\ufeffEVALUATING TRAINING NEEDS<\/p>\n
As suggested by Craig (2008) action research could take a quantitative, qualitative or mixed-method approach, for collection of data from the respondents. The paper examines some of the data collection methods that can be used to improve service delivery in the organization.<\/p>\n
Motivation of the workers<\/p>\n
Surveys could be used to gather employees\u2019 responses and discover which elements of the reward system are working and which are not. In addition, the surveys could be used by the management and the consultants to determine whether employees favor extrinsic or instruct motivators. Surveys could be delivered online, and McClelland (1994) recommends the use of custom-designed survey questionnaire due to its flexibility. Use of surveys has several advantages including elimination of bias, easy administration, and can be used to collect a wide variety of information. Interviews can also be used by action researchers for collection of qualitative data, and they could be structured, semi-structured and unstructured (McClelland, 1994). To obtain standardized information from the employees, it would be advisable for the researcher to use structured interviews. Focus groups provide action researchers with an avenue to validate the responses given and should be used in conjunction with numerically oriented methods while on-site observations are used to capture elements such as the physical environment, social organization, program activities and interactions of the employees (McClelland, 1994).However, according to McClelland (1994) on-site observations are limited by need for subject matter experts <\/p>\n
Outsourcing the non-core activities<\/p>\n
To effectively deal with this theme, action researchers could conduct surveys targeted at specific departments, and employees who have the necessary technical expertise. This is very necessary, as some of the employees may not be even be aware of how the organization operates. Given the likely impact of outsourcing on employment, surveys provide an organization with the best opportunity of obtaining standardized responses from the employees. The quantitative data obtained could then be supplemented with the information collected through interviews, focus groups and on-site observations. <\/p>\n
Improving communication capabilities and proper resource allocation<\/p>\n
To improve the existing communication channels and resource allocation, the researchers will equally rely on both qualitative and quantitative data. In this regard, data collected through surveys, interviews, focus groups and on-site observation will highly be appreciated. <\/p>\n
References<\/p>\n
Craig, D. V. (2008). Action research essentials. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.<\/p>\n
McClelland, S. B. (1994). Training needs assessment data-gathering methods: Part one, survey questionnaires. Journal of European Industrial Training, 18(1), 22-26.<\/p>\n
McClelland, S. B. (1994). Training needs assessment data-gathering methods: Part two\u2014Individual interviews. Journal of European Industrial Training, 18(2), 27-31. <\/p>\n
McClelland, S. B. (1994). Training needs assessment data-gathering methods: Part three, focus groups. Journal of European Industrial Training, 18(3), 29-32. <\/p>\n
McClelland, S. B. (1994). Training needs assessment data-gathering methods: Part four, on-site observations. Journal of European Industrial Training, 18(5), 4-7. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\ufeffEVALUATING TRAINING NEEDS As suggested by Craig (2008) action research could take a quantitative, qualitative or mixed-method approach, for collection<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-49160","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"yoast_head":"\n