies . Then this data can be assessed using an evaluation model such as the Kirkpatrick Model.

Cammy Beans Learning Visions: Beginning Instructional Designers Toolkit

MAY 1, 2007

My list begins as such: Important Theories and Terms: Gagnes 9 Events Kirkpatrick Levels ADDIE Cognitive Load Theory ARCS (John Keller) Books: Ruth Clark: e-Learning and the Science of Instruction Malcom S. About Kilpatrick Levels : do you mean Kirkpatrick levels ? Please add your own essentials. Im not a big theory person.

Where is the study of what we do?

Mark Oehlert

MARCH 13, 2012

Case studies , accounting, finance, the works. Then something happened and instead of going on to get my MBA, I decided that I wanted to study history and anthropology so off to grad school. Like many, I've traveled an odd path to get where I am today. My undergraduate degree is in business/management.

Free L&D webinars for February 2019

JANUARY 30, 2019

Join Travis Thompson, Director at American Express as he presents a case study of a 450-person high-impact pilot program where the leaders and team members of a global financial services company learned how to “connect with people”. The fast-paced nature of a call centre can make it difficult to introduce changes.

Free learning & development webinars for January 2023

DECEMBER 29, 2022

PT: Three Kirkpatrick Tips to Avoid 2023’s Biggest Training Evaluation Mistakes Are you making the most common training and evaluation mistakes that threaten the success of your mission-critical initiatives? About a case study that brought the value of internal coaching programs to life. Thursday, January 12, 2023, 12 p.m.–1

Cammy Beans Learning Visions: Youre So Immature: e-Learning in Some Organizations

OCTOBER 5, 2007

He was venting about Kirkpatrick evaluations. Little Shots of Theory Instructional Design as a practice in corporate vs. A Conversation with Karl Kapp ► February (11) ID Live with Charles Reigeluth on EdTechTalk Kineo Insights Webinar: Kronos Moodle Case Study Kineo Insights Webinar: The Truth About Open Sourc.

22 Remarkable Game-Based Training Results You Need to See

JULY 2, 2019

Here are results from case studies across the internet (as well as some of our own averages) to give you an idea the kind of results other companies are seeing when they implement game-based training. Level 1 Kirkpatrick : Did Employees Enjoy Training? Level 2 Kirkpatrick : Did Employees Actually Learn Anything? Kineo. ?.

How to Evaluate Learning with Pre and Post-Training Test

MAY 31, 2022

The Kirkpatrick Taxonomy Model. The Kirkpatrick Taxonomy model is arguably one of the most common ways to measure effectiveness of corporate training programs. Don Kirkpatrick developed this model, and it is a comprehensive four-level strategy aimed at evaluating the training programs. . Case Studies .

Here are results from case studies across the internet (as well as some of our own averages) to give you an idea the kind of results other companies are seeing when they implement game-based training. Level 1 Kirkpatrick : Did Employees Enjoy Training? Level 2 Kirkpatrick : Did Employees Actually Learn Anything?

Top 60 eLearning Posts for October 2010

eLearning Learning Posts

NOVEMBER 2, 2010

It’s an intriguing read, with several interesting case studies from organisations that are using social media to advance their business goals. This may be because designers only know about the Kirkpatrick “Levels.” It felt natural to tell my friends and connections about this awesome book. Sumeet Moghe, 2009.

Stay Connected

Join 84,000+ Insiders by signing up for our newsletter

• Learn More about eLearning Learning
• Participate in eLearning Learning
• Selecting the right LMS
• 2019 eLearning Learning Summer Reading List
• Stay At Home Reading List
• Add a Source
• Add a Resource
• 2017 eLearning Learning MVP awards
• 2018 eLearning Learning MVP Awards
• 2019 eLearning Learning MVP Awards
• 2020 eLearning Learning MVP Awards
• 2021 eLearning Learning MVP Awards
• 2022 eLearning Learning MVP Awards
• Wed. Apr 10
• Tue. Apr 09
• Mon. Apr 08
• Sun. Apr 07
• Mar 30 - Apr 05
• Performance
• More Topics 

Input your email to sign up, or if you already have an account, log in here!

