In order to assess the effectiveness of the training course with a view to gaining further employment it is necessary to find out how the course has impacted on the problems concerned. To do this, one must perform follow up research into the behavioural changes which it is hoped will have occurred. These changes will have taken place both in the team leaders’ behaviour and also in the behaviour of the staff they supervise.
The question which arises from this statement then is not so much whether or not, further study needs to be undertaken, but rather what is the best and most productive way to go about it? In Introducing Human Resource Management, Foot and Hook (2002a) emphasise the importance of evaluating the training as a part of the training cycle. If this evaluation does not take place, they claim that the organisation concerned has no way of assessing how successful the training has been.
Therefore, in order to provide a way of measuring the success of the training, evaluation should take place at several different stages – at the end of the training course the trainees should be asked how effective they thought it was and knowledge and skills should be assessed to see what they have learned as opposed to how they feel about it. The authors also claim that it is necessary to find out what effect the training has had by assessing how it has altered the trainees’ methods and behaviour in the workplace. This should be achieved through questionnaires and /or interviews with the trainees and their supervisors or by a work review. (Foot and Hook (2002b).
However, one possible flaw within this method is the fact that it does not directly address the attitudes and beliefs of the trainees’ subordinates. This may be of critical importance to the success of the training, both in providing an understanding of the motivations of the team leaders’ subordinates and the team leaders themselves. In order to assess the success of the course, the management at Standard General will need to know whether the problems have been successfully dealt with.
To do this, they need to test the team leaders’ knowledge, skills and awareness to see how much they have learned from the course. One way to do this would be to refer to the timetable and course contents and ask the trainees relevant questions. They might also check the team leaders’ feelings about the productivity, quality of work and attitudes of their subordinates to see if the training has worked. Further analysis could be conducted by interviewing the trainees’ subordinates and superiors to evaluate their performance. Another way would be to ask the training company to perform assessments. However, this may incur further costs.
Conclusion
In summary, the requirements of the course contents, timetable, duration and costs were all significant factors and had to be carefully considered. In order to ensure re-employment from Standard General, the course had to be well designed and the result had to have a positive effect on the problems which the company was experiencing. Furthermore, a plan had to be designed to check that the team leaders and their staff’s behaviour improved significantly and measurably to such a degree that the problems were overcome. The Human Resource staff believe that the requirements asked of them by the company have been fulfilled and look forward to working with Standard General in the future.
Bibliography & Webliography
1. Torrington, D., Hall, L., Taylor, S., (2002) Human Resource Management. 5th edition, UK: Prentice Hall.
2. Mullins, L. J. (2002) Management And Organisational Behaviour. 6th edition, UK: Prentice Hall.
3. Bratton, J. and Gold, J (1999) Human Resource Management Theory and practice. 2nd edition, New York: Palgrave.
4. Beardwell, I., Holden, L. and Claydon, T. (2004) Human Resource Management a contemporary approach. 4th edition, UK: Prentice Hall.
