International Journal of Research in Engineering, Science and Management 661

Volume-3, Issue-3, March-2020

www.ijresm.com | ISSN (Online): 2581-5792

An Analysis of Appropriate Training Effective

Evaluation System Followed in Hotels
Manjiri P. Joshi
Assistant Professor, Department of Hotel Management, Dr. D. Y. Patil Institute of Hotel management &
Catering Technology, Pune, India

Abstract: A business is interactive of Man, Material and Money. Training has increased in importance in today's environment
A management of man is very important and challenging job, where jobs are complex and change. Hotels that pay lip-service
because it is a job not of managing ‘MEN’, but of administrating to the need for training, by lazily setting aside a few hours a
a social system.
year, will soon find themselves at the receiving end when
Training as the organized procedure by which individuals learn
knowledge and/or skill for a definite purpose. Training improves talented employees leave in frustration and other employees
the quantity and quality of the workforce. It increases the skills find it difficult to beat rivals with new products, sophisticated
and knowledge base of the employees. An effective training makes designs and improved ways of selling. For, any organization
an employee more resourceful and productive. Effective training that stops injecting itself with intelligence is going to die.
is considered as an important factor in determining the efficiency
of an organization which depends upon the capability of its
2. Objectives of the study
employees. Assessment of training effectiveness is an essential
activity because it examines to what extent the gained knowledge  To find the various training evaluation models.
is actually transferred to the workplace.  To analyze the importance of effective training
This is descriptive paper comes under the category of general evaluation system.
review where appropriate training effective evaluation system is
followed. In final conclusive remark paper suggests the most
widely use training evaluation model in present scenario. 3. Literature review
Blanchard et al. (2000) he conducted a survey in Canada both
Keywords: Training, Training Evaluation, Evaluation Models, at management and non-management level, through this data
Hotel organization.
replicate that only one-fifth organization of Canada
evaluates training session.
1. Introduction
Griffin (2010) finds that there is a difference between
Today most organizations talk about measuring the organizations desires to evaluate training and the extent and
effectiveness of the training programs. While most traditional effectiveness of actual evaluation. He also anticipated a
institutions have mechanisms in place where they measure the productivity-based framework to focus data collection and the
effectiveness of the classroom training programs, most modern utilization of a metric to present results.
day training programs are still not evaluated objectively or Iyer, Pardiwalla & Bathia (2009) briefly sightsee the various
accurately. training evaluation method to understand the requirement of
Hotels, today, expend large amount of money on imparting training evaluation. The concept needs a well-framed
training and development practices. But prior to spending such evaluation model so that process of justifying investment as
vast amount, they should analyze the need for conducting well as bringing required modification in the training
training to the workforce. There are chances in which hotels can session can be done.
make mistakes if they are not assessing the training needs. An Smith (1990) observed that evaluation of management
employee, for sure, requires training when he is found to be not training courses is a subject much discussed
capable enough to meet the goals of the organization and when but, apparently carried out. The study finds that there is too
there is a gap between the current performance and expected much emphasize on providing an objective evaluation report
performance. Meagerness in recital occurs due to the lack of and too little focus on subjective and peculiar issues which do
sufficient knowledge and expertise, monotonous management not necessarily fit the frame.
or any other personal and official. But prior to spending such Hashim (2001) made the point that training evaluation hard
vast amount, they should analyze the need for conducting to define as a concept, and even harder when it comes to
training to the workforce. All these problems spotted can be practice. Bringing evaluation in practice has received a lot of
tackled by providing an effective training programme to the criticism. This criticism is largely due to the unsystematic,
right employee and at the right point of time. informal and ad-hoc evaluation that has been conducted by
 International Journal of Research in Engineering, Science and Management 662
Volume-3, Issue-3, March-2020
www.ijresm.com | ISSN (Online): 2581-5792

