11

Eleven Reasons Why Training and

Development Fails . . . and what you can do
about it
By
Jack J. Phillips & Patti P. Phillips
During their more than 10 years as consultants to some of the worlds largest organizations,
Jack and Patricia Phillips have developed a unique vantage point within the training and
development community !hey have assisted hundreds of organizations with measurement and
evaluation to "ring accounta"ility to their workforce processes #s a result, theyve e$amined ma%or
training and development programs in all types of settings, conducted impact studies using a
comprehensive measurement and evaluation process and reviewed the success &or lack thereof' of
studies conducted "y their clients
(f the more than )00 impact studies the Phillipses have conducted or reviewed over the
years, some studies have shown positive results while others yielded a negative return on investment
#long the way, they have o"served repeat patterns of issues that inhi"it or enhance results *ven
when a program is successful, issues may stand in the way of more impressive results +ollectively
through their clients impact studies, along with comprehensive evaluation, they have identified 11
reasons why training and development fails and provide a prescription for change
Lack of Alignment with
Business Needs. A
training programs payoff
comes from the business
measures that drive it.
imply put!
if a training
program is
not aligned
or
connected
to a
business
measure!
no
[1]
improvement can be linked to the program.
"oo often! training is implemented for the
wrong reasons # a trend! desire or perceived
need that may not be connected to a business
measure.
$nitial training needs may be linked to
the ob%ectives and evaluation through the
use of a consistent four&level concept 'ee
()inking *eeds Assessment+ chart,. $f we
accept this evaluation framework! four
corresponding levels of ob%ectives and needs
assessment e-ist as well. .ithout the
business connection at )evel /! the program
will have difficulty in credibly driving any
business results
0ne ma%or telecom firm in the 1A
faced this problem directly as they reviewed
its corporate universitys ma%or programs. A
first step to check for business alignment
was to connect core courses to some
SEPTEMBER 2002 TRAINING Reproduced with Permission 1
Attempting to solve
job performance
issues with training
will not work when
other factors such as
reward systems job
design and
motivation are the
real issues!
business measure or need based on
perceptions of the corporate university staff.
.hen the staff could not readily make the
connection! they determined the linkage did
not e-ist. "he company needed a more
detailed up&front analysis.
"ailure to #ecogni$e Non%
&raining 'olutions $f the
wrong solution is
implemented! little or no
payoff will result. "oo often! training is
perceived as a solution for a variety of
performance problems when training may not
be an issue at all. A recent evaluation of a
leading 1.. banks ma%or training program
illustrated this problem. $n its training
program! the bank attempted to prepare the
commercial loan officers 'relationship
managers, to sell products other than
commercial loans! such as the banks capital
market products and cash management
services. But the training produced little
change in the managers behavior. An impact
study subse2uently revealed that the culprit
was the compensation arrangement. .hen
probed for a reason for the poor results! the
bankers clearly indicated that unless their
compensation system changed to account for
the new product lines! their behavior would
not change. "hey will continue to sell only
[(]
the products on which their commissions
were based.
Attempting to solve %ob performance
issues with training will not work when
factors such as reward systems! %ob design!
and motivation are the real issues. "o
overcome this problem! training staffs must
focus on methods to analy3e performance
rather than conduct traditional training needs
assessments # a ma%or shift in performance
improvement that has been developing for
many years. 1p&front analysis should be
elevated from needs assessment! which is
based on skills and knowledge deficiencies!
to a process that begins with business needs
and works through the learning needs.
Lack of 'pecific )irection
and "ocus! "raining and
development should be a
focused process that allows
stakeholders to concentrate on desired
results. "raining and development
ob%ectives should be developed at higher
4irkpatrick levels than traditional learning
ob%ectives 'ee (5-amples of 0b%ectives+
chart,. "hese ob%ectives correspond with si-
measures that lead to a balanced approach to
evaluating trainings success 'ee (A
[*]
SEPTEMBER 2002 TRAINING Reproduced with Permission 6
Linking Assessment with Evaluation
Needs Program
Assessment Objectives Evaluation
Business Impact Business
Needs Objectives Impact
Job Performance Application Application
Needs Objectives
!ills"#nowledge $earning $earning
Needs Objectives
Preferences atisfaction Reaction
Objectives
% %
& &
' '
( (
Balanced Approach+ chart,. 7ost training
programs should contain ob%ectives at
multiple levels! ideally including those at
levels 8 and /.
+,amples of -bjectives
Objective
1. 9ecrease error rates on reports by 6:;.
