REPORT-NIRUPAMA

TRAINING EFFECTIVENESS (LEVEL 3 OR THE BEHAVIOURAL STAGE
ANALYSIS OF THE KIRKPATRICK MODEL)
SUBMITTED TO:
MR.KUMAR JAGAT
MR.MONIKUT SHARMA
BY:
NIRUPAMA BAKSHI
KIIT SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT

2 | P a g e
CERTIFICATE OF CORPORATE GUIDE
This is to certify that Miss NirupamaBakshi, a student of KIIT School of Management,
Bhubaneswar, pursuing MBA programme in HR &Marketing, successfully completed
internship programmefrom9th
May, 2016 to 9th
July, 2016 at TATA HITACHI
CONSTRUCTION MACHINERY PVT. LTD., Jamshedpur.
During the period of her internship programwith us, shewas found punctual, hardworking
and inquisitive.
Date: 11th
July, 2016
Kumar Jagat
ProjectGuide (DM – HRD)

3 | P a g e
CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY
This is to certify that the project report entitled “Training effectiveness (Level 3 or
Behavioural Stage Analysis of the Kirk Patrick Model)” submitted to KIIT SCHOOL OF
MANAGEMENT, Bhubaneswar in fulfilment of the report of Summer Internship is original
work carried out by Miss Nirupama Bakshi under the guidance of Mr Kumar Jagat. The
matter embodied in this project is a genuine work done by Miss Nirupama Bakshi to the
best of my knowledge and belief and has not been submitted before, neither to this
University or to any other University for the fulfilment of the requirement of any course of
study.
Signature of the Guide Signature of the Student

4 | P a g e
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
“It is not possible to prepare a project report without the assistance & encouragement of other people. This
one is certainly no exception.”
On the very outset of this report, I would like to extend my sincere & heartfelt obligation towards all the
personages who have helped me in this endeavour. Without their active guidance, help, cooperation &
encouragement, I would not have made headway in the project.
I am ineffably indebted to Mr KUMAR JAGAT, Mr MONIKUT SHARMA &Mr SOMEN LODH for
their conscientious guidance and encouragement to accomplish this assignment.
I am extremely thankful and pay my gratitude to my faculty Mr Debi Prasad Das for his valuable guidance
and support on completion of this project in.
I extend my gratitude to TATA HITACHI CONSTRUCTION MACHINERY PVT. LTD. (THCM),
Jamshedpur, for giving me this opportunity.
At last but not least gratitude goes to all concerned departmental managers and supervisors who directly or
indirectly helped me to complete this project report.
I hope that I can build upon the experience and knowledge that I have gained and make a valuable
contribution towards this industry in coming future.
Thanking You
Nirupama Bakshi

5 | P a g e
CONTENTS
S.No. Particulars Page Number
1. Company Profile 6
2. Company Initiative 7 - 9
3. Objective Of Study 10
4. Purpose Of Research 11
5. Area & Organisational Span of Study 11
6. Research Methodology 12
7. Introduction to Kirkpatrick Model 13
8. Executive Summary 14
9. Training Effectiveness Analysis 15 - 30
10. Limitations in the Study 31
11. Learnings 32
12. Conclusions and Findings 33
13. References 34
14. Appendices 35

