218

ISSN 1822 – 8402 EUROPEAN INTEGRATION STUDIES. 2009. No 3

PersoNNel TraiNiNg eFFiCieNCY evaluaTioN sYsTem: 
ComPeTiTive abiliTY asPeCT

Asta Stankevičienė 
Aušra Liučvaitienė 

Agnė Šimelytė
Vilniaus Gedimino technikos universitetas

abstract

Theoretical premises of personnel training efficiency evaluation as one of the factors establishing competitive 
ability advantage, while emphasising changes of working productivity, are analysed in this article. The analysis 
of general competitive ability models and the possible application of prospective in the companies’ competitive 
ability surveys are necessary when trying to clarify peculiarities of modelling competitive ability as a factor 
which forms the competitive advantage. Referring to the introduced arguments and analysis of theoretical 
scientific literature, the possible scheme of competitiveness evaluation is proposed. The provided methodology 
on the competitive evaluation may be in order to evaluate the competitiveness of a company. The elements 
of advantageous and efficient activity become weighty criterion assessing the competitive advantage. The 
criterion assists accurately and explicit of competitive advantage evaluation. In Lithuania, during the period of 
transformation competitive advantages were formed as a part on impact of such factors as qualified and cheap 
labour force, cheap raw materials, etc. It is worth while to notice the significance of results evaluation resources 
used to achieve those results in the methodology. Therefore, examining the personnel’s work efficiency as one 
of factors which forms the competitive advantage, it should be appropriate to identify the essence and methods 
of results evaluation and expenditure for resources of work (especially, in investments of personnel training).

Personnel training importance when company‘s competitive ability is established. After analysis of modern 
attitudes towards personnel training efficiency evaluation it was determined that there is no coherent personnel 
training efficiency evaluation system. Performed analysis of questionnaire research data on companies’ 
attitude towards personnel training efficiency evaluation has shown that opinions of the companies also are not 
completely established. Place of personnel training efficiency evaluation system while evaluating company‘s 
competitive ability is provided, with a reference to competitive ability and personnel training efficiency 
evaluation methods. The position of personnel training efficiency evaluation system determined in common 
evaluation system of competitiveness permits evaluation and not only the impact of material devices on benefit, 
but also the return on investments in human factor, and the impact on working profitability. The suggested 
objective of personnel training may have an impact on different levels of evaluation. The proposed integrated 
training efficiency evaluation system is based on various objectives, levels, criteria, objects and methods in 
evaluation, and evaluation of the effects. Personnel evaluation system might be used in organizations in which 
the training is performed, and the system may be the basis of personnel training efficiency evaluation. The 
training efficiency evaluation acquires the strategic significance in the competitive advantage formation. 

Keywords: 

Personnel training, personnel training efficiency evaluation system, competitiveness, competitive ability.

Introduction 

 The relevance and the problem of research. The 
authors who analyse the problem of competitive ability 
state that the fundamental and strategic direction of 
companies enhancing competitive ability which is the 
basis of competitive ability on intangible investments 
(technologies, managerial, professional and business 
organizational competency and etc.) The core condition 
of company’s competitive ability becomes ability to use 

up-to-dated information and knowledge, in this way, 
the principal competency of the company is developed. 
Consequently, the personnel’s training appears as the 
basic method. 
 Appreciating attitude of Lithuanian companies’ 
managers towards personnel training, it is likely 
that they admit the importance of training. Although 
to perform personnel training some inconvenience 
concerning unwelcome conditions come into existence. 
First of all, it is the lack of financial resources and the 



ISSN 1822-8402 EUROPEAN INTEGRATION STUDIES. 2009. No 3

219

resistance of individual executive’s managers as well 
as there are some barriers created by individuals such 
as unwillingness to get knowledge, lack of time, etc. 
Naturally, mentioned holdbacks are usually related to 
some managers’ indifference towards the performance 
of personnel training since it is complicated to ascertain 
impact of personnel training has or might have on 
company’s performance. Such situation is related to 
uncertainty of personnel training efficiency evaluation 
due to the fact that there is no unite system of personnel 
training efficiency evaluation. 
 The object of research – the system of personnel 
training efficiency evaluation. The used methods 
involve: theoretical review of concepts concerning 
personnel training efficiency evaluation, systematic, 
logical analysis and synthesis and performed analysis of 
questionnaire research data.
 The aim of research – introduce the system of 
personnel training efficiency evaluation and the system 
position in a general scene of competitive ability 
evaluation. 
 The tasks of research: 

to evaluate the importance of personnel training 	
by creating competitive advantage;
to represent the review of modern attitudes towards 	
the personnel training efficiency evaluation;
to evaluate the companies’ attitudes towards the 	
system of personnel training efficiency evaluation, 
applying the questionnaire;
to introduce the system of personnel training 	
efficiency evaluation and to define its place in 
general competitive ability evaluation system, 
considering the methodology personnel training 
efficiency evaluation and competitive ability. 