training institution. investment in training to be appraised which can help

Ogundejl (1991), Observed increasing impotence of to justify expenditure on future programmes.
evaluation and considering it as a powerful tool to enhance 2) It allows the effectiveness of differing approaches to
the effectiveness of training. The major role of training be compared.
evaluation is quality ascription, quality assessment and quality 3) It provides feedback for the trainers about their
control. performance and methods.
4) It enables improvements to be made, either on the next
4. Theoretical framework occasion, or if the evaluation is on-going, as the
training proceeds.
A. Hotel organization
5) Recording learning achievements can be motivational
A hotel is an establishment that provides paid lodging on a for learners.
short-term basis. The history and growth of the travel industry 6) The evaluation indicates to what extent the objectives
has not been linear; it has grown exponentially. Rapid have been met and therefore whether any further
technological advances have made a huge impact on the training needs remain.
industry in more ways than one. Hotel guests in the 21st century When to Evaluate (Process of evaluation)
may have different wants and needs to guests in the 18th There are three possible opportunities to undertake an
century, but the basic principles of the accommodation and evaluation:
hospitality industry have remained the same.
 Pre Training Evaluation: is a method of judging the
However, as circumstances surrounding the industry have
worth of a programme before the progrmame activities
changed, managing a hotel now requires extensive knowledge
begin. The objective of this evaluation is (a) To
of hotel and hospitality management. Knowing about business
determine the appropriateness of the context of
management, online marketing, review and revenue training activity and (b) To help in defining relevant
management and much more is indispensable to running a
training objectives.
successful establishment.
 Context and Input Evaluation: is a method of judging
B. Training the worth of a pogramme while the programme
In the words of Dale, I. Beach, “Training is the organised activities are happening. The objectives of this
procedure in which people learn knowledge and/or skill for evaluation are (a) To assess a training course or
definite purpose.” workshop as it progress (b) To find out the extent of
Training is vital part of every employee and manager. programme implementation and (c) To determine
“Training and Development means changing what employees improvement and adjustments needed to attain the
know, how they work, their attitudes toward their work, or their training objectives.
interaction with their co-workers or supervisors  Post Training Evaluation: is method of judging the
worth of a programme at the end of the programme
5. Training Evaluation activities. The focus is on the outcome. It tries to judge
whether the transfer of training to the job taken place
A. Evaluation or not.
An evaluation is a systematic determination of merit, worth, Improve business performance through training:
and significance of something or someone using criteria against The business environment is constantly changing, therefore
a set of benchmark standards. the knowledge and skills require for developments will also
Training evaluation can be defined as any attempt to obtain change. To compete with others, organization requires training
information (feedback) on the effects of training program and strategy which, where organization business wants to be and
to assess the value of training in the light of that information for identifies the training require getting there. Regular evaluations
improving further training. of completed training help in identify skill gaps in workforce
Evaluation of training can be viewed as a method of and take proactive steps to avoid the problem.
measuring change in knowledge, skills, attitudes, job Organization training strategy integrated with business
performance, costs and the quality of the training facilities. planning and employee development. The process of evaluation
A major reason to evaluate training programs is to determine is central to its effectiveness and helps to ensure that:
whether the training programs are accomplishing their specific  Whether training budget is well spent
training objectives. The process of training evaluation has been  To judge the performance of employee as individual
defined by A. C. Hamblin as “any attempt to obtain information and team.
on the effects of training performance and to assess the value of  To establish culture of continuous learning and
training in the light of that information”. improvement.
Why is the training evaluation required? All these problems spotted can be tackled by providing an
1) The evaluation enables the effectiveness of an effective training programme to the right employee and at the
 International Journal of Research in Engineering, Science and Management 663
Volume-3, Issue-3, March-2020
www.ijresm.com | ISSN (Online): 2581-5792

