BUSI 644 Week 4 Discussion Board Forum 2 Example

Discussion Board Forum 2

BUSI 644 Human Resources Development, Discussion Board Forum 2 (thread and 2 replies)

Thread by [Student Name]

The forum prompt, the accounting firm and the two classmates' threads are composites standing in for the course's own; the textbook, Scripture and research cited are real, and the requirements follow Liberty's public course guide for BUSI 644.

Thread

At my accounting firm, every continuing education course ends with the same form: five questions on whether the instructor was engaging, the room was comfortable and the course was enjoyable. The forms come back with high scores, and the firm concludes that its training works. No one asks whether anything changed on client files afterward. Werner and DeSimone (2017) would call this an evaluation stuck at the first of Kirkpatrick's four levels, and the chapter suggests that it tells us much less than we assume.

Research supports that caution. Alliger et al. (1997) conducted a meta-analysis of studies that measured more than one level of training outcome. They divided reactions into affective reactions, whether trainees liked the training, and utility reactions, whether trainees judged it useful for their jobs. Utility reactions were more strongly related to learning and to on-the-job performance than affective reactions, and they predicted transfer better than even immediate learning measures did. A course can be enjoyable and useless, and the standard form cannot tell the difference.

A fuller evaluation of our firm's courses would add a measure at each level, using data the firm mostly collects already. Reactions would ask utility questions, such as "Which part of this course will you use on a client file next month?" Learning would be measured with a short case problem before and after each technical course, for example a lease accounting update, so that the firm sees the gain rather than only the final score. Behavior would be checked by reviewing a sample of each trainee's client files three months later for the new treatment. Results would be tracked through review notes and corrections on engagements, which the firm already records but never links to training. If lease-related review notes fall in the quarter after the course, the partners have evidence worth more than any satisfaction score. None of these measures requires new software; the files, review notes and quiz scores already exist, and what is missing is the decision to connect them.

The chapter also notes that stronger designs, such as comparing trained staff with a group not yet trained, give more confidence that changes come from the training. Our firm could train half its staff in the first quarter and the rest in the second, which creates a natural comparison without denying anyone the course. Proverbs observes that a wise person listens and adds to learning (English Standard Version Bible, 2001/2016, Proverbs 1:5); measuring whether learning is applied is how an organization listens to its own training.

Reply to Alicia

Alicia, your thread laid out a new onboarding plan for the dental practice where you manage the front office: a first-day welcome, a week of shadowing and a checklist of systems to learn. I think the plan covers the information new hires need, and research suggests one more element would strengthen it.

Bauer et al. (2007) meta-analyzed 70 samples of newcomers and modeled newcomer adjustment as three things, understanding the role, confidence in performing it and a sense of belonging among coworkers, and found that this adjustment linked both the organization's socialization tactics and newcomers' own questions to outcomes such as job satisfaction, commitment, performance, intention to stay and turnover. Your shadowing week builds the first two well, since new hires see how the schedule, billing and patient check-in actually work and try them with a coworker nearby. Social acceptance is less visible in the plan. Werner and DeSimone (2017) note that orientation programs often focus on paperwork and procedures and neglect the social side of joining an organization.

At a small practice, social acceptance can be built cheaply: assign each new hire a peer buddy who is not their supervisor, schedule lunch with the hygienists in the first week and introduce the newcomer by name at the morning huddle. Those steps cost little and address the part of adjustment most likely to determine whether a new receptionist is still with you in six months. A short check-in at thirty and ninety days, asking the newcomer what is still unclear and whom they feel comfortable asking for help, would show whether the plan is working. How has turnover among your front-office staff looked over the past two years?

Reply to Grant

Grant, your thread made a strong case and argued that your manufacturing company should calculate return on investment for every training program, so that HRD competes for budget on the same terms as new equipment. I agree that HRD should speak the language of results, especially in a manufacturing company where every other budget request arrives with a payback period, and Werner and DeSimone (2017) present utility analysis and ROI as ways to express training's value in financial terms.

I would add a caution about the word "every." An ROI study requires isolating the training's effect from other changes, converting outcomes to dollars and tracking costs carefully, which can take more effort than a short program is worth. The textbook suggests matching the depth of evaluation to the program's cost and importance. A two-year supervisory academy deserves an ROI study; a one-hour safety refresher may need only a learning check and incident tracking. Another option is to run a full ROI study on one representative program each year and use its results to estimate the value of similar programs, which spreads the cost of measurement across many decisions.

In one of His parables, a builder who lays a foundation and then runs out of money becomes the town's joke, so Jesus urged listeners to tally the expense of a tower before breaking ground (English Standard Version Bible, 2001/2016, Luke 14:28). The same stewardship applies to evaluation itself: counting the cost of measurement before committing to it. Which of your company's programs would you choose for the first ROI study, and who would collect the data?

References

Alliger, G. M., Tannenbaum, S. I., Bennett, W., Jr., Traver, H., & Shotland, A. (1997). A meta-analysis of the relations among training criteria. Personnel Psychology, 50(2), 341-358. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1997.tb00911.x

Bauer, T. N., Bodner, T., Erdogan, B., Truxillo, D. M., & Tucker, J. S. (2007). Newcomer adjustment during organizational socialization: A meta-analytic review of antecedents, outcomes, and methods. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(3), 707-721. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.3.707

English Standard Version Bible. (2016). Crossway. (Original work published 2001)

Werner, J. M., & DeSimone, R. L. (2017). Human resource development (7th ed.). Cengage Learning.