Abstract
For almost 40 years, Donald Kirkpatrick's framework for evaluation has been used as a basic model for the identification and targeting of training-specific interventions in business, government, military, and industry alike. By approaching evaluation from four different perspectives—reaction, learning, behavior, and results—the model has provided a solid basis for the examination of training's impact on the organization. Despite the current practice of measuring one's success according to the success of one's clients, proposed changes in the model have not been frequently adopted. It is therefore likely time for professionals to reevaluate the utility and responsiveness of the Kirk-patrick framework to meet the value-added requirements of today's organizations. This article identifies tools and concepts for being responsive to the new organizational realities not originally addressed by the Kirkpatrick model.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
American Society for Training and Development (ASTD). (no date). Percent of courses evaluated at Kirkpatrick levels [online]. Available: http://www.astd.org/who/research/benchmar/96stats/graph15.gif [March 30, 1998].
Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1989).The systematic design of instruction (3rd ed.). Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman & Co.
Drucker, P.F. (1993)Post-capitalist society. New York: HarperBusiness.
Foshay, R. (in press). An examination of evaluation research.
Gilbert, T., & Gilbert, M. (1989: January). Performance engineering: Making human productivity a science.Performance Improvement.
Hall, J., Sprague, D., & Watkins, R. (1995; August).Florida's job training programs: What is the return on taxpayers' investment? Tallahassee, FL: Florida TaxWatch Incorporated.
Kaufman, R. (1992).Strategic planning plus: An organizational guide. Newbury Park, CA: Sage (Revised).
Kaufman, R. (May–June, 1997). Avoiding the “dumbing down” of human performance improvement.Performance Improvement.
Kaufman, R. (1998).Strategic thinking: A guide to identifying and solving problems—Revised. Arlington, VA & Washington, DC: Jointly published by the American Society for Training and Development and the International Society for Performance Improvement.
Kaufman, R., & Keller, J. (1994: Winter). Levels of evaluation: Beyond Kirkpatrick.Human Resources Quarterly, 5(4).
Kaufman, R., Keller, J., & Watkins, R. (1995). What works and what doesn't: Evaluation beyond Kirkpatrick.Performance and Instruction 35(2), 8–12.
Kaufman, R., & Watkins, R. (1996: Spring). Costs-consequences analysis.HRD Quarterly.
Kaufman, R., Watkins, R., & Sims, L. (1997). Cost-consequences analysis: A case study.Performance Improvement Quarterly 10(2).
Kaufman, R., Watkins, R., Triner, D., & Stith, M. (1998: summer). The changing corporate mind: Organizations, vision, missions, purposes, and indicators on the move toward societal payoffs.Performance Improvement Quarterly.
Kirkpatrick, D.L. (1959a). Techniques for evaluating training programs.Journal of ASTD, 13(11), 3–9.
Kirkpatrick, D.L. (1959b). Techniques for evaluating training programs: Part 2—Learning.Journal of ASTD, 13(12), 21–26.
Kirkpatrick, D.L. (1960a). Techniques for evaluating training programs: Part 3—Behavior.Journal of ASTD, 14(1), 13–18.
Kirkpatrick, D.L. (1960b). Techniques for evaluating training programs: Part 4—Results.Journal of ASTD, 14(2), 28–32.
Kirkpatrick, D.L. (1994).Evaluating training programs: The four levels. San Francisco: Berret-Koehler.
Kirkpatrick, D.L. (1996). Evaluation. In R.L. Craig, & L.R. Bittel (Eds.),Training & Development Handbook. American Society for Training and Development, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.
Kirkpatrick, D.L. (1996: Spring). Invited reaction: Reaction to Holton article.Performance Improvement Quarterly, 7(1), 23–29.
Muellner, A. (Reporter). (1998, March 18).Morning Edition. Upper Marlboro, Maryland: National Public Radio.
Muir, M., Watkins, R., Kaufman, R., & Leigh, D. (June, 1998). Costs-consequences analysis: A primer.Performance Improvement.
Pava, M.N., & Krausz, J. (1995).Corporate responsibility and financial performance: The paradox of social cost. Westport, CN: Quorum Books.
Phillips, J. (1996). Measuring the Results of Training. In R.L. Craig, & L.R. Bittel (Eds.),Training & Development Handbook. American Society for Training and Development, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.
Popcorn, F. (1991).The Popcorn report. New York: Doubleday.
Rothwell, W.J., & Kazanas, H.C. (1992).Mastering the instructional design process: A systematic approach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Toffler, A. (1990).Powershift: Knowledge, wealth and violence at the edge of the 21st century. New York: Bantam Books.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Watkins, R., Leigh, D., Foshay, R. et al. Kirkpatrick plus: Evaluation and continuous improvement with a community focus. ETR&D 46, 90–96 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299676
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299676