Strategic HR: How goal setting makes continuing education successes measurable

It is no secret that continuing education is central to the success of a company and its employees. Lifelong learning is a necessity to remain economically and professionally relevant. Nevertheless, continuing education measures in particular are often on the cross-off list when it comes to saving money. This is also due to the fact that some learning effects cannot be directly quantified in figures or only bear fruit after a delay. Measuring the success of learning opportunities should not be limited exclusively to financial aspects. Continuing education should be judged on the basis of its objectives.

How goal setting and measurability drive corporate learning

But which goals these are depends on the company and the employees. “What is the goal of personnel development in an organization or department? What are our goals in employee development? “A clear definition of goals and strategies forms the basis for the quality of continuing education offerings and performance measurement. And is therefore also the basis for securing the budget in personnel development. However, 50% of the HR developers surveyed are unable to recognize exactly this strategy in their company. [1] It is time to define goals and make them measurable.

Clearly defined goals provide focus and ensure understanding at all levels — among budget managers, stakeholders and employees. The definition not only involves the question of “What? “important. Selecting the right measurement methods and setting target values makes goal achievement verifiable. In turn, proven continuing education successes become a strong argument in budget discussions and an overview of the effects becomes the starting point for improving the quality of offers.

Strategic personnel development: “Measurable or not measurable, that is the question here”

The return on investment (ROI) provides an initial assessment of the success of continuing education offers. It compares the costs incurred with the monetary benefit and is calculated as follows:

Costs can be reflected very well in ROI, for example for trainers, travel costs or rental costs for training rooms. However, the situation is different when it comes to many positive effects. How can an increase in the company's innovative capacity, the development of a learning culture or the acquisition of skills and competencies among employees be directly quantified? Not to be neglected either: Some effects only occur after a time delay.

‍
In addition, continuing education goals should also be realistic and achievable. It is important to set goals that are challenging but still within the limits of opportunity. In addition to realizability, the relevance of the goals to the vision of the company and the needs of employees must also be considered. The continuing education offer should be relevant to both your own professional and personal development and contribute to the company's success.
A pure cost-benefit analysis, such as ROI, is therefore not enough for a full evaluation of continuing education offers according to the possible goals. And certainly not when the defined goals are difficult to represent in monetary terms. Approaches that can measure more comprehensively are therefore required. Advanced measurement methods, such as the Kirkpatrick Model or the Learning Transfer Evaluation Model (LTEM), can provide a wider basis for evaluating continuing education offerings.

A wider evaluation base with the Kirkpatrick model

The four levels of the Kirkpatrick model provide a comprehensive view of the effectiveness of continuing education offerings. In addition to the participants' reaction (“reaction”), actual learning success (“learning”) and the transfer of what has been learned into everyday working life (“behavior”) are also considered. On the fourth level (“Results”), the impact of the offer on the organization is analysed. This broad basis of analysis gives you the opportunity not only to comprehensively test the effects, but also in terms of their specific goals.

An even more precise basis is provided by the Learning Transfer Evaluation Model (LTEM), which provides an assessment scheme in eight phases and includes both the learners themselves and learning effects or the transfer of learning. In both models, both the advantages for the measurability of a Learning Management Systems (LMS) as well as one Learning Experience Platform (LXP) become effective and provide a reliable database.