Evaluate Learning Effectiveness by Establishing a Chain of Evidence

Creating a chain of evidence can help demonstrate the value of a learning and development program. With Kirkpatrick’s Levels of Evaluation, you can link the results achieved at each level of evaluation in order to establish the big picture outcome. 

A chain of evidence shows the organizational value of the entire business partnership effort through quantitative and qualitative data that sequentially connect the four levels and show the ultimate contribution of learning and reinforcement to the business.

The central point of the model is the chain – the stories that can be told by looking at each set of evidence and how it links to other sets of evidence. Evidence is gleaned from (1) learner engagement, (2) learner change and performance, and (3) business impact.

Here’s how you build the chain of evidence –

First, assess learning delivery. Did the learning reached its intended audience? Did learners connect to it? Did learners engage? Did they react positively? Where the methods used successful in reaching learners?

Second, check of learner engagement resulted in a change in the learner’s performance. Consider if behaviors have changed – Has there been a measurable shift in their learning? Has the learner actually applied the learning through new or different behaviors? In this link of the chain, we are looking at capabilities and attitudes—which could be the most critical step in the chain of evidence method.

Finally, determine to what extent has the learning made the impact—at a business level. Here, you are seeking to measure changes in organization performance that result from learners applying their new learning to the workplace. Evidence you are looking for here include changes in output, improvement in employee productivity, changes in customer satisfaction, etc.

When not implemented properly, false correlations can happen. If you don’t look at the evidence and follow the chain to seek further evidence to tell the full story, you run the risk of falling back on assumptions and easy-to-make, but invalid correlations. No model is a substitute for curiosity; the chain of evidence that the Kirkpatrick Evaluation Model enables puts the power of curiosity and evidence at its core.