6. $ncrease the use of counseling skills in <:; of situations where work habits
are unacceptable.
8. Achieve a post&test score increase of 8:; over pre&test.
/. $nitiate at least three cost reduction pro%ects.
=. 9ecrease the amount of time re2uired to complete a pro%ect.
>. Achieve a 6?1 benefit to cost ratio one year after program implementation.
@. Aeceive a %ob relevance rating from participants of at least /.= out of =.
B. $ncrease the e-ternal customer satisfaction inde- by 6=; in 8 months.
<. Candle customer complaints with the =&step process in <=; of complaint
situations.
1:. Achieve a %ob simulation test score average of @=.
11. Donduct a meeting with direct reports to set performance improvement
goals.
16. At least =:; of participants use all customer interaction skills with every
customer.
.hen developed properly! these
ob%ectives provide important direction and
focus for a variety of stakeholders at
different time frames. Eor designers and
developers! the ob%ectives provide needed
insight to focus on application and impact!
not %ust learning. "he facilitators need
detailed ob%ectives to prepare individuals for
the learning e-periences ultimate outcome?
%ob performance change.
Participants need the direction provided
by level 8 and / ob%ectives to clearly see
how the training programs outcome will
actually help the organi3ation. ponsors of
training and development! the key clients
who pay for the program and support it!
re2uire such ob%ectives to connect training
with important business&unit measures.
Einally! evaluators use this type of direction
to know what data to collect to determine
whether the program has been successful.
Aecogni3ing the importance of multiple
ob%ective levels! including business impact!
a vice president of corporate training and
development at a ma%or package delivery
company recently posed an important
2uestion to the organi3ation? (Cow can we
e-pect our management team to support a
program when we cannot define the
behavior e-pected from participants and the
subse2uent business impact driven by the
programF+
.hile not all programs should undergo
such detailed up&front analysis! it is a critical
issue that needs more attention.
&he 'olution is &oo
+,pensive! 0f course! a
training and development
programs A0$ might
ultimately fail to recoup its
high costs. $ts important to note! however! that
a negative A0$ is not always a sign of failure.
7any programs might add enough perceived
value through intangibles and significant short&
term behavior change to overcome negative
A0$. $f positive A0$ is e-pected! however! then
negative A0$ shows failure and is unacceptable.
[.]
0ne large banks e-ecutive leadership
development program! for e-ample! offered an
impressive design from a learning perspective
and included pro%ect assignments for
participants! mentors! and learning coaches.
1nfortunately! the program proved too
e-pensive for the monetary value that it added!
even after multiple years of providing benefits.
.hen the full cost of conducting the four&week
SEPTEMBER 2002 TRAINING Reproduced with Permission 8
A Balanced Approach to Measuring Trainings Success
Measure 1 Participant Reaction To! Satis"action #ith! and Planned Action
$onnected to the Training
Measure 2 Participant %earning I&pro'e&ent ($hanges in )no*ledge and
S+ills,
Measure - Application o" )no*ledge %earned and Ne* S+ills on the .o/
Isolate the
E0ects o"
Training 1 2e'elop&ent
Measure 3 Business I&pact 2irectl4 %in+ed to the Training
Measure 5 Return on In'est&ent $o&paring Monetar4 Bene6ts to $osts
Measure 7 Intangi/le Bene6ts %in+ed to the Progra&
The process used to capture the success o" training and de'elop&ent
progra&s de'elops si8 t4pes o" data a/out a speci6c progra& (See 9A
Balanced Approach: chart,; These si8 t4pes o" data pro'ide a /alanced!
credi/le approach to identi"4ing the success o" a training and
de'elop&ent progra&; The 6rst "our t4pes o" data are consistent *ith
the traditional )ir+patric+ le'els; The process also re<uires a speci6c
&ethod or techni<ue to isolate the i&pact o" the progra&; This critical
step ans*ers the <uestion! 9=o* do 4ou +no* it *as the training>: This
co&prehensi'e process pro'ides the co&plete pro6le o" training success;
At the heart o" the process is a step?/4?step &odel that sho*s ho* the
data are collected! processed! and anal4@ed (See 9The RAI Process
Model: chart,; The process starts /4 de'eloping e'aluation plans to
collect data and &a+e decisions regarding ho* the data are processed
and anal4@ed; 2uring the progra&! reaction and planned actions are
captured "ro& participants; %earning is captured as speci6c
i&pro'e&ents in s+ills! +no*ledge and perceptions are &easured;
A"ter the progra& is i&ple&ented! application and i&ple&entation
data are collected *hich sho* the use o" the s+ills and the application o"
*hat *as learned in the training progra&; Ne8t! the corresponding
/usiness i&pact! *hich is directl4 lin+ed to the training and de'elop&ent
progra& or solution! is &easured; Together! these /loc+s in the process
&odel co&prise the +e4 ele&ents o" data collection;
The ne8t set o" /loc+s in the process &odel co&prises the RAI
anal4sis; The 6rst tas+ is to isolate the e0ects o" learning "ro& other
inBuences; This process uses one or &ore &ethods to separate
trainings inBuence "or& other "actors that had an i&pact on the
The RAI Process
training sessions in ma%or cities around the
world were tallied along with the costs of
consultants! personal learning coaches for each
e-ecutive! and costs for the design!
