Evaluating the effectiveness of training of managerial and non-managerial bank employees using Kirkpatrick's model for evaluation of training

Employee training is crucial for optimizing productivity and meeting customer satisfaction in the competitive Indian banking sector, particularly given recent challenges like deregulation, demonetization, digitalization, and bank consolidation. Evaluating training effectiveness is paramount, and Kirkpatrick's four-level model offers a structured approach. This study aims to assess the impact of training programs on managerial and non-managerial employees in Indian banks using Kirkpatrick's model. The research seeks to understand the relationships between the four levels of the model (Reaction, Learning, Behavior, and Results) and to determine if the model effectively evaluates training impact on employee motivation and bank performance, considering differences between managerial and non-managerial staff. The study will analyze the impact of various training methods (on-the-job, off-the-job, and special training) and the influence of factors such as digitalization, demonetization, job enrichment, and bank consolidation on employee behavior and performance. The ultimate goal is to develop a framework for evaluating and improving training programs in the Indian banking sector.

Existing literature highlights the importance of systematic and integrated training in the banking sector. Kirkpatrick's model has been widely used to evaluate training effectiveness across various sectors, although its application in the Indian banking context is limited. Studies show the model's success in assessing knowledge transfer and behavioral changes. However, criticisms include the difficulty and time-consuming nature of higher-level evaluations. This study addresses this gap by applying Kirkpatrick's model comprehensively, focusing on its four levels, to evaluate the impact of training in the Indian banking sector, considering both managerial and non-managerial staff and differentiating training types.

This study used a quantitative research design employing a structured questionnaire administered to 402 employees from public, private, and foreign sector banks in India. The sample included branch heads, assistant managers, regional heads, senior managers, associates, probationary officers, clerks, and chief managers, categorized into managerial and non-managerial levels. Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) was employed to analyze the data and test the hypothesized relationships between the four levels of Kirkpatrick's model. The model assessed the relationships between Reactions, Learning (measured using the Balanced Scorecard's four perspectives: financial, customer, internal business process, and growth), Behavior (considering the impact of digitalization, demonetization, job enrichment, and bank consolidation), and Results (employee motivation and bank performance). Construct reliability and validity were assessed using Cronbach's alpha, composite reliability, and average variance extracted (AVE), and discriminant validity was assessed using the Fornell-Larcker criterion and HTMT ratios. Variance inflation factors (VIFs) were used to check for multicollinearity among the indicators. The study tested seven main hypotheses and several sub-hypotheses related to the interrelationships between the different levels of Kirkpatrick's model for both managerial and non-managerial employees.

The PLS-SEM analysis revealed strong support for the hypotheses. For managerial employees, the model explained 73.2% of the variance in results (R² = 0.732). Reactions to training significantly influenced learning, learning significantly influenced behavioral changes, and behavioral changes significantly impacted results. The results further suggested that managerial employees showed greater effectiveness in adapting to changes related to demonetization, digitalization, and job enrichment compared to non-managerial employees. In contrast, for non-managerial employees, the model explained 57.1% of the variance in results (R² = 0.571). Similar positive and significant relationships were observed between the four levels of Kirkpatrick's model, but the overall effect size was smaller compared to the managerial level. Both managerial and non-managerial employees exhibited different reactions to on-the-job, off-the-job, and special training. Off-the-job training showed the highest loading for non-managerial employees, while on-the-job training was more prominent for managerial employees. Special training requires improvement for both levels. The findings also indicated that both managerial and non-managerial employees showed better adaptation to digitalization and job enrichment compared to demonetization and bank consolidation, indicating a need for more targeted training in these areas.

The findings confirm the applicability and effectiveness of Kirkpatrick's model for evaluating training programs in the Indian banking sector. The strong relationships between the four levels suggest that improving employee reactions to training can positively influence their learning, behavior, and ultimately, the overall results. The significant difference in effectiveness between managerial and non-managerial employees highlights the importance of tailoring training programs to the specific needs and roles of different employee groups. The findings related to the impact of demonetization, digitalization, job enrichment, and bank consolidation on employee behavior suggest that training programs should explicitly address these dynamic aspects of the banking environment. The study emphasizes the need for continuous improvement and adjustment of training programs to align with the evolving needs of the banking industry.

This study provides valuable insights into the effectiveness of training programs for bank employees in India using Kirkpatrick’s four-level model. The findings emphasize the importance of a comprehensive training approach that considers the specific needs of different employee groups, addresses the dynamic challenges of the banking sector, and focuses on continuous improvement. Future research could explore the long-term effects of training, examine the impact of different training methodologies, and investigate the role of other factors such as organizational culture and leadership support on training effectiveness. Larger-scale studies with diverse samples are also warranted to enhance the generalizability of these findings.

The study's limitations include its reliance on self-reported data, which may be subject to biases. The cross-sectional nature of the study limits the ability to establish causal relationships between training and outcomes. The sample, while relatively large, might not be fully representative of the entire Indian banking sector. Future studies should consider a longitudinal design to assess long-term impacts and employ multiple data sources to enhance the reliability and validity of the findings.