Enter your email address to reset your password. a temporary password will be e‑mailed to you., be in the know on.

eLearning Learning

Expert insights. Personalized for you.

We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 84,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.

Get the good stuff

Subscribe to the following eLearning Learning newsletters:

You must accept the Privacy Policy and Terms & Conditions to proceed.

You know about us, now we want to get to know you!

Check your mail, we've sent an email to . please verify that you have received the email..

We have resent the email to

Let's personalize your content

Use social media to find articles.

We can use your profile and the content you share to understand your interests and provide content that is just for you.

Turn this off at any time. Your social media activity always remains private.

Let's get even more personalized

Choose topics that interest you., so, what do you do.

Are you sure you want to cancel your subscriptions?

Cancel my subscriptions

Don't cancel my subscriptions

Changing Country?

Accept terms & conditions.

It looks like you are changing your country/region of residence. In order to receive our emails, you must expressly agree. You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the unsubscribe link at the bottom of our emails.

You appear to have previously removed your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions.

We noticed that you changed your country/region of residence; congratulations! In order to make this change, you must accept the Aggregage Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy. Once you've accepted, then you will be able to choose which emails to receive from each site .

You must choose one option

Please choose which emails to receive from each site .

• Update All Sites
• Update Each Site

Please verify your previous choices for all sites

Sites have been updated - click Submit All Changes below to save your changes.

We recognize your account from another site in our network , please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.

You must accept the Privacy Policy and Terms & Conditions to proceed.

This is not me

How to Use the Kirkpatrick Model Effectively for Learning Measurement

• Jake Wengroff
• November 5, 2021

The Kirkpatrick Model is perhaps the best known model for analyzing and evaluating the results of training programs. 

The Kirkpatrick Model measures training effectiveness on four levels of criteria:

Level 1 Reaction  

Measures how participants react to the training — i.e., satisfaction, comfort level

Level 2 Learning  

Analyzes whether learners truly understood the training — i.e., increase in knowledge, skills or experience

Level 3 Behavior  

Examines whether learners utilize what they learned at work — i.e., a change in behavior or overall work performance

Level 4 Results  

Determines whether the training results in a positive impact on the business or overall organization

One advantage of the Kirkpatrick Model is that it takes into account any style or method of training delivery, both informal or formal. 

Another advantage is that it can be implemented before, throughout, and following training to show the value of training to the business—it doesn’t just take place at one point, and then it’s over and done with.

“We have not encountered an industry or program where the model will not work, which is a testament to its timeless, flexible, and elegant design,” notes Kirkpatrick Partners, on its website .

Shifting priorities in the organization make it more challenging than ever to keep L&D aligned with business goals. If your L&D strategy is in need of an overhaul, download this L&D strategy toolkit for guidance.

The Levels of Kirkpatrick and How to Integrate Them with Your Learning Programs

Level 1: reaction.

This level might seem to be the most superficial level, but it basically asks learners about how they felt about the training. 

The obvious questions would be:

• Did you enjoy it?
• Did you feel it was valuable?
• Did you feel that the instructor did a good job?

These questions, usually delivered via a simple post-course questionnaire, scratch the surface, which is what they are intended to do. They tell you nothing about whether your course actually fulfilled its objective and actually imparted knowledge or skills; the later levels do that, but it does give you an idea how your learning was received, and how you might be able to improve the learning experience.

Level 2: Learning

This next level seeks to determine whether any learning was captured or absorbed. 

To determine this, instructional design teams will usually deliver two assessments—one at the beginning and then one at the end of the course. The assessments can be nearly identical, so that learning teams can see if learners are answering more questions correctly after their training. If they are, it would suggest that learning took place; if not, then something about your learning material is clearly not doing its job.

These assessments can also deliver yet another surprising result: learners’ responses are both complete and identical in both—meaning that they knew much of the material beforehand and the course did not deliver anything new or noteworthy.

Level 2 can be delivered in several creative, strategic ways to determine knowledge or skill acquisition. Perhaps the second assessment can be more open-ended, and learners will need to articulate the learning in their own words.

Still other ways Level 2 can be delivered can be one week, one month, or even perpetually after the training has been completed. This also addresses the forgetting curve and can be a true measure of the ability of your courses to meet the needs of learners.