6 | P a g e
COMPANY PROFILE
Tata Hitachi Construction Machinery Co. Ltd, the Leader in Construction Equipment in India, enhances the
operational performance of its customers, leading to improving their profitability and competitiveness by
offering constructive solutions. Tata Hitachi is a subsidiary company of Hitachi Construction Machinery Co.
Ltd., which holds 60% share, and Tata Motors Ltd holding the balance 40%. The company commenced
manufacturing of construction equipment in 1961, as a division of TELCO. In 1984, it entered into a
technical collaboration with HCM, Japan for manufacturing state of the art hydraulic excavators.
Tata Hitachi is focused on capitalizing the opportunity in the domestic arena for which the key market
segments are Excavators, Wheeled Products, Cranes and Others. Tata Hitachi's consistent growth and
success have been built on the foundation of our ability to understand customers' needs and provide
Equipment and Support solutions that increase profitability and competitiveness for them. What we call
Reliable Solutions. Our capabilities to deliver Reliable Solutions starts with our comprehensive range of
Equipment that ensures that the customer has exactly the right kind of equipment for all Mining,
Infrastructure, Construction and Agricultural needs.
The construction industry involves heavy use of excavators, wheel loaders, and backhoe loaders. Tata
Hitachi's range of excavators starting at 2 tones with a maximum size of 120 tones is made in the country.
But size even bigger than this including the giant 250 tones excavator have been brought in from Tata
Hitachi's Principals, Hitachi Construction Machinery Limited, Japan.
Tata Hitachi is one of the largest manufacturers of construction equipment in the country and has three
manufacturing plants - at Jamshedpur in Jharkhand, at Dharwad in Karnataka and at Kharagpur in West
Bengal. It also has a full – fledged Design and Development set-up for developing indigenous and
collaborated equipment’s. Hitachi is actively participating in creating the new R&D facilities at Kharagpur
with the aim to make the new center a global R&D hub.
Our endeavor to provide Reliable solutions is enabled by our widespread network, which ensures that
wherever they are, our customers are never too far away from us. Tata Hitachi Dealers provide support to
the customers through parts and expert service. Tata Hitachi takes pride in its marketing and service network
of 230+ touch points that enables it to have one of the largest distribution networks in the country.
Our focus is also on Value added Service offerings such as Full Maintenance Contracts, which complete our
package to our customers and enable him free up precious resources for his core activities. Specialized
reconditioning and refurbishing services are offered to ensure that the utility of the equipment is extended
and life cycle costs brought down.

7 | P a g e
CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY INITIATIVE OF THCM
LITERACY INITIATIVE: THCM in its operational areas around its Plants at all locations has
identified schools which are catering mainly to underprivileged section of society. THCM also provides
infrastructure support to these schools to enhance the quality of education to the children. THCM has helped
these schools by building a library, computer laboratory, boundary wall, vocational training workshop,
drinking water facilities for these schools.
INITIATIVE
LITERACY
HEALTH
CARE
SKILL
DEVELOPM
ENT
RURAL
DEVELOPM
ENT

8 | P a g e
HEALTH CARE INITIATIVE: THCM conducts Medical Check- up programmes in sponsored
villages and schools and provides treatment for various ailments. THCM also undertakes repairing of tube
wells and open wells for safe drinking water in sponsored villages.
RURAL DEVELOPMENTINITIATIVE: THCM conduct various training programmes in the
villages to enhance their agricultural income through modern techniques. THCM assists the villagers in
reclamation of their barren land to bring it under cultivation. The company also helps the villagers in
creating water harvesting structures to store rain waiter for their use in house hold activities and other
activities like pisciculture, duck farming, vegetable farming etc.

9 | P a g e
SKILL DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE: The Company has set up an Operator Training School
at Kharagpur. As a policy 50 per cent of the seats have been kept reserved for SC and ST candidates. The
school has a modern hostel, multiple class rooms supported by electronic visual aids and to add to this the
Company has put in place its state-of-the art machines amongst others for practical sessions and for
imparting world class training. The program includes theory on equipment, practical and hands on training
for aggregates.
A team of well trained and experienced personnel in the field of training from the Company is leading the
initiative. It will ultimately usher in a supply chain management system connecting supply of trained
resource to its demand. This will be noteworthy and is sure to make a sustainable contribution to the hugely
growing infrastructure sector in the country. Ultimately the emerging 3D vision out of this will focus on
positive economic value addition, social entrepreneurship, flanked by the twin pillars of growth and
sustainability. To further enhance the employability arena, the Company provides four wheel driver training
to village youths and tailoring to ladies groups in the villages.

10 | P a g e
OBJECTIVE OF STUDY
 To measure the training effectiveness of employees as per their respective trainings.
 To measure the degree to which participants’ behaviors change as a result of the training.
 To check whether the knowledge and skills from the training are then applied on the job by trainees
or not by comparison analysis of participant data average by that of supervisors’.
 To enhance further training and development programme.
 To evaluate both pre- and post-event measurement of the learner’s behavior.
.

11 | P a g e
PURPOSE OF THE RESEARCH
The purpose of the research is to find out the performance on the job has improved or not. Here our purpose
is to find out if training program participants change their on-the-job-behaviour (OJB) as a result of their
having attended and participated in the training programme.
After the collection of the data we analyse the data department wise, and conclude to find out the areas
where improvement is required. Thus, we strive for improvement and perfection of the job performance of
the employees.
AREA AND ORGANISATIONAL SPAN OF THE STUDY
 The area of my study was Human Resource Management.
 My research regarding the Project covered all the departments of THCM.
 The period of my internship was 2 months (9th May to 11th July).

