Conducting Post-Training Evaluations

The question of how to measure skills is one that educators have grappled with for years. Often, it’s meant relying on proxy metrics to define success. Hours spent learning. Qualifications gained. Important, but still improveable. Yes, completion rates matter. But they encourage you to limit who gets access to learning based on who is likely to complete, rather than who can benefit. And if you’re an employer waiting to the end of a programme to find out if you’ve got ROI, then you should demand better. The fundamental question for any leadership team: is this investment of time and money delivering a tangible return to the business? So in addition to that, at Multiverse, we’ve shifted the focus from time spent learning to value created. Our quarterly impact numbers are grounded in the actual work our apprentices do. Every project submitted on the Multiverse platform represents someone applying new skills to a real challenge in their organisation. That's what we measure, and that's what we report. In 2026 so far, our apprentices have reported monthly ROI of: - 325,000 hours of time saved  - £240 million in saved or avoided costs - £40 million in increased revenue In a world where every budget line is being scrutinised, “we think it's working” isn't good enough. This is the data I come back to when I want to know whether we're actually delivering on that. Real outcomes, from real apprentices, doing real work. And if you're a customer, we'll show you exactly what this looks like for your organisation. If you can't demonstrate the direct return on your talent development spend, you're essentially guessing. We think you deserve better than that. Ultimately, this is what true accountability looks like in skills development. We are proving that when you equip your workforce with the right technical tools, the result is a measurable and scalable surge in productivity.

Measuring the ROI of Virtual Behavioral Training Investing in behavioral training is not just about cost—it’s about measurable impact. The real question organizations must ask is: Does the training deliver a return on investment (ROI) in terms of improved retention, productivity, and leadership effectiveness? In our previous analysis, the total cost of a two-day virtual behavioral training for 60 mid-level managers was ₹19,63,000. Now, let’s calculate the potential ROI based on key business outcomes. 1. ROI Formula The standard formula for training ROI: ROI (%) = {Monetary Benefits} - {Training Cost}/ {Training Cost} * 100 2. Business Impact Assumptions To estimate the monetary benefits, we consider three key areas: A) Reduction in Attrition Average attrition for mid-level managers: 15% annually Assumed reduction in attrition due to training: 3 percentage points Average cost of replacing a manager (hiring, onboarding, productivity loss): ₹15,00,000 per manager Retention improvement: 60 managers × 3% = 1.8 managers saved {Cost Savings from Reduced Attrition} = 1.8*15,00,000 = ₹27,00,000 B) Increased Promotions & Internal Mobility Assumed impact: 5% increase in internal promotions Cost of hiring an external manager: ₹20,00,000 (recruitment, ramp-up, lost productivity) Savings from internal promotion: 60 × 5% = 3 managers promoted {Cost Savings from Internal Promotions} = 3* 20,00,000 = ₹60,00,000 C) Productivity Gains from Behavioral Improvement Behavioral training enhances leadership, communication, and decision-making, leading to improved productivity. Assumed productivity increase: 2% per manager Average annual contribution per manager (₹30L salary, assuming 3× salary as productivity value): ₹90,00,000 Total productivity gain per manager: ₹90,00,000 × 2% = ₹1,80,000 Total impact: ₹1,80,000 × 60 managers = ₹1,08,00,000 3. Total Monetary Benefit Benefit Area and Financial Impact Reduction in Attrition 27,00,000 Increased Internal Promotions 60,00,000 Productivity Gains 1,08,00,000 Total Benefits 1,95,00,000 4. ROI Calculation ROI (%) = {1,95,00,000 - 19,63,000}/{19,63,000} * 100 ROI = {1,75,37,000}/{19,63,000} * 100 ROI = 892% 5. Strategic Takeaways: Why This Matters High ROI Justifies Investment: An 892% ROI confirms that investing in behavioral training yields substantial business value. Retention and Internal Mobility Drive Cost Savings: Avoiding attrition and promoting from within reduces hiring costs significantly. Productivity Gains Create Long-Term Impact: Even small behavioral shifts in leadership and decision-making lead to tangible business outcomes. By linking training costs to measurable business benefits, organizations can move beyond cost discussions to strategic impact measurement—ensuring learning investments drive organizational growth. Would love to hear from others.