Level 3: Behavior

Kirkpatrick’s Level 3 goes even deeper than Level 2 and seeks to evaluate whether employees are actually using what they learned.

This needs time for new behaviors to settle in. Further, it is not something which is solely based on the employees. Learning leaders will need to garner 360º feedback, which would include the learners themselves, in addition to co-workers, managers, and others who work regularly with the learner. If the training course has had the desired effect, it will be noticeable to everyone involved.

Sometimes, the feedback will say that no changes have occurred. In those instances, it’s important to ask why people think this is the case. 

“Behavior can only change if the conditions for it are favorable,” notes Ashleigh Hull in eLearningIndustry . “Will the boss actually let your participant apply their new knowledge? Is there a tool or a system that has not been put in place? Does the learner have any desire or incentive to apply the learning? And what can be done to remedy these situations?”

Level 4: Results

Kirkpatrick’s final level of evaluation looks at whether training positively impacted the organization as a whole. This relies on goals being set before the development of the training. What changes were managers looking for? How is success defined? 

Obviously, data will need to be captured and evaluated in order to determine these Level 4 results. Unlike Levels 1, 2 and 3, the learner would not be involved in supplying this data for the instructional design team or for management.

Final Thoughts

When evaluating the impact of your training, it’s important to know about all 4 of these levels of the Kirkpatrick Model.

It’s also important to understand that while the Kirkpatrick Model helps to measure the ability of your learning experiences to impact learners—and by Level 4, the organization as a whole—you can still glean insights from these 4 levels to inform your instructional design and development as well.

For example, if in Levels 1 and 2 there is consistent feedback that the courses were ineffective and the assessments showed poor absorption of material, the issue might not be with learners, but with the subject matter and the courses themselves.

The fifth stage of ADDIE is Evaluation, which should be integrated throughout the lifecycle of instructional design. However, feedback from the 4 stages of the Kirkpatrick Model can be useful when building future learning experiences in your organization.

Download this free eBook to understand the forces that are driving the need to overcome internal skills obsolescence so you can design an effective upskilling/reskilling program for your organization.

You might also like

Encouraging Teamwork: Cognota’s Comments Feature

Aligning Your Training Programs to Core Business Objectives in Cognota

Starbucks and ELB Learning on Creating a Flexible, Outcome-Focused L&D Playbook

Article details, share this article, get more like this, search our site, connect, collaborate & grow: discover the learnops® community.

LearnOps ®️

L&D Resources

Cognota Resources

• © Cognota, Inc 2024

Privacy Overview

• Skip to primary navigation
• Skip to main content
• Skip to footer

Chief Learning Officer - CLO Media

Chief Learning Officer is a multimedia publication focused on the importance, benefits and advancements of a properly trained workforce.

The Kirkpatrick Model: Past, Present and Future

Since it was first developed in the 1950s, the Kirkpatrick Model has helped learning practitioners understand and measure the impact of their workforce development initiatives. And as times have changed, so has the model.

by Jim Kirkpatrick

October 25, 2009.

In 1954, Don Kirkpatrick was at the University of Wisconsin working on his Ph.D. dissertation on the topic of evaluating the effectiveness of a supervisory management program he developed. Being a practical man, he decided on four simple words — reaction, learning, behavior and results — to describe how training would lead to learning, which would lead to on-the-job application, in turn leading to desired results.

After earning his doctorate, Kirkpatrick didn't give those four simple words another thought until Bob Craig contacted him in 1959 and asked him to write an article for the ASTD journal. He accepted, but said that instead of one article, he would write four. Thus were born the Kirkpatrick four levels. Kirkpatrick didn't actually use the word "levels," nor did he name his work a model. And at that point, he had no idea the impact these articles would have on the world of corporate learning and development.

After those four articles were published in 1959, related articles began surfacing with questions about the application of the four levels, largely from academic circles and primarily on Levels 1 and 2. At the request of Nancy Olsen at ASTD, Kirkpatrick reviewed the literature and wrote summative editorials on evaluation in 1965, 1975 and 1985.