12 | P a g e
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Sources of data collection:
Primary-Questionnaire with close ended and an open ended questions that ask the respondents to select
from a list of possible response, 5 point rating scale.
Sampling design:
Sampling size- 1165(participants’ feedback), 906(supervisors’ feedback)
Sampling unit- THCM, Jamshedpur (15 departments)
Tool and techniques of datacollection:
Research instrument– 5 point scale
Data collection method- Questionnaire survey
Plan of analysis-The data obtained from questionnaire was summed up. Inference was drawn
quantitatively from the averages and finally findings and conclusions were drawn.
Questionnaire survey:
A questionnaire survey was conducted which covered operators ,supervisors, managers and executives of
Tata Hitachi Construction Machinery Pvt. ltd, Jamshedpur of various departments namely maintenance,
tool room, transmission, fabrication, assembly, administration, quality assurance, design, HR&IR, customer
support, climate change etc.

13 | P a g e
INTRODUCTION TO KIRKPATRICK MODEL
Donald Kirkpatrick (March 15, 1924 – May 9, 2014) was Professor Emeritus at the University of
Wisconsin in the United States. He is best known for creating a highly influential 'four level' model for
training course evaluation, which served as the subject of his Ph.D. dissertation in 1954. Kirkpatrick's ideas
were published to a broader audience in 1959 in a series of articles in the US Training and Development
Journal, but they are better known from a book he published in 1994 entitled Evaluating Training
Programs. Other books that he has written on training evaluation include Transferring Learning to
Behaviour and Implementing the Four Levels.
The Four Levels of Learning Evaluation are as follows:
1. Reaction - what participants thought and felt about the training (satisfaction; "smile sheets")
2. Learning - the resulting increase in knowledge and/or skills, and change in attitudes. This evaluation
occurs during the training in the form of either a knowledge demonstration or test.
3. Behaviour - transfer of knowledge, skills, and/or attitudes from classroom to the job (change in job
behaviour due to training program). This evaluation occurs 3 to6 months post training while the trainee
is performing the job. Evaluation usually occurs through observation.
4. Results - the final results that occurred because of attendance and participation in a training program
(can be monetary, performance-based, etc.).

14 | P a g e
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
As a student of Human Resource Management from KIIT SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT,
Bhubaneswar, I was given the opportunity to do two month’s summer internship at Tata Hitachi
Construction Machinery (Jamshedpur plant, Jharkhand). During my internship I worked in the HR
section where my topic was based on the evaluation of the trainings given there. The pattern or the model
of evaluation was based on the “Kirkpatrick Model”.
I collected the data to evaluate the effectiveness of training given to the employees. I was also given the
task to search for institutes that provide various trainings conducted by THCM. I have also learned the
importance of Level 1 analysis and have prepared the level 1 summary very often after any training that
used to be conducted. This has helped me to understand a major part of pre and post training procedures
in an organisation.
In order to complete my analysis I distributed 1165 feedback forms and got 906 forms filled by the
participants. After completion of the participant feedback I distributed the supervisor feedback forms of
the respective participants who had filled the participant feedback forms. Out of the 906 supervisor forms
I got 822 forms filled. After the collection of the forms I fed the data in the system and accordingly I
performed the level 3 comparative analysis, and prepared my report.
Note: The rest of the 84 forms could not be filled because either the supervisors had left/retired or
transferred to another plant of THCM. Also in some cases the supervisors did not give the feedback for
those participants who have left/retired/transferred.
The analysis for employee’s performance on the job (department wise) is as follows:
S.NO. Department Participant( Q.no. 7) Supervisor(Q.no. 7)
1. Administration 3.00 2.00
2. Assembly 4.24 4.25
3. Climate Change 4.50 4.50
4. Customer Support 4.03 3.92
5. Design 4.37 4.26
6. Fabrication 4.37 4.14
7. Finance 3.00 4.00
8. HR & IR 3.67 4.50
9. Maintenance 4.25 3.92
10. Planning 5.00 4.50
11. QA 4.07 4.19
12. Spare Parts 4.00 4.00
13. SCM 4.42 4.20
14. Tool Room 4.44 4.67
15. Transmission 4.21 3.95