development! and facilitation teams! the total
reached almost G1::!::: per participant. "he
program was unable to deliver what
management e-pected.
#ecommended /osts for &raining
0rograms
Assessment Dosts 'Prorated,
9evelopment Dosts 'Prorated,
Program 7aterials
$nstructorHEacilitator Dosts
Eacilities Dosts
"ravelH)odgingH7eals
Participant alaries and Benefits
AdministrativeH0verhead Dosts 'Prorated,
5valuation Dosts
"his issue raises the 2uestion of what
costs should be included in the analysis.
Actual costs are traditionally included in an
impact study! although some of them are
indirect and might not be visible or
contained in a particular cost statement 'ee
(Aecommended Dost Dategories+,. "oo
often there is a tendency to use only direct
costs or even to minimi3e them to a certain
e-tent.
"he good news is that many effective
learning solutions can be implemented with
ine-pensive processes and still drive
business results. Eor e-ample! a se-ual
harassment prevention workshop conducted
at a hospital network cost each participant
'supervisor and managerial level, G/6/. "he
A0$ was 1!:=6 percent. $t is possible.
Develop
Evaluation
Plans And
Baseline Data
Develop
Objectives
Of
Solution(s
!ollect
Data Afte"
Solution
#mplementation
#solate
$he Effects
!ollect
Data Du"ing
Solution
#mplementation
#dentif%
#ntangible
&easu"es
!onve"t
Data $o
&oneta"%
'alue
!alculate
$he (etu"n
On
#nvestment
$abulate
!osts
Of Solution
THE ROI PROCESS
!alculating the (etu"n on #nvestment of
a Business Pe"fo"mance Solution
)ene"ate
#mpact
Stud%
Evaluation
Planning
Data Collection Data Analysis Reporting
Level 1: Reaction,
Satisfaction, and
Planned Actions
Level 3:
Application/
!ple!entation
Level ":
Learning
ntangi#le $ene%ts
Level &: R'
Level (:
$usiness !pact
#egarding &raining as an
+vent or a 'eries of +vents!
A positive business impact
must come from an
individual participants behavior change!
and such change does not come easily.
.hen training is considered a single event!
such as attending a two&day workshop for
e-ample! the odds of changing behavior are
slim. .ithout behavior change! training
fails to generate business results.
[1]
0ne ma%or physician malpractice
insurance provider offered various training
seminars to help physicians ad%ust their
approach and behavior regarding certain
medical procedures. "raditionally! the
programs were offered in four&hour or full&
day programs! with no pre&work and no
follow&up reinforcement. *ot surprisingly!
the seminars changed few! if any! behaviors.
ometimes it may be helpful to consider
behavior change as bodybuilding. An
occasional visit to the gym will have little
impact on the body. Iet! a continuous
process of working out! along with the
proper motivation and support! will make it
happen.
0articipants are Not 2eld
Accountable for #esults!
Eor training programs to be
successful! participants must
individually drive performance change.
.hen pressed for reasons for not changing
behavior! participants are 2uick to blame
others! usually the boss. But that may not be
the real issue. 0f individuals most likely to
be held responsible for results # including
managers! trainers! developers! and senior
e-ecutives # the overlooked participant
deserves more attention. Participants often
dont see changing their behavior as their
responsibility. Cistorically! when results are
few! the training and development staff!
along with immediate managers! comes
[3]
under fire. But! we often fail to focus on the
participants role in the process.
A recent impact study involving a
technology firm based outside the 1nited
tates revealed that several leadership
programs designed for employees at various
organi3ational levels failed to yield the
e-pected results. A ma%or barrier was
noticed? 5ach group of participants
continually identified lack of support from
immediate managers as the problem.
$ronically! each level blamed the ne-t. "he
D50 commented that somewhere along the
chain of authority a person must accept
responsibility and make things happen.
