Assessment practices of corporate training. A research into the Italian fashion system.

Journal title RIV Rassegna Italiana di Valutazione
Author/s Luca Salmieri, Pierpaolo Letizia
Publishing Year 2017 Issue 2016/65
Language Italian Pages 19 P. 101-119 File size 1184 KB
DOI 10.3280/RIV2016-065007
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

Authors present the results of an ethnographic research on training evaluation practices adopted by companies in the fashion industry. Research has first verified whether these companies use a system of evaluation. The analysis then reviews the types of effects and impacts companies tend to evaluate and according to what mode of detection. Finally authors frame the assessment practices in a modeling methodology employed by companies in order ascertain the possibilities to adopt a participatory assessment approach. .

Keywords: Continuos Training; Evaluation of Training Effects; Corporate Culture

  1. Alvarez K., Salas E. and Garofano, C. M. (2004). An Integrated Model of Training Evaluation and Effectiveness. Human Resource Development Review, 3,(4): 385–416. DOI: 10.1177/153448430427082
  2. Baldwin T.T. and Ford J.K. (1988). Transfer of Training: A Review and Directions for Future Research, Personnel Psychology, 41: 63–105.
  3. Ballot G., Fakhfakh F. and Taymaz, E. (2006). Who benefits from training and R&D, the firm or the workers? British Journal of Industrial Relations, 44,(3): 473–95.
  4. Barron J.M. Berger M.C. and Black, D.A. (1997). How well do we measure training? Journal of Labor Economics, 15,(3): 507-28. DOI: 10.1086/20987
  5. Bartel A.P. (1991). Productivity gains from the implementation of employee training programs, National Bureau of Economic Research.
  6. Berge Z. L. (2008). Why it is so hard to evaluate training in the workplace. Industrial and Commercial Training, 40,(7): 390–95. DOI: 10.1108/0019785081091227
  7. Bezzi C., Cannavò L. e Palumbo M. (2010). Costruire e usare indicatori nella ricerca sociale e nella valutazione, Milano, FrancoAngeli.
  8. Bisio C. (2002). Valutare in formazione, Milano, FrancoAngeli.
  9. Brown C. (2008). The use of complex adaptive systems as a generative metaphor in an action research study of an organization, Qualitative Report, 13,(3): 416–31.
  10. Brunello G. (2004). La formazione continua nelle grandi imprese italiane: un’analisi dei risultati della seconda indagine ISFOL. Roma, ISFOL.
  11. Campbell J.P. (1988). Training design for performance improvement. In Campbell J.P. e Campbell R.J., (eds.), Productivity in organizations, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.
  12. Colquitt J.A., LePine J.A. and Noe R.A. (2000). Toward an integrative theory of training motivation: A meta-analytic path analysis of 20 years of research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85: 678–707. DOI: 10.1037//0021-9010.85.5.67
  13. Conti G. (2005). Training, productivity and wages in Italy. Labour economics, 12,(4): 557–76.
  14. Czarniawska B. (1997) A narrative approach to organization studies, London, Sage Publications.
  15. De Meuse K. P., Dai, G. and Lee, R. J. (2009). Evaluating the effectiveness of executive coaching: Beyond ROI?, Coaching: An international journal of theory, research and practice, 2(2): 117-34.
  16. Doolittle P.E. (2000). Complex constructivism: A theoretical model of complexity and cognition. International Journal of Teaching & Learning in Higher Education, 26,(3): 485–98.
  17. Engeström Y. (2001) Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of education and work, 14,(1): 133–56. DOI: 10.1080/1363908002002874
  18. Engeström Y. and Sannino A. (2010), Studies of expansive learning: Foundations, findings and future challenges. Educational research review, 5,(1): 1–24.
  19. Fetterman D. M. (2001). Foundations of empowerment evaluation, Thousand Oaks, CA Sage.
  20. Fetterman D.M. (1994). Empowerment evaluation. Evaluation Practice, 15,(1): 1–15.
  21. Fontana, A. e Varchetta G., (2002), La valutazione riconoscente, Milano, Guerini e Associati.
  22. Foresti, M. (2003). La partecipazione in ambito valutativo: mito o realtà? Teoria e pratica degli approcci partecipati in valutazione, Rassegna italiana di valutazione, 25: 1–26. DOI: 10.1400/6648
  23. Fortunati F. (2007). Il processo di formazione continua in azienda. Modelli, strumenti ed esperienze di sviluppo del capitale intellettuale, Milano, FrancoAngeli.
  24. Fosnot C.T. (1996). Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice, New York, Teachers College Press.
  25. Fraccaroli F. e Vergani A. (2004). Valutare gli interventi formativi, Roma, Carocci.