15 | P a g e
TRAINING EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS REPORT
 ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT(Financial Year 2015-2016)
On the basis of the in-house training programme, the feedback having rated value of, or greater than 4.5 is
rated as strong.
Participant: Supervisor
1. From the figures we can see that participants believe more, that their performance on the job has
improved due to training, than the supervisors. This shows that the training had an impact on
participants.(3>2)[Q7]
2. Participants and supervisors think equally that the participants have received satisfactory opportunity
to use the knowledge they have learnt.(3=3) [Q1]
3. Participants believe more, that they have actually used their knowledge at a higher degree than the
supervisors.(3.5>2)[Q2]
4. In terms of judging confidence, participants feel more, that their confidence has increased, than
supervisors. Supervisors feel that participants are less confident. (3.5>2) [Q3]
5. Participants believe more, that the content of the program is relevant to the job, than the supervisors.
(3<4) [Q4]
6. Participants believe less, that they had access to the necessary resources (e.g. equipment, facility) to
apply their knowledge and/or skills on their jobs, than the supervisors. The difference in their
opinion is quite high.(3.5<5)[Q5]
7. Participants believe less, that proper coaching and feedback was given to them in applying their
knowledge on the job, than supervisors. The difference between their opinions is quite low.(3.5<4)
[Q6]
3
3.5 3.5
3
3.5 3.5
33
2 2
4
5
4
2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Sum of PARTICIPANT Sum of SUPERVISOR ADMINISTRATION

16 | P a g e
 ASSEMBLY DEPARTMENT(Financial Year 2015-2016)
1. From the figures we can see that participants believe less, that their performance on the job has
improved due to training, than the supervisors. However, the difference in their opinion is negligible.
This shows that the training had an impact on participants.(4.24<4.25)[Q7]
2. Participants think more, that they have received satisfactory opportunity to use the knowledge they
have learnt, than the supervisors. The difference between their opinions is low.(4.15>3.96) [Q1]
supervisors.(4.22> 3.95)[Q2]
4. In terms of judging confidence, participants feel more, that their confidence has increased, than the
supervisors. Supervisors feel that participants are less confident. (4.24>4.16) [Q3]
5. Participants believe more, that the content of the program is highly relevant to the job, than the
supervisors. (4.22> 4.05) [Q4]
apply their knowledge and/or skills on their jobs, than supervisors. The difference in their opinion is
very low.(4.11<4.24)[Q5]
knowledge on the job, than the supervisors. The difference between their opinions is very low.
(4.20<4.25) [Q6]
4.15
4.22
4.24
4.22
4.11
4.2
4.24
3.96 3.95
4.16
4.05
4.24 4.25 4.25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Sum of participant Sum of supervisor ASSEMBLY

17 | P a g e
 CLIMATE CHANGE DEPARTMENT(Financial Year 2015-2016)
1. From the figures we can see that, the participants and the supervisors equally believe that the
performance of the participants on the job has increased satisfactorily. This shows that the training
had a good impact on participants. (4.5=4.5)[Q7]
2. Supervisors think less, that the participants have received satisfactory opportunity to use the
knowledge they have learnt, than the participants. The difference between their opinions is very low.
(4.5<5) [Q1]
3. Participants and supervisors equally believe that the participants have actually used their knowledge
at a higher degree .(4.5=4.5)[Q2]
4. In terms of judging confidence, participants feel less that their confidence has increased, than the
supervisors.(5>4.5) [Q3]
5. Participants believe less that the content of the program is relevant to the job, than the
supervisors.(4<4.5) [Q4]
6. Participants believe more that they had access to the necessary resources (e.g. equipment, facility) to
apply their knowledge and/or skills on their jobs, than the supervisors.(4.5>4)[Q5]
knowledge on the job, than supervisors. The difference between their opinions is very less. (4.5<5)
[Q6]
4.5 4.5
5
4
4.5 4.5 4.5
5
4.5 4.5 4.5
4
5
4.5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Sum of PARTICIPANT Sum of SUPERVISOR CLIMATE CHANGE