In the 1970s, Kirkpatrick's awareness of the widespread use of the model grew and he found that his four levels were being used worldwide as a standard for training evaluation. As technology progressed, Kirkpatrick began using an overhead projector and transparencies when presenting the applications. And, while most would consider this technology archaic and cumbersome, he continues to use it today, to the amusement and amazement of audiences.

Throughout the 1980s, many organizations developed Level 1 and Level 2 methods and tools, and Kirkpatrick began collecting case studies of these practices, believing them to be an important way to educate and encourage others. However, there was still a concentrated focus on Levels 1 and 2. Even with newer technology, which made it easy to implement electronic surveys, most organizations remained focused on measuring only those two levels.

The Continued Development of Kirkpatrick

At the suggestion of a friend, Kirkpatrick published a book in 1993, "Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels," featuring the case studies that he collected over the years. Meanwhile, Kirkpatrick's son, Jim, was working as a career consultant, using the Kirkpatrick Model as a framework for helping clients and employees identify career goals and a path to achieving them. He then became the training director at First Indiana Bank, where he was able to use the Kirkpatrick Model in the traditional training sense.

In 2005, Don and Jim Kirkpatrick released their first co-authored book, "Transferring Learning to Behavior," focused on Level 3 behavior. This transfer of learning to behavior continues to be one of the biggest goals and challenges of many training organizations.

In 2006, the third edition of "Evaluating Training Programs" was published to broaden the application of the four levels beyond training programs, to topics like managing and driving organizational change and demonstrating the value of entire learning functions. The new edition placed an emphasis on Level 4 results, making the case that the best way to use the model is to start with Level 4 results and work backward so that training efforts are focused on the desired business results, providing support for the necessary behaviors to achieve them.

The Kirkpatricks made the case for a chain of evidence with the publication of their third collaborative book, Implementing the four levels, in 2007. The chain of evidence provides a framework for learning professionals to create and present evidence to business executives showing how business partnership efforts impact the bottom line.

The chain of evidence is used to show how the model can be used from the inception of an initiative all the way to measuring the final impact, as opposed to measuring the effectiveness of what has already been done. The concept is designed to demonstrate that the intended results must be considered before training begins, and key metrics should be identified and measurement methods planned from the start.

Much has happened during the last 50 years. Don Kirkpatrick has gone from using chalkboards and hook-and-loop boards to overhead projectors, but don't expect him to go any farther. He loves his overhead projector. But on the golden anniversary of the model, the focus shifts from the current status of the Kirkpatrick Model to where it is headed in the next 50 years.

Taking Kirkpatrick to the Next Level

Broadening and deepening the application of the Kirkpatrick Model has been a long, slow process. Many learning professionals are uncomfortable with the idea that their job goes beyond the delivery of training programs. To address this tendency, Jim Kirkpatrick and his wife, Wendy, published the book "Training on Trial," which discusses how workplace learning professionals need to redefine their role and actively extend their expertise, influence, impact and value beyond the classroom and into the business.

Many learning leaders still try to demonstrate their value to the business by using attendance, Level 1 reaction data and Level 2 testing scores. Unfortunately, this perpetuates the myth that the learning event alone is sufficient to bring about expected Level 4 results. It also shouts to business stakeholders, "Look how much this is costing you!"

The good news is that there are pockets of professionals within the industry who realize the seriousness of this challenge and are making strides in creating and demonstrating real value. Rather than starting with Level 1 and all too often never reaching Levels 3 and 4, they are embracing the concept and the practice that the end is the beginning. Specifically, they are spending time with business leaders before training elements are developed to discuss and negotiate what they expect and what success will look like.

Then they discuss which observable and measureable success indicators will be used to determine Level 4 results. This sets the table for return on expectations. These Level 4 metrics then become the cornerstones for which all parties are held accountable and set the stage for implementing the business partnership model, leading to effective execution at Level 3 and maximizing both business and talent management goal achievement at Level 4.

From there, learning professionals can discuss with line managers what critical behaviors (Level 3) are most likely to bring about the targeted outcomes. Then they can begin to design the training events (Levels 1 and 2) that will facilitate the learning and application of the critical behaviors that will lead to the desired results.

