The effects of alternative reports of human resource development results on managerial support

✍ Scribed by Brent W. Mattson

• Publisher: John Wiley and Sons
• Year: 2003
• Tongue: English
• Weight: 157 KB
• Volume: 14
• Category: Article
• ISSN: 1044-8004
• DOI: 10.1002/hrdq.1056

✦ Synopsis

Abstract

Managerial responses to human resource development (HRD) results evaluation reports were
experimentally investigated as a function of (1) how evaluation information was presented and
(2) reported HRD program impact levels. Managers (n = 233) read a business scenario in
which they were asked to make a decision about whether to implement a development program. They were then exposed
to one of nine experimental treatment conditions (evaluation report type × reported program impact
level). The report types included utility analysis, critical outcome technique, and anecdotal evaluation
reports. Results were varied at three impact levels (low, average, and high). Findings of the study
showed that managers perceived utility analysis and critical outcome technique reports as almost equally useful
in decision making; however, the anecdotal evaluation report was found to be significantly less useful than
either of the other two report types. There was no effect of the reported program impact level on the perceived
usefulness of the evaluation reports for decision making. Furthermore, there was no interaction between report
type and impact level on the perceived usefulness of the reports for decision making. These findings show that
managers prefer information about the financial results of HRD interventions to anecdotal information, regardless
of the reported level of impact.