18 | P a g e
 CUSTOMER SUPPORT DEPARTMENT(Financial Year 2015-2016)
1. From the figures we can see that, the participants feel more, that their performance on the job has
increased satisfactorily, than the supervisors. This shows that the training had an impact on
participants. (4.03>3.92)[Q7]
(4.09>4) [Q1]
3. Participants feel more, that they have actually used their knowledge at a higher degree, than the
supervisors. The difference in the opinion is very low.(3.94>3.85)[Q2]
supervisors. However, the difference in their opinion is negligible.(4.24>4.23) [Q3]
5. Participants believe more, that the content of the program is relevant to the job, than the
supervisors.(4.24>3.92) [Q4]
apply their knowledge and/or skills on their jobs, than the supervisors.(3.59<4.08)[Q5]
7. Participants believe more, that proper coaching and feedback was given to them in applying their
knowledge on the job, than supervisors. The difference between their opinions is very less.
(3.81>3.67) [Q6]
4.09
3.94
4.24 4.24
3.59
3.81
4.034
3.85
4.23
3.92
4.08
3.67
3.92
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Sum of PARTICIPANT Sum of SUPERVISOR
CUSTOMER
SUPPORT

19 | P a g e
 DESIGN DEPARTMENT(Financial Year 2015-2016)
(4.22>4.13) [Q1]
supervisors.(4.26>3.96)[Q2]
supervisors. Supervisors feel that they are less confident. However, the difference in their opinion is
very low.(4.38>4.27) [Q3]
5. Participants believe less, that the content of the program is relevant to the job, than the supervisors.
However, the difference in their opinion is negligible.(4.39<4.4) [Q4]
6. Participants believe more, that they had access to the necessary resources (e.g. equipment, facility) to
opinion is negligible.(4.33>4.31)[Q5]
knowledge on the job, than supervisors.(4.3>3.8) [Q6]
4.22
4.26
4.38 4.39
4.33 4.3
4.37
4.13
3.96
4.27
4.4
4.31
3.8
4.26
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Sum of PARTICIPANT Sum of SUPERVISOR DESIGN

20 | P a g e
 FABRICATION DEPARTMENT(Financial Year 2015-2016)
2. Supervisors think more, that the participants have received satisfactory opportunity to use the
knowledge they have learnt, than the participants. The difference between their opinions is quite low.
(4.15<4.25) [Q1]
supervisors. However, the difference in their opinion is very low.(4.25>4.19) [Q3]
5. Participants believe more, that the content of the program is relevant to the job, than the supervisors.
The difference in their opinion is quite low.(4.33>4.25) [Q4]
opinion is negligible.(4.25<4.27)[Q5]
knowledge on the job, than supervisors. The difference between their opinion is quite
low.(4.27>4.22) [Q6]
4.15
4.32
4.25
4.33
4.25
4.27
4.37
4.25
4.1
4.19
4.25
4.27
4.22
4.14
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
FABRICATION

21 | P a g e
 FINANCE DEPARTMENT(FINANCIAL YEAR 2015-2016)
1. From the figures we can see that participants believe that their performance on the job has improved
less due to training. However, supervisors believe that the impact of training was higher. This shows
that the training had a low impact on participants.(3<4)[Q7]
2. Participants feel less, that they have received opportunity to use the knowledge they have learnt, than
the supervisors. The difference between their opinions is high. (2.5<4) [Q1]
3. Participants believe less, that they have actually used their knowledge at a higher degree than the
supervisors.(3<4)[Q2]
4. In terms of judging confidence, participants feel less, that their confidence has increased than
supervisors.(3<4) [Q3]
5. Participants believe less, that the content of the program is relevant to the job than the
supervisors.(3<4) [Q4]
apply their knowledge and/or skills on your jobs than the supervisors. The difference between their
opinions is very large.(2.5<4)[Q5]
knowledge on the job than supervisors. The difference between their opinions is very large. (2.5<4)
[Q6]
2.5
3 3 3
2.5 2.5
3
4 4 4 4 4 4 4
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Sum of PARTICIPANT Sum of SUPERVISOR FINANCE