📈 Unlocking the True Impact of L&D: Beyond Engagement Metrics 🚀 I am honored to once again be asked by the LinkedIn Talent Blog to weigh in on this important question. To truly measure the impact of learning and development (L&D), we need to go beyond traditional engagement metrics and look at tangible business outcomes. 🌟 Internal Mobility: Track how many employees advance to new roles or get promoted after participating in L&D programs. This shows that our initiatives are effectively preparing talent for future leadership. 📚 Upskilling in Action: Evaluate performance reviews, project outcomes, and the speed at which employees integrate their new knowledge into their work. Practical application is a strong indicator of training’s effectiveness. 🔄 Retention Rates: Compare retention between employees who engage in L&D and those who don’t. A higher retention rate among L&D participants suggests our programs are enhancing job satisfaction and loyalty. 💼 Business Performance: Link L&D to specific business performance indicators like sales growth, customer satisfaction, and innovation rates. Demonstrating a connection between employee development and these outcomes shows the direct value L&D brings to the organization. By focusing on these metrics, we can provide a comprehensive view of how L&D drives business success beyond just engagement. 🌟 🔗 Link to the blog along with insights from other incredible L&D thought leaders (list of thought leaders below): https://lnkd.in/efne_USa What other innovative ways have you found effective in measuring the impact of L&D in your organization? Share your thoughts below! 👇 Laura Hilgers Naphtali Bryant, M.A. Lori Niles-Hofmann Terri Horton, EdD, MBA, MA, SHRM-CP, PHR Christopher Lind

"We brought in a trainer for two days and nothing changed." Of course it didn't. You treated training like a checkbox activity. Sales leaders constantly make this mistake: → Hire external trainer for 2-day workshop → Everyone gets excited during sessions → 30 days later, zero behavior change → "Training doesn't work" Wrong. Your approach to training doesn't work. Here's what actually happens: Day 1: Reps are pumped. Taking notes. Asking questions. Day 2: Still engaged. Ready to implement everything. Day 30: Back to old habits. Zero retention. Why? Because you treated symptoms, not the disease. You didn't change their daily habits. You didn't provide ongoing reinforcement. You didn't build systems for accountability. Real training that creates lasting change looks different: #1 It's diagnostic first. Before any training, you identify specific skill gaps through call reviews, deal analysis, and performance data. Not generic "they need better discovery" but specific "they ask surface level pain questions but never uncover business impact." #2 It's delivered in sprints. Six weeks of twice-weekly sessions beats a 2-day workshop every time. Reps can practice between sessions, get feedback, and build muscle memory. #3 It includes reinforcement systems. Weekly coaching calls, peer practice sessions, and manager check-ins. The learning doesn't stop when the trainer leaves. #4 It measures behavior change, not satisfaction scores. "Did you like the training?" is worthless. "Are you now asking better discovery questions?" matters. #5 It provides job aids and frameworks. Reps need cheat sheets, email templates, and conversation guides they can reference in real situations. Most importantly: It's customized to your specific challenges, not generic sales advice. The companies that see 40%+ improvement in performance don't do one-off training events. They build learning into their culture. They have weekly skill-building sessions. They do call reviews with specific feedback. They practice objection handling until it's automatic. Stop buying training like it's a magic pill. Start building capability like it's a muscle that needs consistent exercise. Your reps deserve better than motivational speeches that wear off in a week. — Tired of wasted training budgets? I'll design a performance improvement system that actually creates lasting behavior change. Book a diagnostic: https://lnkd.in/ghh8VCaf

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐞𝐜𝐫𝐞𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐓𝐫𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐀𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐖𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐬? 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐭 𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐄𝐧𝐝. 🏁 I used to think my job as an L&D professional started with a syllabus. I was wrong. Recently, I was tasked with building a learning solution for our Talent Acquisition (TA) team. The goal wasn’t just to "train recruiters"—it was to solve a business problem. Instead of looking at what they needed to know (Level 2), I started with what the business needed to achieve (Kirkpatrick Level 4). The "Reverse" Approach I didn’t start with slides. I started by analyzing Voice of the Customer (VOC) survey results, focusing on various metrics from both Hiring Managers and Candidates. Working Backwards: ✅ Level 4 (Results): I defined the business KPI. ✅ Level 3 (Behavior): Based on the VOC metrics, I identified the specific actions recruiters needed to change—specifically around "Precision Intake" and "Candidate Experience Management." ✅ Level 2 & 1 (Learning & Reaction): Only then did I design the actual training content that addressed those specific behavior gaps. The Result? The training didn't feel like a chore; it felt like a solution. Because I built it based on the actual metrics revealed in the VOC surveys, the TA team saw immediate value, and the business saw a measurable shift in hiring efficiency. The Lesson: If you want your learning solutions to be more than just "check-the-box" exercises, stop asking "What should we teach?" and start asking "What does the data say I need to solve?" How do you use VOC data to shape your enablement programs? 👇 #LearningAndDevelopment #InstructionalDesign #TalentAcquisition #KirkpatrickModel #Enablement #DataDrivenLD #BusinessImpact