right point of time. evaluator collects data at one time but asks for recall of
behavior or conditions prior to, as well as after, the
6. Approaches to Evaluation of Training intervention or program.
Six general approaches to educational evaluation can be  One-Group Pretest-Posttest Design. The evaluator gathers
identified (Bramley, 1991; Worthen & Sanders, 1987), as data prior to and following the intervention or program
follows: being evaluated.
 Goal-based evaluation  Time Series Design. The evaluator gathers data prior to,
 Goal-free evaluation during, and after the implementation of an intervention or
 Responsive evaluation program.
 Systems evaluation  Pretest-Posttest Control-Group Design. The evaluator
 Professional review gathers data on two separate groups prior to and following
an intervention or program. One group, typically called the
 Quasi-legal
experimental or treatment group, receives the intervention.
Goal-based and systems based approaches are predominantly
The other group, called the control group, does not receive
used in the evaluation of training (Philips, 1991). Various
the intervention.
frameworks for evaluation of training programs have been
proposed under the influence of these two approaches. The  Posttest-Only Control-Group Design. The evaluator collects
most influential framework has come from Kirkpatrick data from two separate groups following an intervention or
(Carnevale & Schulz, 1990; Dixon, 1996; Gordon, 1991; program. One group, typically called the experimental or
Philips, 1991, 1997). Kirkpatrick’s work generated a great deal treatment group, receives the intervention or program, while
of subsequent work (Bramley, 1996; Hamblin, 1974; Warr et the other group, typically called the control group, and does
al., 1978). Kirkpatrick’s model (1959) follows the goal-based not receive the intervention. Data are collected from both of
evaluation approach and is based on four simple questions that these groups only after the intervention.
translate into four levels of evaluation. These four levels are Case Study Design. When evaluations are conducted for the
widely known as reaction, learning, behavior, and results. On purpose of understanding the program’s context, participants’
the other hand, under the systems approach, the most influential perspectives, the inner dynamics of situations, and questions
models include: Context, Input, Process, Product (CIPP) Model related to participants’ experiences, and where generalization is
(Worthen & Sanders, 1987); Training Validation System (TVS) not a goal, a case study design, with an emphasis on the
Approach (Fitz-Enz, 1994); and Input, Process, Output, collection of qualitative data, might be most appropriate. Case
Outcome (IPO) Model (Bushnell, 1990). studies involve in-depth descriptive data collection and analysis
Goal-based evaluation begins with goals in mind and seeks of individuals, groups, systems, processes, or organizations. In
to determine if those goals were achieved; particular, the case study design is most useful when you want
Goal-free evaluation does not seek to confirm or deny a pre- to answer how and why questions and when there is a need to
determined outcome or goal. Rather, it seeks to discover any understand the particulars, uniqueness, and diversity of the
benefits that result from the intervention; case.
Responsive evaluation is an approach that it is based on client Below Table presents a comparison of several system-based
requirements. This can present unique challenges for the models (CIPP, IPO, & TVS) with a goal-based model
evaluator, but it is a common approach; (Kirkpatrick’s). Goal-based models (such as Kirkpatrick’s four
The systems approach to evaluation focuses on whether the levels) may help practitioners think about the purposes of
intervention was efficient and effective; evaluation ranging from purely technical to covertly political
Professional review evaluation uses external expert appraisal purpose. However, these models do not define the steps
to evaluate instead of other commonly used and accepted necessary to achieve purposes and do not address the ways to
methods; utilize results to improve training.
The quasi-legal approach is infrequently practiced, but is On the other hand, systems-based models (e.g., CIPP, IPO,
uses an actual court-of inquiry format to present evidence, take and TVS) seem to be more useful in terms of thinking about the
testimonials, and evaluate an intervention or product. overall context and situation but they may not provide sufficient
granularity. Systems-based models may not represent the
A. Evaluation designs dynamic interactions between the design and the evaluation of
The following are brief descriptions of the most commonly training. Few of these models provide detailed descriptions of
used evaluation (and research) designs. the processes involved in each steps. None provide tools for
 One-Shot Design. In using this design, the evaluator gathers evaluation. Furthermore, these models do not address the
data following an intervention or program. For example, a collaborative process of evaluation, that is, the different roles
survey of participants might be administered after they and responsibilities that people may play during an evaluation
complete a workshop. process.
 Retrospective Pretest. As with the one-shot design, the
 International Journal of Research in Engineering, Science and Management 664
Volume-3, Issue-3, March-2020
www.ijresm.com | ISSN (Online): 2581-5792
Table 1
Goal-based and systems-based approaches to evaluation
Kirkpatrick (1959) CIPP Model (1987) IPO Model (1990) TVS Model (1994)
1. Reaction: to gather data on 1. Context: obtaining 1. Input: evaluation of system 1. Situation: collecting pre-training
participants reactions at the end of a information about the situation performance indicators such as data to ascertain current levels of
training program to decide on educational needs trainee qualifications, availability of performance within the organization
and to establish program materials, appropriateness of and defining a desirable level of
objectives training, etc. future performance
2. Learning: to assess whether the 2. Input: identifying educational 2. Process: embraces planning, 2. Intervention: identifying the reason
learning objectives for the program are strategies most likely to achieve design, development, and delivery of for the existence of the gap between
met the desired result training programs the present and desirable
performance to find out if training is
the solution to the problem
3. Behavior: to assess whether job 3. Process: assessing the 3. Output: Gathering data resulting 3. Impact: evaluating the difference
performance changes as a result of implementation of the from the training interventions between the pre- and post-training
training educational program data
4. Results: to assess costs vs. benefits of 4. Product: gathering 4. Outcomes: longer-term results 4. Value: measuring differences in
training programs, i.e., organizational information regarding the results associated with improvement in the quality, productivity, service, or
impact in terms of reduced costs, of the educational intervention corporation’s bottom line- its sales, all of which can be expressed
improved quality of work, increased to interpret its worth and merit profitability, competitiveness, etc. in terms of dollars
quantity of work, etc.

