Evaluation Practices Training providers flourish starting 1992 with the passing of HRD Act The Act requires companies to contribute 1% of monthly payroll to HRDF to be used for employees training by registered training providers In 1999 there were 300 registered training providers with Ministry of Human Resource

Evaluation practices found to be unsystematic, informal and ad hoc It included all form of evaluation approaches (methods of data collection) The most commonly used approaches were: Trainee feedback, Interview, Performance analysis, Reaction form, Survey, Document Review, Supervisor, Competency test, and Site visit

Majority of the training providers: Evaluated their training immediately after the training programs completed The findings show some form of formal, but not systematic, and comprehensive evaluation Clients (companies) to some extent did require formal evaluation The training providers’ commitment towards evaluation was moderate

Conclusions Did the providers serious about evaluation? Did they understand the importance of evaluation? What was the important consideration to embark on evaluation Did the evaluation approaches appropriate?

What were the reasons for the immediate increase in the numbers of training providers? Who are the training providers in Malaysia? Why companies employed outside training providers?