22 | P a g e
 HR & IR DEPARTMENT(FINANCIAL YEAR 2015-2016)
improved due to training, than the supervisors. Supervisors strongly believe that participants’ job
performance has improved. This shows that the training had a low impact on participants.
(3.67<4.5)[Q7]
2. Participants and supervisors think equally that the participants have received satisfactory opportunity
to use the knowledge that they have learnt from the training; on their job.(5=5) [Q1]
3. Participants believe less, that they have actually used their knowledge at a higher degree than the
supervisors.(4.33<4.5)[Q2]
4. In terms of judging confidence, participants feel less, that their confidence has increased, than
supervisors. Supervisors feel that they are more confident. However, the difference in their opinion is
very low.(4<4.5) [Q3]
5. Participants believe less, that the content of the program is relevant to the job, than supervisors. The
difference in their opinion is high.(3.67<5) [Q4]
apply their knowledge and/or skills on your jobs, than the supervisors.(4<4.5)[Q5]
knowledge on the job, than the supervisors.(4<4.5) [Q6]
5
4.33
4
3.67
4 4
3.67
5
4.5 4.5
5
4.5 4.5 4.5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Sum of PARTICIPANT Sum of SUPERVISOR HR & IR

23 | P a g e
 MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT(Financial Year 2015-2016)
participants (4.25>3.92)[Q7]
2. Participants think less, that they have received satisfactory opportunity to use the knowledge that
they have learnt from the training; on their job, than the supervisors. The difference in their opinion
is quite small.(4.13<4.21) [Q1]
supervisors. Supervisors feel that they are less confident. The difference in their opinion is quite
low.(4.42>4.13) [Q3]
5. Participants believe more, that the content of the program is relevant to the job, than supervisors. The
difference in their opinion is high.(4.38>3.92) [Q4]
apply their knowledge and/or skills on your jobs, than the supervisors.(4.13>3.92)[Q5]
knowledge on the job, than the supervisors. The difference in their opinion is quite low.(3.92>3.63)
[Q6]
4.13 4.17
4.42 4.38
4.13
3.92
4.254.21
3.79
4.13
3.92 3.92
3.63
3.92
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Sum of PARTICIPANT Sum of SUPERVISOR MAINTENANCE

24 | P a g e
 PLANNING DEPARTMENT(Financial Year 2015-2016)
improved due to training, than the supervisors. This shows that the training had a good impact on
participants.(5>4.5)[Q7]
2. Participants think less, that they have received satisfactory opportunity to use the knowledge they
have learnt on their job, than their supervisors.(4.5<5) [Q1]
3. Participants believe less, that they have actually used their knowledge at a higher degree, than the
supervisors.(4.5<5)[Q2]
4. In terms of judging confidence, participants feel more, that their confidence has increased drastically,
than supervisors.(5>4.5) [Q3]
5. Participants believe less, that the content of the program is relevant to the job than
supervisors.(4.5<5) [Q4]
6. Participants believe that they had not access to the necessary resources (e.g. equipment, facility) to
apply their knowledge and/or skills on your jobs whereas supervisors believe that the participants
had a great access to the necessary resources to apply their knowledge on their job.(4<5)[Q5]
7. Participants and supervisors believe equally that proper coaching and feedback was given to them in
applying their knowledge on the job.(4.5=4.5) [Q6]
4.5 4.5
5
4.5
4
4.5
55 5
4.5
5 5
4.5 4.5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Sum of PARTICIPANT Sum of SUPERVISOR PLANNING

25 | P a g e
 QUALITY ASSURANCE(Financial Year 2015-2016)
improved due to training, than the supervisors. This shows that the training had a low impact on
participants.(4.07<4.19)[Q7]
have learnt on their job, than their supervisors.(4.18>4.03) [Q1]
3. Participants believe more, that they have actually used their knowledge at a higher degree, than the
supervisors(4.12>3.96)[Q2]
4. In terms of judging confidence, participants feel more, that their confidence has increased drastically,
than supervisors. However, the difference between their opinions is quite negligible.(4.19>4.14)
[Q3]
5. Participants believe less, that the content of the program is relevant to the job, than
supervisors.(4.08<4.12) [Q4]
apply their knowledge and/or skills on your jobs, than the supervisors.(3.87<4.20)[Q5]
knowledge on the job, than the supervisors.(3.87<4.13)[Q6]
4.18
4.12
4.19
4.08
3.87 3.87
4.07
4.03
3.96
4.14
4.12
4.2
4.13
4.19
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Sum of PARTICIPANT Sum of SUPERVISOR QA

