Evaluating Training ROI for a Leadership Development Program
A manufacturing company launched a 6-month leadership development program for 30 supervisors. The program cost $150,000 (including external facilitators, materials, and lost productivity). The goal was to improve employee engagement and reduce turnover, which was 25% in the first year for new hires. Post-program, engagement scores in participating departments rose from 3.2 to 3.8 on a 5-point scale, and turnover dropped to 18%. However, the HR director is skeptical: 'How do we know it was the training? Other factors could be at play.' The CFO wants a cost-benefit analysis. The training team has data: pre/post engagement surveys, turnover rates, and production metrics (scrap rate decreased from 5% to 4%).
1. What evaluation design would you use to isolate the impact of the training? Explain how you would address the HR director's concern.
Read the worked answer
To isolate impact, I would use a quasi-experimental design with a comparison group. Since random assignment wasn't possible, I'd identify a similar group of supervisors who didn't attend (e.g., in a different plant or on a waitlist) and compare pre/post changes. I would also use a time-series analysis to see trends before and after. To address the HR director's concern, I'd gather qualitative data (interviews with supervisors and their teams) and check for confounding variables (e.g., economic changes, new HR policies). Additionally, I'd calculate the effect size and use a control chart for turnover. If no comparison group is available, I'd use a pre-post with trend analysis and note limitations. The key is to triangulate data sources and be transparent about attribution. I would also involve the HR director in interpreting results to build buy-in.
2. Calculate a basic ROI for the program using the turnover reduction. Assume the cost to replace a supervisor is 50% of their annual salary ($60,000), and the program reduced turnover by 7 percentage points (from 25% to 18%) among 30 supervisors. Show your work and discuss assumptions.
Read the worked answer
First, calculate the number of turnovers avoided: 30 supervisors * 7% reduction = 2.1 turnovers avoided. (Note: this is an estimate; actual turnover may not be exactly proportional.) Cost per turnover avoided = 50% of $60,000 = $30,000. Total benefit = 2.1 * $30,000 = $63,000. Program cost = $150,000. Net benefit = $63,000 - $150,000 = -$87,000 (negative). ROI = (Net benefit / Cost) * 100 = (-87,000 / 150,000) * 100 = -58%. This suggests the program did not pay off in the first year from turnover alone. However, assumptions: turnover reduction may not be solely due to training; benefits may accrue over multiple years; other benefits like scrap reduction (5% to 4% on production) could add value. For example, if scrap reduction saves $200,000 annually, ROI becomes positive. I would present a multi-year projection and include all benefits. Also, the cost of turnover includes recruitment, training, and lost productivity, which may be higher than 50% of salary. So the ROI could be understated. I would recommend a more comprehensive analysis.