The most popular and influential framework for training evaluation is articulated by Kirkpatrick. Kirkpatrick argues that training efforts can be evaluated according to four criteria: reaction, learning, behavior, and results. Did the trainees like the program and feel it was valuable? Positive reactions to a training program may make it easier to encourage employees to attend future programs.

Did the trainees learn what the HRD objectives said they should learn? Measuring whether someone has learned something may involve a quiz or test—a different method from assessing the participants’ reaction to the program. Does the trainee use what was learned in training back on the job? If learning does not transfer to the job, the training effort cannot have an impact on employee or organizational effectiveness. Has the training improved the organization’s effectiveness? Is the organization more efficient, more profitable, or better able to serve its customers?

Meeting this criterion is considered the bottom line for most managers. Kirkpatrick’s framework provides a useful way of looking at the possible consequences of training and reminds us that HRD efforts often have multiple objectives. Findings about HRD evaluation show that organizations generally do not collect information on all four types of outcomes.