Kirkpatrick Performance Model and Performance Formula Applied to Business and Government

To understand whether someone has successful achieve their training goals is dependent on their ability to incorporate key concepts into deep learning where they create noticeable change of action/behavior. It makes no difference if we are talking about a company training situation (something like a small start up) or a large group (even as large as governmental entities/bodies). Learning occurs whether or not we are training or not however training is often more focused in an effort to create competitive competencies. A solid tool is Kirkpatrick's Performance Model to help formulate a method of review to ensure meaningful learning is occurring.

You can read a book that discusses the basic executive and leadership model 1. Reaction, 2. Learning, 3.Behavior, 4. Results HERE. 

Performance can come in many different levels but sometimes putting them into a formula can help. Three variables used in the Performance Formula 1.) Ability-capacity to perform the job individually or collectively. KSA; 2.) Motivation-Willingness to perform the job; 3.) Environment-environmental issues such as systems, co workers, politics, resources, etc. 

You can look at a formula that sort of describes how this functions.

The Performance Formula

Performance = f(KSAs × M × E)

KSAs = Ability; M = Motivation; E = Environment

f=function of

Sometimes its easiest to use an example. Let us say we are dealing with a challenge (i.e. a new market competitors, international conflict, complex decision making, etc...). We would need people who have the knowledge, skills and abilities to overcome the challenge, the motivation to overcome the challenge, and the proper environment to overcome those challenges. If any of these factors are not present, there will be difficulty in developing to full capacity and increased risk of failure.

There are many ways that training development can be derailed and lead to lower overall organizational performance. If we have narrowly relied on inappropriate KSA (i.e. nepotism versus inherent ability) then we would be limited in the first variable, if the motivations are wrong (i.e. self seeking versus organizational mission) then we aren't likely to gain the collective effort (or it will be derailed into improper uses.), and the environment (policies, structure, pressures, etc... that can derail efforts).

When any of these components/variables are missing/weak we run into an issue of inability/ineptitude. That creates problems because we are unable to overcome challenges unless we start to learn the skills (in comparison to non learning organizations), create the motivations (i.e. performance = rewards), and the development of environments/systems that are more conducive to success. Its a process that moves beyond "big attitudes" within the company/organization.

I can say that being able to overcome environmental challenges and threats takes focus and constantly building capacity. Some organizations do this because they develop learning institutions around core values and principles. Those that don't eventually collapse as the cost of internal transactions rise through derailed effort and lost opportunity. Leadership within a growing organization can help put together the pieces/factors that lead to environmental master but must always move toward higher levels of macro perform through shared principles and effort. 

“The purpose of education is to free the student from the tyranny of the present.”- Cicero