Impact evaluation of T&D at the societal level

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to propose a training and development (T&D) evaluation model that includes new societal indicators, considering the growing demand to do so. Three complementary studies were done. Study I used a framework for T&D evaluation that includes societal impact in it. Study II investigated which levels of T&D Brazilian organizations use. Study III went deeper into practitioners' vision on such theme.

Design/methodology/approach

Three multimethod studies were done, over ten years (2001-2011). Study I focused on the evaluation of a professional formation program and used a quasi-experimental design. In Study II a survey was done with 1,150 organizations, searching for T&D evaluation strategies. Study III was a qualitative research with T&D professionals on societal impact.

Findings

Impacts at the individual, organizational and societal levels were identified in Study I. Study II showed that most Brazilian organizations measure solely the individual level. Study III identified that the societal impact is sole and rarely measured by public organizations and large business corporations where a T&D department is fully operating

Research limitations/implications

The indicators of societal and organizational outcomes used are appropriate for evaluating a specific T&D program. Other programs would require their own indicators (e.g. absenteeism, health, well being).

Practical implications

The results of this study highlight an increasing demand for the recognition of organizational and societal indicators in T&D evaluation. Practitioners should be aware of this fact.

Originality/value

This study uses indicators that are beyond the walls of the organization. It contributes to the development of T&D evaluation tools and points to new challenges towards societal effects of T&D activities.

Citation

Mourão, L. and Eduardo Borges-Andrade, J. (2013), "Impact evaluation of T&D at the societal level", Journal of Workplace Learning, Vol. 25 No. 8, pp. 505-520. https://doi.org/10.1108/JWL-12-2012-0081