Hello friend,
Training can be evaluated in monetary terms. I am familiar with two methods:
1. HRV (Human Resources Value) method
2. DIF (Difficulty, Importance, Frequency) analysis
The first method is simple and can be explained as follows:
Step 1: Create the Performance Grid for each employee
The Performance Grid is a matrix combining two factors: competency and commitment. It is expressed graphically, with competency on the horizontal axis and commitment on the vertical axis. The values range from zero to 100 as a percentage.
Let's assume we want to create the performance grid for employee A. His supervisor needs to indicate where he is positioned in terms of competency and commitment. Let's assume these values are 60 and 70. The average grid value is therefore (60 + 70) / 2 = 65%.
Step 2: Calculate Human Resource Value (HRV)
HRV = Average employee cost x grid value
Employee cost is the total cost of maintaining the services of the employee at current rates. For A, the employee cost is Rs.1.2 lakh per annum. Therefore, the average employee cost is Rs.10,000. Hence, HRV for A = 10,000 x 65% = Rs.6,500. This means that even though we are paying Rs.10,000 to maintain A, we are getting only Rs.6,500 value from him.
Step 3: Send A for training to improve gaps in competency.
Step 4: Make a fresh performance grid after training and calculate HRV. Assume that after training, his supervisor assesses him at 70 on competency and 80 on commitment; the average grid value becomes 75%. New HRV after training = 10,000 x 75% = Rs.7,500.
Step 5: Calculate the incremental increase in HRV after training. In this case, 7,500 - 6,500 = Rs.1,000. This incremental increase represents the ROI on training for A. Taken for a whole group, it gives the ROI for that particular training program.
Step 6: Calculate, in the above manner, the ROI for all the training programs in a calendar year to give the total value.
The above scheme is ideally suited for a small organization where these calculations could be effectively done. Success depends on how well the supervisors evaluate the performance of their subordinates. The scheme has a subjective element in the evaluation process, so the values obtained need not be considered accurate but as trend values useful for our contextual purpose. The whole scheme, even with subjective errors discounted, provides a tangible indicator regarding the effectiveness of training.
I hope this is of use to you.
Best wishes,
Rajeev.V