7. Method of evaluation 9. Results and Discussion

Various methods can be used to collect data on the outcomes The primary data collected through the questionnaire was
of training. Some of these are: analysed by percentage method and the representation was done
Questionnaires: Comprehensive questionnaires could be in graphical form. The data was analysed as per the responses
used to obtain opinion reactions, views of trainees. obtained from the respondents and interpreted to draw the
Tests: Standard tests could be used to find out whether conclusions. The results obtained from the data collected
trainees have learnt anything during and after the training. through the Hotel Employees are as follows.,
Interviews: Interviews could be conducted to find the
usefulness of training offered to operatives.
Studies: Comprehensive studies could be carried out eliciting
the opinions and judgments of trainers, superiors and peer
groups about the training.
Human resource factors: Training can also be evaluated on
the basis of employee satisfaction, which in turn can be
examined on the basis of decrease in employee turnover,
absenteeism, accidents, grievances, discharges, dismissals, etc.
Cost benefit analysis: The costs of training (cost of hiring
trainers, tools to learn training centre, wastage, production
stoppage, opportunity cost of trainers and trainees) could be
compared with its value (in terms of reduced learning time
improved learning, superior performance) in order to evaluate
a training programme.
Feedback: After the evaluation, the situation should be
examined to identify the probable causes for gaps in
performance. The training evaluation information. (about costs,
time spent, outcomes, etc.) should be provided to the 10. Conclusion
instructors’ trainees and other parties concerned for control, Efficiency and effectiveness are two critical issues in
correction and improvement of trainees’ activities. The training evaluation. While multiple strategies can be used to gather
evaluator should follow it up sincerely so as to ensure effective evaluation information, realistically there is a limit on the
implementation of the feedback report at every stage. amount of time most organizers and trainers have for
evaluation. In addition, repeat demands for feedback from
8. Research methodology training participants can have a negative effect on their view of
The study sample comprised of 100 employees of 5 hotel the learning experience. The goal is to focus on what are the
organizations from Pimpri-Chinchawad region. The data is most important outcomes to document.
collected through a questionnaire consists of 8 questions. All This focus helps to assure that efficient information gathering
questions are close ended questions. The questionnaire was centres on the results that have the greatest impact on improving
filled from all levels of management. training. Evaluation of training addresses both learning and the
 International Journal of Research in Engineering, Science and Management 665
Volume-3, Issue-3, March-2020
www.ijresm.com | ISSN (Online): 2581-5792

quality of training. Determining what works, i.e., best practices, [4] Hamblin, A. (1974). Evaluation and Control of Training. Maidenhead:
McGraw-Hill.
is a desirable result of the evaluation process. During the [5] Holton, E. F. (1996). The flawed four-level evaluation model. Human
evaluation process, information on desired training or future resource development quarterly, 7(1), 5-21.
learning needs also can be collected. This needs assessment [6] Kaufman, R., Keller, J., & Watkins, R. (1995). What works and what
doesn’t: Evaluation beyond Kirkpatrick. Performance and Instruction,
component adds value to the evaluation process.
35(2): 8-12. 12.
[7] https://www.completelearning.co.nz/wp-
References content/uploads/2012/03/Measuring-ROI-The-Fifth-Level-of-
Evaluation3.pdf13.
[1] Alliger, G., & Janak, E. (1989). Kirkpatrick's levels of training criteria:
[8] Dick, Walter. (2002). Chapter 11 Evaluation in instructional design: The
thirty years later. Personnel Psychology, 331-342.
impact of kirkpatrick’s four-level model. In Robert Reiser & John
[2] Blanchard, P. N., Thacker, J. W., & Way, S. A. (2000). Training
Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology
evaluation: perspectives and evidence from Canada. International Journal
(pp. 145-153). Prentice Hall.
of Training and Development, 295-304.
[9] Kaufman, R., Keller, J. & Watkins, R. (1995). What works and what
[3] Goldstein, & Ford. (2002). Training in Organizations. Belmont, CA.:
doesn’t: Evaluation Beyond Kirkpatrick. Performance and Instruction,
Thomsan Wadsworth.
35(2), 8-12.