Assessing Employee Training Effectiveness: An Empirical Integration of Kirkpatrick Level 1 and Level 2 Evaluations
Main Article Content
Abstract
Training evaluations in DKI Jakarta's private sector are often limited to subjective participant satisfaction (Level 1) while neglecting objective learning outcomes (Level 2). This study evaluates a division's basic training program by integrating Kirkpatrick’s Level 1 (Reaction) and Level 2 (Learning). A quantitative descriptive approach was applied to 35 employees selected via purposive sampling. Data were collected through Likert-scale questionnaires and pre-test/post-test documentation, then analyzed using Excel and SPSS. Level 1 results showed positive responses, with facilitation method (T2=4.06) and material relevance (R1=4.03) scoring highest, while overall satisfaction (S1=3.49) scored lowest, highlighting a conflict between utility value and affective comfort due to daily workloads. At Level 2, a Paired Samples T-Test confirmed a highly significant surge in cognitive competence (t=-19.437, p=0.000), as the mean score rose from 39.00 to 76.86. The narrowing standard deviation (9.61 to 8.67) indicates a homogeneous equalization of knowledge. Management should alleviate daily workloads during training to boost affective satisfaction. Future research should expand longitudinally to encompass workplace behavior (Level 3) and organizational results (Level 4).
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
Alliger, G. M., & Janak, E. A. (1989). Kirkpatrick’s levels of training criteria: Thirty years later. Personnel Psychology, 42(2), 331–342. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1989.tb00661.x
Alliger, G. M., Tannenbaum, S. I., Bennett, W., Jr., Traver, H., & Shotland, A. (1997). A meta-analysis of the relations among training criteria. Personnel Psychology, 50(2), 341–358. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1997.tb00911.x
Armstrong, M., & Taylor, S. (2023). Armstrong’s handbook of human resource management practice (16th ed.). Kogan Page.
Arthur, W., Jr., Bennett, W., Jr., Edens, P. S., & Bell, S. T. (2003). Effectiveness of training in organizations: A meta-analysis of design and evaluation features. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(2), 234–245. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.2.234
Bates, R. (2004). A critical analysis of evaluation practice: The Kirkpatrick model and the principle of beneficence. Evaluation and Program Planning, 27(3), 341–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2004.04.011
Blume, B. D., Ford, J. K., Baldwin, T. T., & Huang, J. L. (2010). Transfer of training: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Management, 36(4), 1065–1105. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309352880
Goldstein, I. L., & Ford, J. K. (2002). Training in organizations: Needs assessment, development, and evaluation (4th ed.). Wadsworth.
Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1959). Techniques for evaluating training programs. Journal of the American Society of Training Directors, 13(11), 3–9.
Kirkpatrick, D. L., & Kirkpatrick, J. D. (2006). Evaluating training programs: The four levels (3rd ed.). Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Kraiger, K., Ford, J. K., & Salas, E. (1993). Application of cognitive, skill-based, and affective theories of learning outcomes to new methods of training evaluation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(2), 311–328. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.2.311
Morgan, R. B., & Casper, W. J. (2000). Examining the factor structure of participant reactions to training: A multidimensional approach. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 11(3), 301–317. https://doi.org/10.1002/1532-1096(200023)11:3%3C301::AID-HRDQ7%3E3.0.CO;2-P
Noe, R. A. (2020). Employee training and development (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
Salas, E., Tannenbaum, S. I., Kraiger, K., & Smith-Jentsch, K. A. (2012). The science of training and development in organizations: What matters in practice. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 13(2), 74–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100612436661
Sitzmann, T., Brown, K. G., Casper, W. J., Ely, K., & Zimmerman, R. D. (2008). A review and meta-analysis of the nomological network of trainee reactions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(2), 280–295. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.2.280