Another recent advancement in the application of the Kirkpatrick Model is the recognition of the importance of drivers. Drivers, also known as reinforcers or enablers, are the processes and systems that reinforce actions, monitor procedures and encourage or reward performance of critical behaviors on the job. Drivers partner with Level 3 behaviors to create the key to successful execution. Without this connection, only about 15 percent of what is learned is applied, limiting the amount of value brought to the bottom line.

There is a trend in the use of the four levels to create and present a chain of evidence to corporate partners to show the power of training and evaluation, but also the power of the business partnership model between trainers, line managers and business executives. Along with this is a strong emphasis on Levels 3 and 4, which, instead of sending the message of cost as with Levels 1 and 2, emphasizes impact and value to business executives.

The Kirkpatrick Model is also expanding beyond the boundaries of training. The Kirkpatrick Goal Achievement Model, unveiled earlier this year, aims to help people create a goal achievement plan with actions and measurements on four levels. This process proposes to increase the likelihood of success by considering what success will look like and how model users will know when it has been accomplished (Level 4); what behaviors need to be performed to reach the goal (Level 3); what one needs to learn, or believe, to be willing and able to perform the critical behaviors (Level 2); and what conditions need to be present to support performance of the critical behaviors (Level 1).

Another proposed application of the Kirkpatrick Model in development takes the model to learning products and consulting to give providers the methodology and tools to demonstrate the results their products and services can deliver to clients.

Many professionals continue to perfect the Kirkpatrick Model application, educate others about it and develop new applications for the model, and as the learning industry continues to grow and evolve, the model continues to adapt and serve as a resource.

Jim Kirkpatrick

Related articles.

Learning Insights: Aubrey Little holds learning in high respect

by Elizabeth Loutfi-Hipchen

Unleashing your talent through internal mobility

by Andrew Wojecki

Podcast: Voices of CLO: Mike Mather and Steve Hajdukovic

Why it’s time to throw out old upskilling playbooks

by Kevin R. Lowell

Torch: Coaching That Powers Your Organization

Budgets & Bottom Lines for L&D Impact

Immersive Experiences: TD Bank Shares Insights on The Future of Learning Beyond eLearning

Tech Check: Getting Intentional With AI

Foundations of AI Integration

• Register/Login

30 Examples of Successful Kirkpatrick Model Implementation

Looking for a case study or two on how to successfully implement the  Kirkpatrick Model ? We’ve created a Case Studies Guide to help people locate the perfect case study for their situation. Some of these case studies can be found in our books, while others are taught in our programs. They range across different topics and types of organizations.  Click here to view our new Case Studies Guide . 

Click here  to view the IU Healthcare case study. You must log in to view the case study, which is located in our Resources Library in the “Kirkpatrick White Papers” module. Join the Discussion How are these case studies helping you to implement the Kirkpatrick Model in your organization? Here are some ways to join the discussion. 

Log in and leave a comment

Comment on this feature in  Facebook

Start a  LinkedIn discussion Don’t Miss a Feature Register with us  to receive Kirkpatrick Quick Tips delivered to your inbox each Wednesday.  Additional Resources Kirkpatrick Four Levels ®  Evaluation Certification Program – Bronze Level Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Training Evaluation   Have You Seen the New Additions to Our Resources Library? Why Did the Army’s Maneuver Center Choose the Kirkpatrick Model for Their Training Program?

Read our latest white papers and get quick access to our best free resources.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

MRS. KIRKPATRICK, THE U.S. AND THE FALKLANDS

To the Editor:

Anthony Lewis's commentary on Jeane Kirkpatrick's performance on ''Face the Nation'' (''Ideology and Ignorance,'' column April 15) redounds with raw animosity:

She went on to say that Western Europe (she mentioned England, France and Italy specifically) as the cradle of our own civilization naturally has earned a special claim on American moral and political predilections. She also reminded us that culture and geography make the Americas a natural cluster of shared interests and concerns. Where ''invincible ignorance, unyielding ideology'' came into play is simply undetectable.

Despite what Mr. Lewis asserts, the U.S. has not ''embraced'' the Argentine military; nor have our actions sanctioned tyranny. However, Argentine claims to the Malvinas are serious and longstanding, garnering support from all of Argentine society.

