I'd take a hard look at George Roth's and Art Kliener's Learning
Histories. The AutoCo case I quoted last month was a learning history.
George Roth has published a Learning Histories methodology on the MIT
site
http://learning.mit.edu/res/wp/18004.html
Rol Fessenden wrote:
> Chris S is asking how one can measure a corporate learning program. I
> take it from his comments that the company has had a bad financial year,
> and management is re-evaluating the relevance of the
> training/learning/empowerment efforts. Chris needs to know how to evaluate
> a learning program without connecting the learning to bottom-line results.
>
> This is parallel to the questions being asked in the "Wheatley Dialog" in
> that he is looking for a high-level assessment or analysis tool that does
> not use reductionist methods. Look at the whole, not the bits and pieces.
>
> You may not like this, but I think you have to ask your clients
> specifically what the learning program has done to make them better at
> doing whatever they are charged with doing. If a manager has had staff
> pass through the program and cannot identify any gains, then there is a
> question about what the training is doing. If, on the other hand, a
> manager can define clearly why the training program benefited the
> performance of the group through improving the performance of individuals
> or teams, then you have clear evidence of how the program contributes.
>
> Efforts such as the Wheatley Dialog may ultimately provide some direction
> on the higher level perspective, but until then, you will have to get
> feedback from those whose staff has undergone training.
-- Ben Compton The Accidental Learning Group Work: (801) 222-6178 Improving Business through Science and Art bcompton@geocities.com http://www.e-ad.com/ben/BEN.HTMLearning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>