The utilization of training program evaluation in corporate universities

Human Resource Development Quarterly

Volumn 15, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 363-383

  Bober, Christopher F ^a   Bartlett, Kenneth R ^b  

^a PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 70249143554     PISSN: 10448004     EISSN: 15321096     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/hrdq.1111     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Alkin, M. C., & Taut, S. M. (2003). Unbundling evaluation use. Studies in Educational Evaluation 29, 1-12.
2. Alkin, M. C., Burry, J., Jacobson, P., & White, P. (1983). Organizing for evaluation use: An administrator's handbook. Los Angeles: UCLA, Center for the Study of Evaluation.
3. Blass, E. (2001). What's in a name? A comparative study of the traditional public university and the corporate university. Human Resource Development International, 4 (2), 153-172.
4. Brown, S. M. (1998). The changing context of practice. In S. M. Brown & C. J. Seidner (Eds.), Evaluating corporate training: Models and issues. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic.
5. Caracelli, V. J. (2000). Evaluation use at the threshold of the twenty-first century. In V. J. Caracelli & H. Preskill (Eds.), The expanding scope of evaluation use. New Directions for Evaluation, no. 88. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
6. Carnevale, A. P., & Schulz, E. R. (1990). Economic accountability for training: Demands and responses. Training & Development, 44 (7), s-1-s-32.
7. Cousins, J. B., & Earl, L. M. (1992). The case for participatory evaluation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14 (4), 397-418.
8. Cousins, J. B., & Leithwood, K. A. (1986). Current empirical research on evaluation utilization. Review of Educational Research, 56 (3), 331-364.
9. Cracknell, B. E. (2001). Knowing is all: Or is it? Some reflections on why the acquisition of knowledge focusing particularly on evaluation activities, does not always lead to action. Public Administration and Development, 21, 371-379.
10. Dealtry, R. (2001). How to configure the corporate university for success. Journal of Workplace Learning, 13 (2), 73-79.
11. Densford, L. E. (1998). Many corporate universities under development: The aim is to link training to business. Corporate University Review, 6 (6), 15-21.
12. Dixon, N. M. (1996). New routes to evaluation. Training & Development, 50 (5), 82-87.
13. Freeman, R. (1986). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Ballinger.
14. Hargreaves, P., & Jarvis, P. (2000). The human resource development handbook. London, UK: Kogan Page.
15. Hendricks, M. (1994). Making a splash: Reporting evaluation results effectively. In J. S. Wholey, H. P. Hatry, & K. E. Newcomer (Eds.), Handbook of practical program evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
16. Henry, G. T. (2001). Coeditor's notes. In D. L. Stufflebeam (Ed.), Evaluation models. New Directions for Evaluation, no. 89. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
17. Henry, G. T., & Mark, M. M. (2003). Toward an agenda for research on evaluation. The practice-theory relationship in evaluation. In C. A. Christie (Ed.), New Directions for Evaluation, no. 97. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
18. Industry report. (2002, October). Training Magazine, 39, 24-33.
19. Kirkhart, K. E. (2000). Reconceptualizing evaluation use: An integrated theory of influence. In V. J. Caracelli & H. Preskill (Eds.), The expanding scope of evaluation use. New Directions for Evaluation, no. 88. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
20. Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1998). Evaluating training programs (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
21. Leviton, L. C., & Hughes, E. F. (1981). Research on the utilization of evaluations: A review and synthesis. Evaluation Review, 5 (4), 525-548.
22. Meister, J. C. (1994). Corporate quality universities: Lessons in building a world-class work force. Alexandria: American Society for Training and Development.
23. Meister, J. C. (1999). Survey of corporate university future directions. New York: Corporate University Exchange.
24. Noe, R. A. (2002). Employee training and development (2nd ed.). San Francisco: McGraw-Hill.
25. Patton, M. Q. (1982). Practical evaluation. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
26. Patton, M. Q. (1997). Utilization-focused evaluation: The new century text (3rd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
27. Patton, M. Q., Grimes, P. S., Guthrie, K. M., Brennan, N. J., French, B. D., & Blyth, D. A. (1977). In search of impact: An analysis of the utilization of federal health evaluation research. In C. H. Weiss (Ed.), Using social research in public policy making (pp. 141-164). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
28. Phillips, J. (1997). Handbook of training evaluation and measurement methods. Houston: Gulf.
29. Piskurich, G. M. (1997). Re-evaluating evaluation. Performance & Improvement, 36 (8), 16-17.
30. Preskill, H. S. (1984). Evaluation use in the management/supervisory training programs of banking organizations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana.
31. Preskill, H. S., & Caracelli, V. (1997). Current and developing conceptions on use: Evaluation use TIG survey results. Evaluation Practice, 18 (3), 209-225.
32. Preskill, H., & Torres, R. T. (2000). The learning dimension of evaluation use. In V. J. Caracelli & H. Preskill (Eds.), The expanding scope of evaluation use. New Directions for Evaluation, no. 88. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
33. Rich, R. F. (1977). Uses of social science information by federal bureaucrats: Knowledge for action versus understanding. In C. H. Weiss (Ed.), Using social research in public policy making (pp. 199-212). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
34. Robinson, D. G., & Robinson, J. C. (1989). Training for impact: How to link training to business needs and measure results. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
35. Russ-Eft, D., & Preskill, H. (2001). Evaluation in organizations: A systematic approach to enhance learning, performance, and change. Cambridge, MA: Perseus.
36. Russ-Eft, D., & Preskill, H. (2003). A framework for reframing HRD evaluation, practice, and research. In A. M. Gilley, J. L. Callahan, & L. L. Bierema (Eds.), Critical issues in HRD: A new agenda for the twenty-first century. Cambridge, MA: Perseus.
37. Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Leviton, L. C. (1991). Foundations of program evaluation: Theories of practice. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
38. Stufflebeam, D. L., Ed. (2001). Evaluation models. New Directions for Evaluation, no. 89. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
39. Swanson, R. A., & Holton, E. F., III. (2001). Foundations of human resource development. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
40. Torres, R. T., Preskill, H., & Piontek, M. (1997). Evaluation strategies for communicating and reporting: Enhancing learning in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
41. Turnbull, B. (1999). The mediating effect of participation efficacy on evaluation use. Evaluation and Program Planning, 22, 131-140.
42. Weiss, C. H. (1983). The stakeholder approach to evaluation: Origins and promise. In A. S. Bryk (Ed.), Stakeholder-based evaluation. New Directions for Program Evaluation, no. 17. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
43. Weiss, C. H. (1998). Have we learned anything new about the use of evaluations? American Journal of Evaluation, 19 (1), 21-33.
44. Wentling, T. L. (1980). Evaluating occupational education and training programs. Urbana, IL: Griffon Press.
45. Wentling, T. L., Wang, L., Ovaice, G., Bober, C. F., & Schulze, A. (1998). The corporate university: An initial study. In R. J. Torraco (Ed.), 1998 Academy of Human Resource Development Conference Proceedings (pp. 830-838). Baton Rouge, LA: Academy of Human Resource Development.
46. Wilson, J. P. (1999). Human resource development: Learning and training for individuals and organizations. London, UK: Kogan Page.
47. Worthen, B., Sanders, J., & Fitzpatrick, J. (1997). Program evaluation: Alternative approaches and practical guidelines (2nd ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.
48. Woudhuysen, J. (2002). The online campus. In D. Hayes & R. Wynyard (Eds.), The McDonaldization of higher education (pp. 84-104). Westport, CT: Bergin and Garvey.