Inspired by the latest FSI Training conference and Fabio Nakamura's lecture, I wanted to share the methodology for data analysis that I have implemented within my team. Previously, I analyzed drill intensity compared to full match data. My approach involved looking at intensity metrics over the full duration of a match and comparing them with training data. This method proved inadequate for capturing individual training performance and match intensity. In the last few days, I have focused on a more precise approach by segmenting match data into individual cuts. This allowed me to establish thresholds for each player, enhancing the accuracy of the analysis. To streamline the process before importing the data into Power BI, I divided each player's match data into segments of 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, and 10 minutes. For each segment, I calculated the average of the three best values for the variables: Total Distance, High-Speed Running (HSR) Distance, Sprint Distance, Acceleration Efforts (Zones 2+3), Acceleration Distance, Deceleration Efforts (Zones 2+3), Deceleration Distance, and Player Load. The rationale behind averaging the three best values, rather than using a single best value, is that outliers can create unrealistic thresholds. For example, during a short two-minute period, an athlete may be highly motivated, resulting in an intensity peak that does not represent sustainable performance. Averaging the three best values provides a more reliable and representative benchmark. By dividing drill values by these thresholds, I calculated the percentage of match intensity. This adjustment revealed that the previously analyzed drill intensities were often overestimated by up to 50% in some cases. An example in the images involves two players with different game thresholds. When examining absolute data, it appears that Player 1 experiences a higher mechanical load (in terms of accelerations and decelerations). However, both players exhibit similar intensity levels when compared to their match thresholds. This discrepancy becomes even more apparent when analyzing a full 90-minute match, as was done in my earlier approach. This finding underscores that absolute values alone cannot provide meaningful insights into individual player intensity during training. Each player and each drill must be carefully analyzed to draw accurate conclusions, such as determining whether a player was exerting sufficient effort. The next step in this process is automation. Ideally, the program should recognize drill duration and automatically adjust it to the match intensity thresholds. I'm looking forward to chatting about this approach to data analysis. Any ideas or suggestions on how to enhance this method further are welcome! #sportsscience #dataanalysis #strengthandconditioning #soccer

“Show outcomes, not outputs!” I’ve given (and received) this feedback more times than I can count while helping organizations tell their impact stories. And listen, it’s technically right…but it can also feel completely unfair. We love to say things like: ✅ 100 teachers trained ✅ 10,000 learners reached ✅ 500 handwashing stations installed But funders (and most payers) want to know: 𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵? That’s the outcomes vs outputs gap: ➡️ Output: 100 teachers trained ➡️ Outcome: Teachers who received training scored 15% higher on evaluations than those who didn’t The second tells a story of change. But measuring outcomes can be 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗶𝘃𝗲. It’s easy to count the number of people who showed up. It’s costly to prove their lives got better because of it. And that creates a brutal inequality. Well-funded organizations with substantial M&E budgets continue to win. Meanwhile, incredible community-led organizations get sidelined for not having “evidence”- even when the change is happening right in front of us. So what can organizations with limited resources do? 𝗟𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗲𝘅𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗰𝗵: That study from Daystar University showing teacher training improved learning by 10% in India? Use it. If your intervention is similar, cite their methodology and results as supporting evidence. 𝗗𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗻 𝘀𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲𝗿 𝘀𝘁𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗲𝘀: Baseline and end-line surveys aren't perfect, but they're better than nothing. Self-reported confidence levels have limitations, but "85% of teachers reported feeling significantly more confident in their teaching abilities," tells a story. 𝗣𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗻𝗲𝗿 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗹𝗼𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀: Universities need research projects. Find one studying similar interventions and collaborate. Share costs, share data, share credit. 𝗨𝘀𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘅𝘆 𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘀: Can't afford a 5-year longitudinal study? Track intermediate outcomes that research shows correlate with long-term impact. 𝗧𝗿𝘆 𝗽𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗽𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆 𝗲𝘃𝗮𝗹𝘂𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻: Let beneficiaries help design and conduct evaluations. It's cost-effective and often reveals insights that traditional methods miss. For example, train teachers to interview each other about your training program. And funders? Y’all have homework too. Some are already offering evaluation support (bless you). But let’s make it the rule, not the exception. What if 10-15% of every grant was earmarked for outcome measurement? What if we moved beyond gold-standard-only thinking? 𝗟𝗮𝗰𝗸 𝗼𝗳 𝗮 𝗰𝗲𝗿𝘁𝗮𝗶𝗻 𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗱 𝗼𝗳 𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀𝗻’𝘁 𝗺𝗲𝗮𝗻 “𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗳𝘂𝗹”. We need outcomes. But we also need equity. How are you navigating this tension? What creative ways have you used to show impact without burning out your team or budget? #internationaldevelopment #FundingAfrica #fundraising #NonprofitLeadership #nonprofitafrica