Participants can succeed with training if
they are properly motivated to do so and are
held accountable for their results! even with
an unsupportive manager. "raditionally! the
participants role in a training program has
been limited to attendance # learning the
skills and knowledge being offered. At
times! they may even be re2uired to apply
the newly ac2uired skills on the %ob.
But participants should not only apply
what is learned! they also should ensure that
doing so will reflect business results. .hile
this creates additional e-pectations! the
participants role is elevated from learning to
actually achieving results and reporting
Barriers to &ransfer of &raining to the 4ob
$mmediate manager does not support the training.
"he culture in the work group does not support the
training.
*o opportunity to use the skills.
*o time to use the skills.
kills could not be applied to the %ob.
"he systems and processes did not support the use
of the skills.
9idnt have the resources available to use the
skills.
Dhanged %ob and the skills no longer apply.
kills are not appropriate in our work unit.
9idnt see a need to apply what was learned.
Dould not change old habits.
Aeward systems dont support new skills.
them to the training and development staff.
"his shift is accomplished by developing
e-pectations into learning solutions!
providing handouts that detail specific
e-pectations and defining the roles of
employees in various handbooks! employee
manuals! and orientation sessions.
Participants must understand that the
programs success rests largely with them!
and disappointing results may be their
responsibility.

"ailure to 0repare the
+nvironment for &ransfer!
Aegardless of what
participants learn from a
training program! without transferring it to
the %ob! performance will not change and the
training program will fail. "his training&
transfer problem has been an important issue
in training and development for decades.
1nfortunately! studies continue to show that
between >: and <: percent of what is
learned isnt applied on the %ob. "he reason
this occurs is comple-! involving many
different barriers 'ee (Barriers of "ransfer+
chart,! to which little attention is given until
[5]
its too late.
"he results?
Barriers kill the
success of an
otherwise
successful
program.
Barriers must be understood at the
beginning of the process as part of
needs assessment and analysis. $dentified
early! inhibitors can be addressed in the
solutions design! development! delivery!
and implementation. 5fforts to minimi3e! if
not eliminate! the barriers before the
learning sol is implemented will pay off
significantly.
Lack of 6anagement
#einforcement and
'upport! .ithout
management encouragement
and support! participants will rarely
implement new skills and knowledge in the
workplace. "he managers role! therefore! is
critical in the learning process. 7ost studies
have shown that the two most powerful
opportunities for managerial input occur
during the interaction with the learner prior
to the training solution an after the training
has been completed.
[7]
$ts clear that managers usually dont
reali3e their influence. "his disconnect is
most fre2uently identified in follow&up
surveys conducted as part of an impact
study. 7ore action must be taken to ensure
mangers understand their impact and how
they can make changes.
At one ma%or computer manufacturer!
participants were asked specific 2uestions
regarding the actions and performance of
their managers following training. By using
multiple&choice responses! the survey
essentially listed the same 2uestions but
reworded the choices from the perspective
of the group being surveyed. "he results
showed a tremendous disconnect. ome /:
percent of managers said they encouraged
and coached their employees with the
training! while the participants indicated that
: percent actually provided encouragement
and coaching.
"he problem often e-ists in managers
perceptions about reinforcement and
support. ome managers feel that since they
created an empowered environment for
employees! they should not have to probe
$ts clear that managers usually dont reali3e their
influence. 7ore action must be taken to ensure
managers understand their impact and how they can
make changes.
further into each learners application of
new skills or knowledge. ,earning new
skills is a different situation. A new process
implemented in the workplace! particularly
one involving a significant departure from
pervious approaches! re2uires the immediate
managers support. A simple in2uiry about
the training programs success and how it
will be implemented into the work unit is
often sufficient.
0rgani3ations offering support have
tackled this process by developing
management reinforcement modules for a
particular program! defining managers
support roles! conducting workshops to
show managers their specific roles! holding
managers accountable through their own %ob
descriptions and responsibilities! and
rewarding managers for doing it right.
"ailure to 8solate the +ffects
of &raining! "oo often!
training programs are
conducted! business measures
are monitored! and improvements are
credited to the training process alone. "he
assumption is the training program
improved the business. Actually! other
influences and processes may have
influenced the business measure. "he
challenge is to isolate the improvement
directly related to training.
[9]
Eailure to attempt to isolate trainings
contribution might cause some training pros
to be discarded as irrelevant. uch pros may
actually bolster the bottom
line! but if there is no attempt to isolate their
impact! e-ecutives and sponsors are pu33led
about the actual connection to business
improvement.