Theoretical Assumptions on the Evaluation of the 
Competitive Ability

 In the scientific literature various methods are 
proposed to estimate the competitive ability though 
they are marked as separate methods evaluating the 
competitive ability of a country, of a product, etc. 
 Moreover, in the scientific literature might be initiated 
more than one general competitive ability evaluation 
model which analyses the competitive theory. However, 
there could be hardly found any empirical studies 
emphasising the suitability for investigation of personnel 
efficiency as a factor which creates the problems of 
competitive advantage. 
 The analysis of general competitive ability models, and 
the possible application of prospective in the companies’ 
competitive ability surveys is necessary when trying to 
clarify peculiarities of modelling competitive ability as a 
factor which forms the competitive advantage. 

 The scientific literature (M.Porter, 1990; A.M.Rugman, 
J.R.D’Cruz, 1993; R.A. D’Aveni, 1994; F.Weston, 
K.S.Chung, 1990; B.Balassa, 1965; T.L.Vollrath, 1991, 
W.J. Baumol, 1998) introduces various methods used 
in analysis of competitive ability though generally they 
are applied as separate methods evaluating competitive 
ability of a country, of a product, etc. Furthermore, some 
authors (R. Amit and M. Belcourt, 1999) state that the 
personnel training and evaluation of personnel training 
efficiency is as a company’s human resources quality 
determining factor which has ability to reduce risk and 
create competitive advantage. After the analysis of works 
presented above has been done, used evaluation methods 
could be grouped into these: 
 1) Miscellaneous evaluation of competitive ability 
of all economic branches or of one economic branch in 
a country. An objective of the research is to determine 
competitive sectors of a country’s economics and 
evaluate the development perspectives in international 
markets; 
 2) Analysis of manufacturing groups, when bonds 
of the chosen sector to other sectors are examined. It 
includes not only subjects of particular economy, but also 
suppliers of services and goods which in the production 
process are essential. Even more analysis is performed 
according to the M. Porter’s proposed methodology 
which examines whole production process from receiving 
the raw materials to delivery for a consumer;
 3) Evaluation of separate product (good) competitive 
ability. In the analysis of separate product competitive 
ability, size of the subject in the market and of average in 
branch produced production is used;
 4) Evaluation of environment practise. The 
research estimates indicators of modular living level, 
foreign trade, labour force potentiality, condition of 
infrastructure, etc. The indicators introduce conditions of 
development on particular economic branch. Even more 
indicators are applied which reflecting innovations, IT 
and communication level, interface between science and 
economics. 
 Evaluations of the competitive ability of country 
economics, or its separate branch, or of a product, or an 
environment of a business subject are usually performed 
by international organisations, independent experts 
groups and institutes which survey and settle ratings of 
countries in global context by their competitive position in 
an adequate market. Furthermore, there are some experts 
from discrete countries whose objectives are to evaluate 
competitive ability of their own subjects and further 
direction of national economic development. Table 1 
represents the most frequent methods of competitive 
ability evaluation 1

1 There is attached an officially acknowledged methodology 
oriented especially to the potential of practice.



ISSN 1822-8402 EUROPEAN INTEGRATION STUDIES. 2009. No 3

220

Table 1. Comparison of Methods in Competitive Ability Evaluation

Methodology
The Essence of 

Methodology
Used factors

Possibilities to Apply 
the Methodology 

When Assessing the 
Competitiveness of a 

Company 
1 2 3 4

M.porter’s Methods 
(Портер, 2000).

The term of competitive 
advantage of economic 
subject depends on the 
profitability of the subject 
which is determined by five 
strengths.

1) internal factors: conditions 
of demand; associated sectors; a 
strategy, structure and competition of 
economical subject;
2) External factors: Government; an 
international practice.

It can be used when assessing 
competitiveness on the scale 
of a country. 