26 | P a g e
 SPARE PARTS DEPARTMENT(Financial Year 2015-2016)
1. From the figures we can see that participants and supervisors equally believe that their performance
on the job has improved due to training. This shows that the training had an impact on
participants.(4=4)[Q7]
2. Participants think more, that they have received satisfactory opportunity to use the knowledge that
they have learnt from the training; on their job, than the supervisors.(4.5>4) [Q1]
3. Participants and supervisors equally believe, that they have actually used their knowledge at a higher
degree.(4.5=4.5)[Q2]
supervisors. However, the difference in their opinion is very low.(5>4.5) [Q3]
difference in their opinion is high.( 5>4.5) [Q4]
apply their knowledge and/or skills on your jobs, than the supervisors.(4.5<5)[Q5]
knowledge on the job, than the supervisors.(5>4.5) [Q6]
4.5 4.5
5 5
4.5
5
44
4.5 4.5 4.5
5
4.5
4
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Sum of PARTICIPANT Sum of SUPERVISOR SPARE PARTS

27 | P a g e
 SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT(Financial Year 2015-2016)
participants.(4.42>4.2)[Q7]
2. Participants think more, that they have received satisfactory opportunity to use the knowledge that
they have learnt from the training; on their job, than the supervisors. However, the difference in their
opinions is quite negligible.(4.25>4.21) [Q1]
supervisors. The difference in their opinions is quite low.(4.41>4.25) [Q3]
difference in their opinions is negligible.(4.36>4.23) [Q4]
apply their knowledge and/or skills on your jobs, than the supervisors.(4.26>4.25)[Q5]
knowledge on the job, than the supervisors.(4.09<4.13) [Q6]
4.25
4.22
4.41
4.36
4.26
4.09
4.42
4.21
4.15
4.25
4.23
4.25
4.13
4.2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Sum of PARTICIPANT Sum of SUPERVISOR SCM

28 | P a g e
 TOOL ROOM(Financial Year 2015-2016)
improved due to training, than the supervisors. This shows that the training had a low impact on
participants. (4.44<4.67)[Q7]
2. Participants think less, that they have received satisfactory opportunity to use the knowledge they
have learnt on their job, than their supervisors.(4.56<4.8) [Q1]
3. Participants believe less, that they have actually used their knowledge at a higher degree, than the
4. In terms of judging confidence, participants feel less, that their confidence has increased, than
supervisors. Supervisors feel that they are more confident. However, the difference in their opinion is
very low.(4.63<4.88) [Q3]
5. Participants believe more, that the content of the program is relevant to the job, than supervisors.
However, the difference in their opinion is very low.(4.63>4.58) [Q4]
apply their knowledge and/or skills on your jobs, than the supervisors.(4.44<4.73)[Q5]
knowledge on the job, than the supervisors.(4.31<4.73) [Q6]
4.56
4.38
4.63 4.63
4.44
4.31
4.44
4.8
4.62
4.88
4.58
4.73 4.73
4.67
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Sum of PARTICIPANT Sum of SUPERVISOR TOOL ROOM

29 | P a g e
 TRANSMISSION DEPARTMENT(Financial Year 2015-2016)
have learnt on their job than their supervisors.(4.17>3.97) [Q1]
supervisors. Supervisors feel that they are less confident. (4.24>4.06) [Q3]
However, the difference in their opinion is very low.(4.28>4.03) [Q4]
apply their knowledge and/or skills on your jobs, than the supervisors. However, the difference is
quite low.(4.15>4.05)[Q5]
knowledge on the job, than the supervisors.(4.11>3.87) [Q6]
4.17
4.11
4.24
4.28
4.15
4.11
4.21
3.97
3.88
4.06
4.03 4.05
3.87
3.95
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Sum of PARTICIPANT Sum of SUPERVISOR TRANSMISSION

30 | P a g e
 OVERALL ANALYSIS(Financial Year 2015-2016)
participants.(4.31>4.14)[Q7]
have learnt on their job than their supervisors. However, the difference in their opinion is quite
negligible.(4.18>4.16) [Q1]
supervisors. Supervisors feel that they are less confident. However, the difference in their opinion is
quite low(4.28>4.19)[Q3]
However, the difference in their opinion is quite low.(4.3>4.21) [Q4]
apply their knowledge and/or skills on your jobs, than the supervisors. However, the difference in
their opinions is quite low.(4.17<4.23)[Q5]
knowledge on the job, than the supervisors. However, the difference in their opinions is quite
low.(4.17>4.11) [Q6]
4.18
4.23
4.28
4.3
4.17 4.17
4.31
4.16
4.03
4.19
4.21
4.23
4.11
4.14
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
OVERALL