You've just launched a reskilling program aimed at boosting digital literacy across your organization. Now, the big question is: how do you measure its success? To answer that, a combination of hard data and real-world feedback is key. Take the example of AT&T, which famously invested $1 billion in reskilling its workforce for the digital age. They tracked success through KPIs like training completion rates and skill acquisition. Post-training, they saw a marked increase in employees' ability to handle new technologies, evidenced by improved performance metrics. But metrics only tell part of the story. Gathering qualitative feedback is equally important. IBM, for instance, uses surveys and pulse checks to gauge how employees feel about their upskilling efforts. This feedback allows them to tweak programs in real-time, ensuring that learning remains relevant and engaging. Lastly, consider long-term evaluation. Adobe ties reskilling outcomes to annual performance reviews, allowing them to see if the new skills are leading to sustained improvements. This holistic approach—combining KPIs, feedback, and long-term tracking—ensures that reskilling initiatives not only deliver immediate results but also contribute to lasting change. Are you ready to measure the true impact of your reskilling efforts? #hr #chro #reskilling #datainsights #employeedevelopment #employeeskilling

One of the biggest frustrations I hear from L&D managers is this: “We know we’re making a difference but we can’t prove it in a way the business actually cares about.” Thing is, most L&D teams don’t have a measurement problem. They have a focus problem. Too many teams still spend their time reporting metrics that mean nothing to performance: completions, attendance, satisfaction scores. These are admin stats, not impact stats. If you want to show that learning drives performance, you need to measure what matters. Start with behaviour change.... If people aren’t doing anything differently after the training, nothing has improved. It’s that simple. You can see it through quick spot interviews, manager observations, or checking how people apply the skills on the job. Behaviour is the first real indicator of transfer. Next is manager validation... Managers see performance daily. If they can’t see a shift, it hasn’t happened. A short post-training check-in with them will tell you far more than an LMS ever will. Then look at business KPIs... Learning only has value when it moves an operational metric like fewer errors, better customer scores, reduced turnaround time, higher sales conversions. Link every programme to one KPI and report back in business terms, not learning terms. Don’t forget before-and-after performance... Baseline data is the difference between “we think it worked” and “here’s the proof it worked.” A 30- or 90-day comparison is often all you need. Two underrated areas: retention and internal mobility... People stay longer and progress more when they feel they’re developing. Yet most L&D teams never claim credit for this, even though it’s one of the most valuable outcomes they create. Then there’s skills data... The backbone of capability building. If the right skills are growing in the right parts of the business, your learning strategy is working. And finally, the most overlooked: cost avoidance. Sometimes the biggest ROI isn’t extra revenue but what you didn’t have to spend like fewer mistakes, less rework, reduced churn. These numbers often tell the strongest story in the boardroom. If you focus on these areas, you won’t just “deliver training.” You’ll demonstrate performance improvement, the only outcome that really matters! --------------- Follow me at Sean McPheat for more L&D content and and then hit the 🔔 button to stay updated on my future posts. ♻️ Repost to help others in your network.

There’s a reason training impact feels so hard to measure. It’s not because impact isn’t there. It’s because we look for it at the wrong time. Training impact doesn’t show up all at once. It unfolds in stages. Right after training, you won’t see behavior change yet. But you can see early signals: Do people understand it? Do they feel confident applying it? Do they see why it matters? These signals don’t prove impact. But they predict whether it’s even possible. A few weeks later, different things become visible: Early application Intent to use Where people get stuck This is where learning starts to show up at work. Months later, real change follows: Behavior shifts Adoption increases New habits form And only much later does it make sense to ask: Did this improve performance? Did it move the business? Was there ROI? Most training is evaluated far too early to see business impact. Good evaluation is about measuring the right things at the right time.