The use of naked force to force its claims of sovereignty upon an unwilling group of 1,800 empire loyalists cannot be countenanced, but neither can decades of British procrastination over the sovereignty issue be accepted at face value. Muddling through has simply reduced itself to muddling, and if the U.S. is guilty of any sin, it is carrying the politics of the even hand to the level of a mechanical contrivance.

Any U.S. ambassador to the U.N. must fulfill certain protocol functions. Mrs. Kirkpatrick cannot be accused of being a genocidest for lunching with a representative of the Pol Pot regime, and neither should she be saddled with responsibility for Argentine adventurism when she in fact has worked hard to keep all lines of communications open and in this way ease the shuttle diplomacy of Secretary Haig.

The Falkland-Malvinas question is shrouded in tragic ambiguity: islands geographically close to Argentina, with a people culturally bound to England. This is no case study of anti-colonialism versus imperialism but a confused set of national pride played out in a dangerous, if slow-moving course of action.

The United States has been remarkably sensitive to the dialectics of claims, while at the same time supporting England in the Security Council vote, with a consistent belief that armed aggression and invasion should not be countenanced.

It is true that this is a contest between two U.S. allies. The United States is caught up as an honest broker and middleman, suffering everyone's suspicion and hostility as a result. But these policy initiatives permit the U.S. a pivotal role in any eventual settlement. Precisely because we have not chosen sides, we can play such a role.

The issues are complex, and Mrs. Kirkpatrick has presented them with admirable clarity and dispassion. The U.N. is a social forum, a catbird seat in which world powers serve as listening posts to a veritable mosaic of third-world complaints and ailments.

It has taken our Ambassador quite some time to appreciate the learning, in contrast to the lecturing aspects, of this international forum. Now that she has skillfully done so in the Falkland Islands dispute, her ability to provide support to State Department efforts to achieve a peaceful solution has greatly increased. It is a modest role, but so too is the U.N. a modest organization.

Mr. Lewis's personal and vitriolic attack on Mrs. Kirkpatrick only weakens the United States' opportunity to put a cap on this Falkland Island issue, and return it to the bargaining table, where it belongs, once more making it a footnote to Anglo-Argentine relations. IRVING LOUIS HOROWITZ Hannah Arendt Distinguished Professor of Sociology and Political Science Rutgers University New Brunswick, N.J., April 19, 1982

How it works

For Business

Join Mind Tools

Article • 10 min read

Kirkpatrick's Model

Four levels of training evaluation.

By the Mind Tools Content Team

Any time you deliver training to your team, you need to know how effective it's been. Are your people putting their learning into practice? And, is it positively impacting their role and the wider organization?

Kirkpatrick's Four-Level Training Evaluation Model can help you to answer questions like these. You can use it to analyze the impact of training objectively, to work out how well your team members learned, and to improve their learning in the future.

In this article, developed with permission from Kirkpatrick Partners, we'll explore Kirkpatrick's model and how to apply it. We'll also consider situations where it may not be appropriate.

What Is the Kirkpatrick Model?

The Kirkpatrick Model is an internationally recognized tool for evaluating and analyzing the results of educational, training and learning programs. It consists of four levels of evaluation: Reaction, Learning, Behavior, and Results . Each successive level of the model represents a more precise measure of the effectiveness of a training program.

Donald Kirkpatrick, former Professor Emeritus at the University of Wisconsin, first published his model in 1959. He updated it in 1975, and again in 1993, when he published his best-known work, " Evaluating Training Programs ."

Each successive level of the model represents a more precise measure of the effectiveness of a training program. It was developed further by Donald and his son, James; and then by James and his wife, Wendy Kayser Kirkpatrick.

In 2016, James and Wendy revised and clarified the original theory, and introduced the "New World Kirkpatrick Model" in their book, " Four Levels of Training Evaluation ." One of the main additions is an emphasis on the importance of making training relevant to people's everyday jobs.

Let's look at each level in greater detail, and explore how to apply it.

Kirkpatrick's Level 1: Reaction

You want people to feel that training is valuable. Measuring how engaged they were, how actively they contributed, and how they reacted to the training helps you to understand how well they received it.

It also enables you to make improvements to future programs, by identifying important topics that might have been missing.

