Reference no: EM132983354
CASE STUDY
Through mergers and acquisitions, BP, a global energy organisation, more than doubled in size in just 4 years. By the end of 2007, BP had more than 97 600 employees working in more than 100 countries throughout the world. BP service stations are familiar entities, but BP is also involved in the exploration and production of crude oil and natural gas, in refining, marketing, supply and transportation, in the manufacture and marketing of petrochemicals and in solar power generation.
BP had more than 35 leadership development programs occurring throughout the world. Some of these programs were good, others were poor. As a result, BP developed a new program that was designed to provide a common understanding of what it meant to be a leader in BP. The most diverse population of leaders at BP are the 10 000 First Level Leaders (FLLs). These employees work in every BP business including retail operations, chemical plants, and refineries and drilling platforms. They also lead different numbers of employees. Some lead teams of more than 10 employees, others work with just a few employees in functional areas such as research and development. Despite the FLLs' differences, the decisions the FLLs make influence BP's turnover, costs, quality, safety, innovation and environmental performance. The FLLs lead approximately 80 000 employees. The First Level Leaders Development Program was launched in 2002, based on information gathered in needs assessments using telephone interviews and meetings with FLLs. The program included a four day leadership course that focused on how to lead teams, on the role of FLLs and on expectations of leaders in BP. E-learning modules were used for helping FLLs gain and understanding of safety, health and security legislation, ethics and financial decisions. A two-and-a-half day course focused on performance goals, BP's organisation structure, an understanding of the BP brand and BP's global and regional strategy.
BP took several steps to determine whether the training was effective. After they had completed the program, FLLs filled out questionnaires to indicate how satisfied they were with the program. The first data on the success of the program was positive. Course participants reported 84% satisfaction with the course, the program was delivered at less cost than expected, course demand was higher than expected and senior-level leaders at BP were actively involved with the program. However, despite the positive evaluation, BP wanted to develop a way to measure the organisation-wide impact of the program. BP took a number of actions to show that the time and money invested in the program related to BP's bottom line performance. First, in-depth telephone interviews identified the key behaviours that were expected to be changed by the program. The key behaviours were grouped into seven categories: organisational awareness, interpersonal skills, communication skills, confidence and self-awareness, management skills, leadership skills and team performance. Next, telephone interviews and online surveys asked FLLs' subordinates and managers to evaluate the FLLs' performance in each category. FLLs who had attended the leadership program received rating 14% higher than did FLLs who had not attended. The telephone interviews provided stories of FLLs putting what they learnt in the leadership program to good use. These stories were used for showing the benefits of the program to senior BP leaders and for marketing the program to business units. Another evaluation conducted a year later showed similar results. The direct reports and managers again reported better performance on every behavioural category for FLLs who attended the leadership development program compared with FLLs who did not attend. Given the large number of customers, vendors and direct reports influenced by FLLs, the positive changes in behaviours as a result of the program are likely having a positive impact on customer satisfaction, on direct reports' satisfaction and on vendor relations. The next step is to put a dollar value on these types of improvements.
QUESTIONS:
- Define evaluation (see Buckley & Caple 2009).
- Use Kirkpatrick's model of evaluation to assess BP's approach to training effectiveness. In other words, can you identify the four Kirkpatrick levels in their evaluation strategy? Comment on the lengths the organisation went to in order to evaluate the training.
- According to Buckley and Caple (2009, p. 208), why is the process of validating the effectiveness of training so often ignored?