31 | P a g e
LIMITATIONS IN THE STUDY
 The participants and supervisors complained that the time gap between Level 1 and Level 3 feedback
is very long.
 I could not approach all the participants and supervisors because some of them had either left or
retired from the organization or were transferred from the Jamshedpur Plant of THCM.
 I found lack of interest in some of the participants and supervisors in filling the form. Thus, their
feedback might not be genuine from their side.
 I found some supervisors giving biased feedback for the participants with whom they shared a
friendly relationship.
 There were cases where a single supervisor had to give feedback for more than 10 participants. Thus,
convincing some of them to fill up the bundle of forms was a really challenging job.

32 | P a g e
LEARNINGS
I had a great learning experience at THCM, with very supportive guides, Mr. Kumar Jagat and Mr.
Somen Lodh. I have completed my project successfully on time.
Other than my project on Training Effectiveness, I have also worked on several other areas and
events. I used to set the requirements before training had to begin, like preparing the attendance
sheet, and level 1(reaction) form. After the training I updated the master data (attendance) in the
system (MS-Excel). I also prepared the summary of Level 1(Reaction).
I have also searched for institutes for specific trainings that had to be provided to the employees for
this financial year. After, the releasing of the training calendar for this year, I distributed them to the
supervisors and managers of different departments of THCM and accordingly updated the data
regarding the recipients of the training calendar.
I also assisted my guide in preparing the master data and related works about the Health Care Camp
held at THCM.
I prepared Power Point presentations for the Supply Chain Department’s office work.

33 | P a g e
CONCLUSION & FINDINGS
During my internship and as per my analysis the training in all the departments, except Planning, Tool
Room and Climate Change, has to be reconsidered. The employees should get the opportunity to use the
knowledge presented in the programmes.
The lowest performance of employees after training was 3 out of 5 which was found in finance &
administration department. So I conclude that for these departments in particular we have to reconsider their
training as per their requirement, for effective and efficient results. The suggestion from majority of the
participants is that they need enough equipment so that they can have access to the necessary resources so
that they can apply their knowledge on the job.
THCM is committed to further improvement of employee’s performance in order to achieve its goals.
THCM strives to provide an atmosphere of learning. I was exposed to an atmosphere of interaction with
different kind of people and learning new things. I am grateful to THCM for giving me this wonderful
opportunity and experience.
Strong
80%
Weak
20%
0%
Programme's Strength (Participant
Feedback)
Strong
73%
Weak
27%
0%
Programme's Strength(Supervisor
Feedback)

34 | P a g e
REFERENCES
 https://www.google.co.in/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=0kR_V4H7J6nT8gfhn5fQAQ#q=tata+hitachi
 https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact
=8&ved=0ahUKEwjy3MDim-
PNAhXBro8KHU8EDjEQFggsMAM&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tatahitachi.co.in%2F
our-company%2Fcompany-
profile.aspx&usg=AFQjCNEMClY0vMMv4mCWh4iWhe_1x-
8Dug&bvm=bv.126130881,d.c2I
=8&ved=0ahUKEwjy3MDim-
PNAhXBro8KHU8EDjEQFggbMAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tatahitachi.co.in%2F
our-company%2Fskill-development-
initiative.aspx&usg=AFQjCNEdCQ4QJOH_0yhvlpR3Od20rc82SA&bvm=bv.126130881,
d.c2I
=8&ved=0ahUKEwiDlOCEnOPNAhUBtI8KHUWtACgQFgg_MAg&url=https%3A%2F
%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FDonald_Kirkpatrick&usg=AFQjCNHDNtqdugKG3B4
YRLtgOobWyC8Lvg&bvm=bv.126130881,d.c2I
 https://www.google.co.in/search?q=Kirk+Patrick+Model&biw=1366&bih=667&tbm=isch
&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiDlOCEnOPNAhUBtI8KHUWtACgQsAQI
Lw

35 | P a g e
APPENDICES
 THCM – Tata Hitachi Constructions Machinery
 SCM – Supply Chain Management
 QA – Quality Assurance
 HR & IR – Human Resources & Industrial Relations

REPORT-NIRUPAMA

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Ähnlich wie REPORT-NIRUPAMA

Ähnlich wie REPORT-NIRUPAMA (20)

REPORT-NIRUPAMA