Questions to ask trainees include:

• Did you feel that the training was worth your time?
• Did you think that it was successful?
• What were the biggest strengths and weaknesses of the training?
• Did you like the venue and presentation style?
• Did the training session accommodate your personal needs ?
• Were the training activities engaging?
• What are the three most important things that you learned from this training?
• From what you learned, what do you plan to apply in your job?
• What support might you need to apply what you learned?

Identify how you want to measure people's reactions. Many people use employee satisfaction surveys to do this, but you can also watch trainees' body language during the session, or ask for verbal feedback.

Analyze the feedback, and consider the changes that you could make in response.

Kirkpatrick's Level 2: Learning

Level 2 focuses on measuring what your trainees have and haven't learned. In the New World version of the tool, Level 2 also measures what they think they'll be able to do differently as a result, how confident they are that they can do it, and how motivated they are to make changes.

This demonstrates how training has developed their skills, attitudes and knowledge, as well as their confidence and commitment.

To measure how much your trainees have learned, start by identifying what you want to evaluate. Training sessions should have specific learning objectives , so make those your starting point.

You can measure learning in different ways, depending on the objectives. But it's helpful to measure these areas both before and after training.

Before the training begins, test your trainees to determine their knowledge, skill levels and attitudes. Then, when the training is finished, test your trainees a second time to measure what they have learned, or measure their learning with interviews or verbal assessments.

As a manager, you need to hold people accountable for improving their skills, and to offer them the support they need to do so.

Kirkpatrick's Level 3: Behavior

This level helps you to understand how well people apply their training. It can also reveal where people might need help. But behavior can only change when conditions are favorable.

Imagine that you're assessing your team members after a training session. You can see little change, and you conclude that they learned nothing, and that the training was ineffective.

It's possible, however, that they actually learned a lot, but that the organizational or team culture obstructs behavioral change. Perhaps existing processes mean that there's little scope to apply new thinking, for example.

As a result, your people don't feel confident in applying new knowledge, or see few opportunities to do so. Or, they may not have had enough time to put it into practice.

Be sure to develop processes that encourage, reinforce and reward positive changes in behavior. The New World Kirkpatrick Model calls these processes "required drivers." If a team member uses a new skill effectively, highlight this and praise him or her for it.

Effectively measuring behavior is a longer-term process that should take place over weeks or months following the initial training.

Questions to ask include:

• Did the trainees put any of their learning to use?
• Are trainees able to teach their new knowledge, skills or attitudes to other people?
• Are trainees aware that they've changed their behavior?

One of the best ways to measure behavior is to conduct observations and interviews. Another is to integrate the use of new skills into the tasks that you set your team, so that people have the chance to demonstrate what they know.

Managers need to be closely involved at this stage, assessing and coaching their team members in making behavior changes.

Kirkpatrick's Level 4: Results

At this level, you analyze the final results of your training. This includes outcomes that you or your organization have decided are good for business and good for your team members, and which demonstrate a good return on investment (ROI). (Some adapted versions of the model actually have a Level 5, dedicated to working out ROI.)

Level 4 will likely be the most costly and time-consuming. Your biggest challenge will be to identify which outcomes, benefits, or final results are most closely linked to the training, and to come up with an effective way to measure these outcomes in the long term.

Modern trainers often use the Kirkpatrick model backward , by first stating the results that they want to see, and then developing the training that is most likely to deliver them. This helps to prioritize the goals of the training and make it more effective.

Here are some outcomes to consider, depending on the objectives of your training:

• Increased employee retention.
• Increased production.
• Higher morale.
• Reduced waste.
• Increased sales.
• Higher quality ratings.
• Increased customer satisfaction.
• Fewer staff complaints.

Make a series of short-term observations and measurements to check that changes in behavior due to training are making a worthwhile difference to your team's performance. The New World Kirkpatrick Model calls these "leading indicators."

Reprinted with permission of Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., San Francisco, CA. From Evaluating Training Programs , © 1996 by Donald L.Kirkpatrick & James D Kirkpatrick. All rights reserved. www.bkconnection.com. Terms reproduced from The New World Kirkpatrick Model with permission from Kirkpatrick Partners .

Be sure to plan your training effectively. Our articles Training Needs Assessment and Gagne's Nine Levels of Learning can help you to do this.