The World Bank’s 
Methodology
(The Competitiveness 
of European industry, 
1999)

The database is composed 
of 49 indicators that allow 
assessment of a county’s 
economic condition and 
expansion possibilities in the 
competitive business.

1) common factors of economy 
expansion (GDP, GDP annual 
growth, standard deviation of finance 
distribution);
2) the dynamics of factors 
(investments, productivity, a structure 
of export) of  relation between 
microeconomics and international 
economics; 
3) the dynamics of financial indicators 
(the foreign debt, GDP growth 
influenced by price rate, government 
bonds);
4) factors of the infrastructure  and the 
investments climate (communications, 
roads, railways, electricity supply);
5) factors of human resources  and 
intellectual capital development 
(higher education, a life long 
expectancy, patents).

Only some of the mentioned 
factors can be used because 
the factors of the dynamics 
of financial indicators 
(the foreign debt, GDP 
growth influenced by price 
rate, government bonds) 
infrastructure and investments 
climate (communications, 
roads, railways, electricity 
supply) are assessed merely 
on the scale of a country, 
and are not differentiated 
in accordance with separate 
sectors and - much less – with 
companies. 

European 
Committee’s 
Methodology
(The Competitiveness 
of European industry, 
1999)

One of the essential factors 
influencing competitiveness 
in the modern,   changeable 
conditions of global 
economics is a competence 
to conform to rapid 
improvement of technologies 
and to immediately react to 
changes. 

1) an annual variation of  production 
size and working productivity (as a 
relation of the value-added  and annual 
personnel’s quantity);
2) an annual variation of the busy 
condition;
3) an annual average production, 
export and import variation (when the 
growth of export surpasses the growth 
of production, and when the volume of 
export increases more rapidly than the 
volume of import, it can be inferred 
that increases the competitiveness of 
the country in the international market, 
or it is maintained stable);
4) factors of specialization and 
concentration: a coefficient  of 
concentration; Herfindal’s index; a 
standard deviation of parts  
(a dispersion measure of sectors); 
coefficients of specialization: Balla’s 
index, an indicator of the 
geographic specialization; an index 
of dissimilarity (the sum of absolute 
discrepancies); Gini’s coefficient.

It can be partially applied. If 
an object of research is the 
economics of one country, 
for instance, Lithuania, a 
calculation of indexes of 
the concentration is not 
necessary. Besides, Central 
and Eastern Europe’s, 
including Lithuanian, 
structural change importance 
cannot be compared with 
results in the analysis of 
EU – 15 countries because 
the comparable countries are 
in different conditions of the 
economic development. 



ISSN 1822-8402 EUROPEAN INTEGRATION STUDIES. 2009. No 3

221

1 2 3 4
Methodology of 
New Zealand’s 
Department of 
Research, Science 
and  Technologies
(The World 
Competitiveness 
Yearbook, Orla M., 
1996) 

Sectors of the country 
economics are subdivided 
into four groups according 
to the level of use of 
the equipment and 
technologies, i.e., high 
and low technologies, and 
technologies of medium 
height and medium lowness. 

Coefficient of export/import; factors 
of import infiltration and directness 
on foreign competition rate; 
specialization of export; a factor of an 
inner trading rate.

It can be used on a scale 
of the whole country, on 
condition that there will be 
a possibility to calculate all 
the factors, proposed in the 
methodology because not 
evaluating the one of them 
may distort results. 

Methodology of Local 
Resources Outlay
(Lietuvos pramonės 
konkurencingumo 
įvertinimas, 2000)

Competitiveness of the 
whole country economics, 
of the specific sector or of 
the group of a commodity 
is evaluated during the 
short-term and medium-
term period. If DRC factor 
denotes less than 1 - the 
production is claimed to 
be competitive. If DRC is 
equal to 1, or larger than 
1 - the production is not 
competitive. 

DRC (production is competitive, if 
DRC >1).

DRC – a factor of the local financial 
reservoir.

It can be used when the 
thorough information is 
provided about the variation 
of microeconomic and 
macroeconomics factors 
during the period of 
investigation. 

Methodology of 
Lithuanian Economy 
Institute
(Lietuvos pramonės 
konkurencingumo 
įvertinimas, 2000)

The evaluation of 
competitiveness is 
performed referring to the 
external factors of practice 
in Lithuanian foreign 
trade and industry, and the 
comparison of the factors 
with appropriate ES – 15 
countries’ factors. 

