Learning & development ROIquantifying roi from training and development data
Trusted Data worked with a Telecoms client to help them better understand the impact and value of certain workforce training and development initiatives
Bringing new-found people insights across a 42,000 strong workforce
For a sustained period of time, training and development initiatives have been designed and delivered at an aggregate level, without effectively monitoring the performance impact on the Organisation.
Utilising data on training formats, investment and employee performance data, Trusted Data were able to commute critical insights for a client who had seen an average 4% annual increase in training spend over the previous 3 years.
A key issue for the client was, determining the value of specific training formats to help refine their training agenda and budgets.
Bringing data maturity to Training design & HR development
The Client currently had no analytical mechanism for establishing ROI on training investment.
Employees were primarily offered two distinct types of training/learning programs:
- Functional specialist training
- Personal career development training
Budgets had effectively been mapped out based on historic spend rather than what was adding value to the Organisation.
Trusted Data set out to answer the following:
- What is ROI against total investments
- Does the type of training make a difference on ROI
- Is the process effective for long term employee development
- How best to make systematic recommendations based on budget, group and format.
Trusted Data needed to scrutinise quarterly performance data to help drive requisite insights. This included 4 quarters of data prior to and after training delivery.
Payroll and training costs also needed to be mapped against training events before undertaking variance analysis on overall and control groups. This assisted Trusted Data to estimate Training ROI.
The result at an aggregated level showed zero ROI for the Client, as performance prior to and after training periods did not improve.
However, at control group levels – there was evidence of functional training being more effective, delivering a mean performance improvement of 7%.