Limitations of Kirkpatrick's Model

Kirkpatrick's model remains popular, but it should be used with care. The basic structure is now more than 60 years old (despite its many updates), and the ways that people learn and organizations operate has changed radically in this time. Even the term "training" has been largely replaced by "learning and development."

Today, other, non-formal methods of workplace training are often more popular and effective (as shown by the 70:20:10 model). And, with the rise of personalized, user-directed learning, formal training is becoming less prominent. Kirkpatrick's model is not necessarily suited to this new approach to learning.

Another drawback is that Levels 3 and 4, which arguably yield the most useful information for the business, are time-consuming, resource-intensive, and expensive to implement. So the model may not be practical for all organizations, especially if you don't have a dedicated training or HR department to conduct the analysis. And, it's not ideal for all situations, such as one-off training.

Most importantly, organizations change in many ways, and these changes affect behaviors and results, as well as training. For example, measurable improvements in retention and productivity could result from the arrival of a new boss, or from a new computer system, rather than training. Or it could be a combination of these.

Kirkpatrick's model is great for evaluating training in a "scientific" way, but with so many possible variables, Level 4 may be limited in its usefulness.

The New World Kirkpatrick Model seeks to address some of these challenges, by encouraging trainers and organizations to incorporate evaluation as part of the training design process.

The Kirkpatrick Four-Level Training Evaluation Model is designed to objectively measure the effectiveness of training. The model was created by Donald Kirkpatrick in 1959, with several revisions made since.

The four levels are:

• Kirkpatrick's Level 1: Reaction.
• Kirkpatrick's Level 2: Learning.
• Kirkpatrick's Level 3: Behavior.
• Kirkpatrick's Level 4: Results.

By analyzing each level, you can gain an understanding of how effective a training initiative was, and how to improve it in the future.

However, the model isn't practical in all situations, and measuring training effectiveness with it can be time-consuming and resource-intensive, so it should be used with caution.

Kirkpatrick, D. L.  and Kirkpatrick, J. D. (2016). ' Evaluating Training Programs ,' Oakland, CA: Berrett-Koehler.

Kirkpatrick, J. D. and Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). ' Four Levels of Training Evaluation ,' Alexandria, VA: ATD.

Kirkpatrick, J. D. and Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2018). 'Training Evaluation: It Doesn't Have to Be as Formal as You Think,' Training Industry [online]. Available here .

You've accessed 1 of your 2 free resources.

Get unlimited access

Discover more content

Beckhard and harris' change equation.

Overcoming Resistance to Change

Knowledge Management in My Organisation

An Information-Sharing Exercise

Add comment

Comments (0)

Be the first to comment!

Team Management

Learn the key aspects of managing a team, from building and developing your team, to working with different types of teams, and troubleshooting common problems.

Sign-up to our newsletter

Subscribing to the Mind Tools newsletter will keep you up-to-date with our latest updates and newest resources.

Subscribe now

Business Skills

Personal Development

Leadership and Management

Member Extras

Most Popular

Newest Releases

SWOT Analysis

SMART Goals

Mind Tools Store

About Mind Tools Content

Discover something new today

How to stop procrastinating.

Overcoming the Habit of Delaying Important Tasks

What Is Time Management?

Working Smarter to Enhance Productivity

How Emotionally Intelligent Are You?

Boosting Your People Skills

Self-Assessment

What's Your Leadership Style?

Learn About the Strengths and Weaknesses of the Way You Like to Lead

Recommended for you

Using decision matrix analysis.

Comparing Different Options

Business Operations and Process Management

Strategy Tools

Customer Service

Business Ethics and Values

Handling Information and Data

Project Management

Knowledge Management

Self-Development and Goal Setting

Time Management

Presentation Skills

Learning Skills

Career Skills

Communication Skills

Negotiation, Persuasion and Influence

Working With Others

Difficult Conversations

Creativity Tools

Self-Management

Work-Life Balance

Stress Management and Wellbeing

Coaching and Mentoring

Change Management

Managing Conflict

Delegation and Empowerment

Performance Management

Leadership Skills

Developing Your Team

Talent Management

Problem Solving

Decision Making

Member Podcast