
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


Most organizations believe they evaluate training. In reality, they document it—after it's already too late to matter.
One of the biggest misconceptions we see is the belief that evaluation happens after training. Post-program surveys, completion reports, and dashboards are treated as proof of value. But by the time those data points appear, the most important decisions have already been made: goals were defined (or not), success was loosely interpreted, metrics were chosen without context, and environmental constraints were ignored.
When evaluation enters the process too late, it loses its power to influence performance. It can describe what happened—but it can't change what happens next.
True evaluation is not validation. It's sense-making. It's the discipline that forces clarity about what success actually looks like in real work, what behaviors must change, what systems will enable or block that change, and what leaders must do differently to support it. Without that clarity upfront, training becomes the default solution—even when the real issue is time, leadership behavior, broken systems, or unrealistic expectations.
In this episode, we challenge the industry's obsession with retrospective evaluation and make the case for moving evaluation to the beginning of the process—and wrapping it around the entire design and delivery lifecycle. We explore why activity metrics quietly erode credibility, how learning teams end up paying an "ignorance tax" for problems they didn't create, and why evaluation is the only lever learning functions truly own that can protect—and expand—their influence.
Takeaways:
Stop treating evaluation as proof; start using it as a decision tool.
Define success in observable behaviors and business metrics before design begins.
Identify environmental constraints early—or accept that performance won't change.
Document recommendations on record to avoid being blamed for systemic failures.
Use evaluation to influence leadership behavior, not just learner experience.
If evaluation feels disconnected from performance in your organization, it's likely because it's entering the conversation far too late.
🎧 Listen to the full episode and subscribe to the Kirkpatrick Podcast to continue rethinking how learning influences results.
Learn more about the Kirkpatrick Model
Watch the Show on YouTube!
Submit your Questions/Stories: Do you have a question you would like us to answer on the Kirkpatrick Podcast? Have a story about how the Kirkpatrick Podcast or other Kirkpatrick events/programs have positively impacted your career? We would love to hear from you! Follow this link to submit your questions and/or stories, and we may just share them on the next episode of the Kirkpatrick Podcast.
#KirkpatrickPodcast #LearningImpact #PerformanceImprovement #TrainingEvaluation #CultureOfEvaluation #KirkpatrickModel
By Kirkpatrick PartnersMost organizations believe they evaluate training. In reality, they document it—after it's already too late to matter.
One of the biggest misconceptions we see is the belief that evaluation happens after training. Post-program surveys, completion reports, and dashboards are treated as proof of value. But by the time those data points appear, the most important decisions have already been made: goals were defined (or not), success was loosely interpreted, metrics were chosen without context, and environmental constraints were ignored.
When evaluation enters the process too late, it loses its power to influence performance. It can describe what happened—but it can't change what happens next.
True evaluation is not validation. It's sense-making. It's the discipline that forces clarity about what success actually looks like in real work, what behaviors must change, what systems will enable or block that change, and what leaders must do differently to support it. Without that clarity upfront, training becomes the default solution—even when the real issue is time, leadership behavior, broken systems, or unrealistic expectations.
In this episode, we challenge the industry's obsession with retrospective evaluation and make the case for moving evaluation to the beginning of the process—and wrapping it around the entire design and delivery lifecycle. We explore why activity metrics quietly erode credibility, how learning teams end up paying an "ignorance tax" for problems they didn't create, and why evaluation is the only lever learning functions truly own that can protect—and expand—their influence.
Takeaways:
Stop treating evaluation as proof; start using it as a decision tool.
Define success in observable behaviors and business metrics before design begins.
Identify environmental constraints early—or accept that performance won't change.
Document recommendations on record to avoid being blamed for systemic failures.
Use evaluation to influence leadership behavior, not just learner experience.
If evaluation feels disconnected from performance in your organization, it's likely because it's entering the conversation far too late.
🎧 Listen to the full episode and subscribe to the Kirkpatrick Podcast to continue rethinking how learning influences results.
Learn more about the Kirkpatrick Model
Watch the Show on YouTube!
Submit your Questions/Stories: Do you have a question you would like us to answer on the Kirkpatrick Podcast? Have a story about how the Kirkpatrick Podcast or other Kirkpatrick events/programs have positively impacted your career? We would love to hear from you! Follow this link to submit your questions and/or stories, and we may just share them on the next episode of the Kirkpatrick Podcast.
#KirkpatrickPodcast #LearningImpact #PerformanceImprovement #TrainingEvaluation #CultureOfEvaluation #KirkpatrickModel