1) disclosed comparative advantage; 
a part of Lithuanian export of 
commodities in the adequate export of 
countries of EU; a part of import from 
EU which is composed of Lithuanian 
export of commodities; percentage of 
export in the total Lithuanian export; 
a part of export to EU in the total 
Lithuanian export to EU; the net-
income  from Lithuanian export of 
commodities;
2) working productivity (according to 
production); the working productivity 
(according to the value-added); 
the rate of the growing working 
productivity; the rate of growth of 
volume in industrial production; the 
rate of growth of personnel’s quantity;
3) a quality of products, a level 
of technologies, a level of service 
for customers, an installation 
of innovations, marketing, the 
qualification of the labour force;
4) Scientific researches and 
development; a qualitative level 
of stock among the labour force; 
accessibility of financial reservoirs; a 
level of infrastructure in activity.

It can be used to evaluate 
the industrial competitive, 
though the necessary addition 
on the specific factors of an 
examined sector should be 
involved when assessing the 
competitive of a company 
and determining the 
personnel as one of factors 
that forms the competitive 
advantage. 

 After examining the competitive ability evaluation 
methods, the essential indicators are determined which 
might be grouped into these: 1) indicators of the 
measurement of the competitive advantage, 2) indicators 
of the profitability, 3) indicators defining the level of 
state support. 
 The competitive ability of a country and a separate 
object of economics cannot be isolated from evaluation 

of possibilities in formation of competitive ability 
advantage 2. 
 Hence, it is noticeable that retain of competitive 
advantage longevity may cause some problems when 
2 Herein the competitive advantage is interpreted as the in-
defeasible competitive exclusiveness of subject in economics, 
when introducing more valuable than competitors’ products 
in the market. 



ISSN 1822-8402 EUROPEAN INTEGRATION STUDIES. 2009. No 3

222

such factors as customers – consumers’ needs, demand, 
an increase in number of market participants, innovations, 
an installation of modern technologies, market growth 
and etc. – give an ambiguous meaning to long-term 
competitive advantage.   
 Resources of competitive advantage usually 
discussed in theoretical researches are these: highest 
quality manufacturing, lower than competitors’ costs, 
more advantageous geographical situation and creating 
the higher value for consumers. In order, to estimate 
competitive possibilities of the economy subject in a 
market, the notion of the competitive advantage should be 
purposefully extended by the notion of efficient activity 
which would include output, innovations, an internecine 
compatibility in work spheres of the subject, an efficient 
management of a company, human enterprise of the 
subject, etc. Furthermore, these elements of advantageous 
and efficient activity become weighty criterion assessing 
the competitive advantage; the criterion assists in accurate 
and explicit of competitive advantage evaluation. 
 In Lithuania, during the period of transformation 
competitive advantages were formed as a part on impact 
of such factors as qualified and cheap labour force, cheap 
raw materials, etc. The formation and reinforcement of 
competitive advantages (including not only the above 
mentioned) of Lithuanian economy branches is one 
of the essential strategic objectives in the economic 
country’s policy while achieving the competitive ability 
in the international market. The recently formed view 
claims the competitive possibilities in the international 
market of economics subjects particularly depend on the 
personnel’s ability to use the acquired knowledge, skills 
and creativity. Researches of this sphere are performed 
in such directions:
 a) an analysis of specific economy branches, where 
traditional competitive factors are used. Although, in 
accordance with the three parameters, an application of 
new classification of economic branches reflects a level 
of technologies; a level of the intensity of manufacturing 
factors; level of labour force a qualification. 
 b) An evaluation of the accumulated knowledge 
in country, of potential qualification, development of 
sectors opened to knowledge, of rate in installation 
of innovations, and other factors reflecting abilities 
of economic subjects to compete in spheres of high 
technologies and of the complicated production. 
 In order, to attain aim of the article, company’s 
competitiveness might be evaluated using the introduced 
methods in competitive evaluation though possibilities 
of use are limited because of information lack when most 
indicators should be calculated, or because of the opinion 
formed in the company (as results of the investigation 
disclosed) when personnel is not adequately evaluated 
as a resource of competitive advantage. It is worth while 
to notice the significance of results evaluation resources 

used to achieve those results in the methodology. 
Therefore, examining the personnel’s work efficiency as 
one of factors that forms the competitive advantage, it 
should be appropriate to identify the essence and methods 
of results evaluation and expenditure for resources of 
work (especially, in investments of personnel training). 
It is considered appropriate to take cognizance of the 
theoretical definiteness of activity, its correlation with 
the obtainment of competitive advantage; particular 
attention should be paid to personnel training efficiency 
evaluation.

