I was talking with a group of trainers all operating within the same organisation, all sharing the same resources and methodologies. Their approach to evaluation was the typical default position of end of course review sheets which were issued religiously on every single programme. Then, looked at once, subsequently stored in a cupboard for 2-3 years before getting pulped. Nothing was ever apparently done with the data gathered. What makes more sense is rather than undertaking a blanket data gathering exercise with little to no analysis, is to reduce the amount of data you gather; prioritise and select, this is immediately going to create a time saving which will then allow you to undertake a much more thorough analysis of the smaller quantity of information collected. This in turn will produce a much higher quality of information which is more likely to lead to better outcomes. Essentially transfer from the position outlined in the first triangle and move to the position in the right triangle. We discussed this scenario with the trainers and all of them could see the rational and logical reasons for doing this. Will they do it? Unlikely I suspect, they are driven by a management group who essentially believe that doing a little analysis on everything with no results is some how better than doing a lot of analysis on a few things which then produce changes is some how worse. Why is that do you think?
2 Responses
More? You want more?
Great article, Garry (I like the triangle diagrams – simple but effective) – forgive me for answering what was probably intended to be rhetorical question at the end, but could it possibly be the slimmest of chance that the trainers and/or their management peers might be just a little afraid of what proper analysis might reveal? Sounds like the trainers in question have a bad case of ‘busy being busy’ to me – “Look how much feedback we’ve got about our courses – they all say they had a great time”. Really. And what difference has this made to the business and their ways of working? “Um, don’t know – we’ve never actually asked that question.” And why would they? I mean, they might just have to work a bit harder to do something a bit different that is more effective…why not just carry on justifying the importance of the training team with answers to questions like “Did the trainer deliver the course well…Would you recommend this course to others…What did you enjoy most about today?”. Is there any wonder that training budgets are the first to be cut in difficult times. As trainers let’s use ‘Garry’s triangles’ and focus on the value we can add to the business rather than whether we are delivering interesting and fun courses (although this is still important in itself) – if we could justify and demonstrate profitable ROI, surely we could achieve much more, and run more of the interesting and fun courses we love (and still massage our own sense of self-importance)?
I know I’m coming over a bit cynical today, but I haven’t finished first cuppa of the day yet…and on that note, Garry, did you ‘catch the worm’ today? – blogging before 7.30am, very keen!
Not Rhetorical
Not rhetorical and I think you might have highlighted one of the key reasons.
I’m genuinely interested in what people think or have discovered is the rational behind why they won’t do what I suggested?
Yes the ‘early bird that catches the worm’ saying has always amused me. The early bird does indeed catch the worm, but isn’t it the early worm that gets caught as well? Which somehow negates the positive aspects of getting up early. It’s just another dilemma I have to face every morning.