*o doubt this is perhaps the most
challenging issue. "he classical approach is
to compare a group that has received the
training to a group that has not! and let the
difference in the two groups represent
trainings impact. .e have attempted to use
this techni2ue often! but only one&third of
our studies contain this type of arrangement.
Eor the remaining studies! another techni2ue
must be used to pinpoint trainings impact.
Aecently! various techni2ues have evolved
to estimate the connection between the
training and business improvement 'ee
("echni2ues to $solate+,.
"he good news is that at least one of
these techni2ues identified in the chart will
work in every setting! and the issue can be
addressed in every impact study. "o show
trainings real value! designers! developers!
and evaluators must accept the challenge to
tackle this issue.
Lack of /ommitment
and 8nvolvement
"rom +,ecutives!
.ithout top e-ecutive
commitment and involvement! training and
development will be ineffective and ma%or
pros will fall short of e-pectations.
Dommitment is critical! which e2uates to
resources being allocated to the training and
[1:]
&echni;ues to 8solate the +ffects of the
&raining 0rogram
1se of control groups
"rend line analysis
Eorecasting methods
Participants estimate of impact
'percent,
upervisors estimate of impact
'percent,
7anagements estimate of impact
'percent,
1se of e-perts
ubordinates report of other
factors
DalculatingH5stimating the impact
of other factors
development function and its specific pros.
$nvolvement
/ommunication< /ommon &arget Audiences
Reason for Communication
ecure approval for program Dlient! top e-ecutives
Jain support for the program $mmediate managers! team
leaders
Build credibility for the training staff "op e-ecutives
5nhance reinforcement of the program $mmediate managers
5nhance results of future programs Participants
how complete results of the program 4ey client team
timulate interest in training programs "op e-ecutives
9emonstrate accountability for client
e-penditures
All employees
7arket future training programs Prospective clients
includes the actual presence and actions of
individual e-ecutives in the process.
Business literature is laced with
e-amples of top e-ecutives taking active
roles. Andy Jrove! chairman of $ntel! sees
training and development as one of his key
responsibilities. Jack .elch! former
chairman of J5! devoted a prescribed
number of days per month at the J5
management development center in *ew
Iork. Bit Jates! 7icrosoft chairman!
conducts a portion of the orientation for new
employees as part of a rotating assignment
with senior e-ecutives.
Active roles by senior managers are
critical and can be accomplished in many
ways # ranging from minimal participation
to increased involvement in which specific
days are allocated to teaching. .hen
e-ecutives take a very visible role! others
will do the same. "his attitude filters
throughout the organi3ation and makes a big
difference.
"ailure to 0rovide
"eedback and =se
8nformation About
#esults! All
stakeholders need feedback. 5mployees
re2uire feedback on their progress!
[11]
developers and designers need feedback on
program design! facilitators need feedback
to see if
ad%ustments should be made to delivery! and
clients need feedback on a programs
success. .ithout such feedback! a program
may not reach e-pectations.
"he challenge is to provide a stream of
information! as data are collected! to a
variety of audiences 'ee (Dommon "arget
Audiences+ chart,. haring evaluation data
from 4irkpatricks levels 1&= can help refine
the training process. Aeaction data and
learning data can improve learning design
and facilitation. Application data should be
provided to those individuals implementing
the pros so that ad%ustments can be made.
And business impact data must be shared
with clients and others so that the entire
group can understand the value.
7ost importantly! the results may be
used to make ad%ustments in the design!
development! and delivery of the program.
"he routine communication of data serves as
a process improvement in making a
successful program more successful.
Donclusion
Dhances are! these 11 issues sound
familiar. 0rgani3ations must address them
all if training is to live up to e-pectations
and generate appropriate returns on
investment. .ith increased pressure to
show the payoff of the investment in
learning and education! failure cannot be
tolerated. Eailure can be prevented. 1sing
training and development results means
more than simply collecting data. "he
results&based training process must be
e-amined if training and development is to
be successful and respect in an organi3ation.
"he Authors
4A/> 4! 028LL80' is with A0$
$nstitute. Phillips developed and pioneered
the utili3ation of the A0$ process and has
provided consulting services to some of the
worlds largest organi3ations. Ce has written
over 16 books on the sub%ect. Phillips can
be reached at %ackKroiinstitute.net.
0A&#8/8A 0! 028LL80' is D50 of A0$
$nstitute! an international consulting
company focused on the implementation of
the A0$ Process. he has provided
consulting services and support for the A0$
process for several years and has served as
co&author on the topic in several
publications. he can be reached at
pattiKroiinstitute.net.