100 Percent Trained Does Not Mean 100 Percent Effectively Trained

HPISC. Resource Library

Content Area: Training Effectiveness / Metrics

Item: 100% Training Complete ≠ 100% Effectively Trained

100 Percent Trained

 

Excerpt:Can you run me a training report? I need to know where we stand with our training effectiveness program!”

For a training manager, this is a double edged sword. While it is very encouraging that upper management is taking an interest in the training program, focusing merely on the percent complete does not measure training effectiveness.

Take Away:
Explanation of the intention of measuring training effectiveness

Typical Requester:
This article appeals to a wide audience of QA, Operations, and HR L& Managers.

How Used:

  • The primary use is to get up to speed on current thinking around effective training and what can be used for measuring real training effectiveness?
  • The other reason QA folks request it is to foster a dialogue with executives who only want to focus on training curricula completeness as the training metric.

FEATURED ARTICLE IN GXP LIFELINE, JULY 2012

Available on line. Click the icon below:

ONLINEPicture1

Also available is Resource Tool – Performance Improvement Checklist questions to ask.

PerfIMPRChcklst

 

 

 

One thought on “100 Percent Trained Does Not Mean 100 Percent Effectively Trained”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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