Why Everyone Loved the Workshop and Nothing Changed
Five levels of evaluation, and why good feedback doesn’t always mean good results.
4.6 out of 5. Twenty-eight respondents. Three people said the facilitator was engaging. One complained about the lunch.
Sounds like a successful workshop, doesn’t it?
I’ve presented reports like these before, and everyone seemed happy with the results. High ratings, positive comments, good attendance. What more could we ask for?
Quite a lot, actually.
Because all we really know is that people enjoyed the workshop. We don’t know whether they learnt anything useful, let alone whether they went back to work and did something differently.
This is where Jack Phillips’ Five Levels of Evaluation comes in. He built on Kirkpatrick’s original four levels and added a fifth, looking at return on investment (ROI).
The five levels are quite straightforward:
Level 1: Reaction. Did people find the workshop useful and enjoyable?
Level 2: Learning. Did they actually learn something?
Level 3: Behaviour. Are they applying what they learnt?
Level 4: Results. Has their learning made a difference to the organisation?
Level 5: ROI. Was the financial return worth the investment?
In many L&D teams, we are pretty good at measuring Level 1. We send out feedback forms, calculate the average scores, and put together a nice report. Sometimes we measure Level 2 through quizzes or assessments.
But what happens after that?
Learning something doesn’t mean using it
I think this is where we sometimes get a little too comfortable with our evaluation reports.
Someone attends a leadership workshop and learns how to give constructive feedback. They understand the model, practise it during the session, and even score well on the assessment.
Great.
But three months later, are they actually having better conversations with their staff?
Maybe. Maybe not.
Perhaps their manager never followed up. Perhaps they returned to a mountain of emails and urgent deadlines. Or perhaps they simply went back to doing things the way they always had.
That is the gap between Level 2 and Level 3.
And it is an important one because learning does not automatically lead to behaviour change.
People need opportunities to practise, encouragement from their managers, and sometimes a little push to try something new.
Without these, even a well-designed workshop can end up being just another pleasant day away from the office.
Where this shows up
Career development workshops. A university runs a series of career-readiness workshops. Attendance is good, students give positive feedback, and everyone is pleased. But did students actually improve their resumes, approach employers more confidently, or perform better in interviews afterwards? We might not know because nobody followed up.
Get Aico Bloom’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
Leadership development. A company sends 60 managers for coaching skills training. Everyone learns the coaching model and practises asking better questions. Three months later, are those managers actually coaching their teams differently? Have their staff noticed any difference? Or are the managers still giving instructions and calling it coaching?
Customer service training. Employees attend a workshop on handling difficult customers. They enjoy the role plays and score well on the assessment. But when an angry customer calls the following week, do they use what they learnt, or fall back on their usual responses?
These are simple questions, but they tell us much more about whether the training has made a difference.
We don’t have to measure everything
Now, I am not suggesting that we conduct a full ROI study for every workshop.
That would probably take more time and effort than the workshop itself.
Phillips’ fifth level is useful, particularly for major programmes where the organisation has invested significant resources and wants to understand the financial return.
But not every programme needs that level of evaluation.
For many of us, moving from Level 1 or 2 to Level 3 would already be a meaningful improvement.
And it doesn’t have to be complicated.
Before the workshop, ask yourself: What is one thing I hope participants will do differently afterwards?
If it is a coaching workshop, perhaps we want managers to start having regular coaching conversations.
If it is presentation skills training, perhaps we want employees to deliver clearer, more confident presentations.
Then, a month or two later, follow up.
Ask participants whether they have tried it. Speak to their managers where appropriate. Look for examples of how they have applied what they learnt.
It doesn’t have to be a lengthy survey or a complicated research project.
Even a few meaningful conversations can help us understand what is working, what isn’t, and what support participants might still need.
Of course, a few conversations won’t prove that the programme created organisational impact. But they give us something useful to work with beyond satisfaction scores.
Closing reflection
I don’t think there is anything wrong with asking participants whether they enjoyed a workshop. Their experience matters, and the feedback helps us improve.
But we need to be careful about what those ratings actually tell us.
A 4.6 out of 5 is a good satisfaction score. It isn’t evidence that people have changed how they work.
And sometimes, we spend so much time collecting feedback immediately after a workshop that we forget to check what happens afterwards.
Perhaps the next time we present a training evaluation report, alongside the attendance figures and satisfaction ratings, we could ask one more question:
“So, what are people actually doing differently now?”
We might not always like the answer.
But at least we would be learning something too.
With curiosity,
Aico Bloom
You may use the visual for teaching, facilitation, and internal learning decks with attribution to Aico Bloom.