  26. Gagliardi P. e Quaratino L. (2000). L’impatto della formazione. Un approccio etnografico. Milano, Geurini e Associati.
  27. Gherardi S. e Nicolini D. (1998). Apprendimento come partecipazione ad una comunità di pratiche. Scuola Democratica, 1, 247–264.
  28. Hall L. (2009). Don’t be lazy. Evaluate ROI. Coaching at Work, 4,(6):10–21.
  29. Hamblin A.C. (1974). Evaluation and Control of Training. Industrial Training International, 9,(5): 154-6.
  30. Holton E.F. (1996). The flawed four-level evaluation model. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 7: 5–21.
  31. Holton E.F., Bates R.A. and Ruona, W.A. (2000). Development of a Generalized Learning Transfer System Inventory. Human Resource Development Quartely, 11,(4): 333–60. DOI: 10.1002/1532-1096(200024
  32. Kanfer R. and Ackerman P. L. (1989). Motivation and cognitive abilities: An integrative/aptitude treatment interaction approach to skill acquisition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 657–90. DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.74.4.65
  33. Kaufman R. (1992). Strategic planning plus: An organizational guide, New York, Sage Publications.
  34. Kirkpatrick D. L. (1959). Technique for evaluating training program. Journal of American Society of Training and Development, 13: 11–2.
  35. Kirkpatrick D. L. and Kirkpatrick J.D. (1994). Evaluating Training Programs, Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
  36. Lave J. (1996). Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
  37. Lave, J. e Wenger, E. (1991), Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
  38. Lipari D. (2002). Logiche di azione formativa nelle organizzazioni, Milano, Guerini e Associati.
  39. Lipari D. (2006). Pratiche di valutazione negli interventi formativi. Uno schema interpretativo. Rivista FOR, 67: 11–9. DOI: 10.1400/6236
  40. Lipari D. (2008). Per un uso in chiave (auto)valutativa delle etnografie organizzative. Rassegna italiana di valutazione, 12: 77–88. DOI: 10.3280/RIV2008-04000
  41. McLellan H. (1993). Evaluation in a situated learning environment. Educational Technology, 33,(3): 39-45.
  42. Neirotti P. e Paolucci E. (2011). Il complesso legame fra investimenti in formazione e processi di innovazione. Alcune evidenze dalle grandi imprese italiane. Studi organizzativi, 1: 112–43 DOI: 10.3280/SO2011-00100
  43. Patrick J. (1992). Training: Research and practice, London, Academic Press.
  44. Phillips J.J. (1997). Measuring the return on investiment. Alexandria, VA, ASTD.
  45. Phillips, J.J. (1996). How much is the training worth? Training and Development, 50,(4): 20–4.
  46. Pineda P. (2010). Evaluation of training in organisations: a proposal for an integrated model. Journal of European Industrial Training, 34,(7): 673–93. DOI: 10.1108/0309059101107078
  47. Quaglino G.P. (1979). La valutazione dei risultati della formazione, Milano, FrancoAngeli.
  48. Rago E. (2006). La valutazione quantitativa della formazione aziendale. Dalle misure economico-finanziarie agli indicatori bilanciati. Sociologia del Lavoro, 103: 244–70.
  49. Russ-Eft, D. (2002). «A typology of training design and work environment factors affecting workplace learning and transfer», Human Resource Development Review, 1, 45–65.
  50. Scaratti G. (2006). L’(in)effabile dicibilità delle comunità di pratica. Prefazione all’edizione italiana di Wenger E. (2006), IX–XLIII
  51. Schwartzman H. B. (1993). Ethnography in organizations, London, Sage.
  52. Smith D. E. (2006). Institutional ethnography as practice, New York, Rowman e Littlefield.
  53. Stokking K.M. (1996). Levels of Evalution, Kirkpatrick, Kaufman and Keller, and Beyond, Human Resource Development Quarterly, 7,(2): 79–184.
  54. Terleckyj N. (1980). Direct and indirect effects of industrial research and development on the productivity growth of industries. In Kendrick J.W. and Vaccara, B.N. (eds), New developments in productivity measurement, Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
  55. Van Buren M.E. e Erskine W. (2002). The ASTD state of the industry report. Alexandria, VA: ASTD.
  56. Wenger E. (2006). Comunità di pratica. Apprendimento, significato e identità, Milano, Cortina.
  57. Wenger E. (2010). Communities of practice and social learning systems: the career of a concept, in Blackmore C. (ed), Social learning systems and communities of practice, London, Springer.
  58. Wenger E. e Snyder W.M. (2000). Communities of practice: The organizational frontier, Harvard business review, 78,(1), 139–46.

Luca Salmieri, Pierpaolo Letizia, Pratiche di valutazione della formazione aziendale. Una ricerca tra le imprese del ‘sistema moda’ in "RIV Rassegna Italiana di Valutazione" 65/2016, pp 101-119, DOI: 10.3280/RIV2016-065007