Theoretical assumptions in personnel training 
efficiency evaluation

 Describing the essence of training efficiency, 
definition of a notion evaluation should be introduced. 
The evaluation could be understood as determination 
of value. With reference to Guba E. B. and Lincoln Y.S. 
(1981), “value” is understood twofold: value as merit 
which is interpreted as inner and outward ones.  
 The training efficiency evaluation does not only refer 
to a definition of an inner or outward value, but also to 
the very process of training and its results. An executive 
manager evaluating the process of training performs: 

an examination of practice related to training;	
the search for possibilities of improvement. 	

 These stages were called a forming evaluation by 
Scriven M (1967). Scriven M. proposed a notion of a 
total evaluation when after training the process is viewed 
as in the mass and the outward value is estimated. 
 Hamblin A.C. (1974) offered a traditional definition 
of the training environment evaluation: the training 
efficiency evaluation – any effort to get information 
(feedbacks) about results of training programme and 
to determine the value of training in the context of the 
provided information. 
 Different authors introduce a definition of training 
efficiency as seeking for objectives in learning (education): 
such a definition was criticized by Guba E.B. and Lincoln 
Y.S. (1981) as very narrow. Such an evaluation is called 
“determining the whole”. This evaluation is defined 
before the beginning of the very process of the evaluation, 
and it is oriented to the measured results. A Guba E.B. 
and Lincoln’s Y.S. proposed approach was later called 
“responsive”, which differs from “determining the whole” 
and evaluate changing condition and new information. 
And more attention is paid to the description than to the 
measurement. 
 Besides, many scientific sources training efficiency 
evaluation call as a validity of a curriculum of training. 
The validity of curriculum as an objective evaluating 
the training efficiency is an estimation whether the 
curriculum achieved the objectives. Theorists divide the 
process of the validity into two discreet parts – an inner 
and an outer one. In practice these two parts are analysed 



ISSN 1822-8402 EUROPEAN INTEGRATION STUDIES. 2009. No 3

223

as the whole because they can be hardly separated for 
their close relation. The inner validity is appointed to 
assess whether the training reached objectives, and the 
question “Did the trained acquired what they wished?” 
must be answered. The purpose of the outer validity is to 
discover the possibilities of using the gained knowledge 
in the real situation. The close connection between the 
inner and outer validity stipulates the necessity of the 
integrated training efficiency evaluation. A.C. (1974) 
and Kirkpatrick D.L. (1967) claim such an evaluation 
may involve these layers: 

reaction	  (trained personnel’s  and executives 
managers attitude towards training, the structure 
of training, content and methods are applied);
acquisition of knowledge and skills	  (facts and 
measures acquired by the trained);
behaviour at work 	 (what changes took place 
during the period of training, and how the modern 
knowledge and skills are used at work);
Changes in an organization	  (what is an effect done 
for the company). 

 Some authors (for instance, E.F.Holton, 1996), 
who examine these problems, improved suggestions, 
proposed by Kirkpatrick D.L. and distinguished three 
levels – training, performing an individual task and 
general effects of an organization. Others (J.J.Phillips, 
1996) introduce the new attitude towards the training 
efficiency evaluation systems which involve the reaction 
and anticipated actions, the training, use of the acquired 
knowledge, effects of practice and return on investment 
(hereinafter – ROI). Some authors (I.L.Goldstein, 

1986, V.Kumpikaitė, A.Sakalas, 2005) analyse training 
as process and determine the attitude of organization 
towards training of human resources, towards the 
accomplishment of a task, and an arrangement of the 
reservoir and career, training, professional training, 
adaptation and determination need of training. 
 Briefly, it could be stated that the levels of training 
efficiency evaluation proposed by Hamblin A.C. (1974) 
and Kirkpatrick D.L. (1967) the best focus on ROI 
to personnel progress while emphasising changes of 
personnel’s behaviour, i.e. working productivity.  
 In order to evaluate rate of growing working 
productivity, it is worth to choose an appropriate strategy 
of evaluation in accordance with the level of training 
efficiency evaluation. Hamblin A.C. defines some 
strategies of evaluation depending on training results. 
The author believes the training may be a cause of a 
chain reaction in an organization, and the strategy of 
evaluation may be selected in every stage (Table 2). 
 A.C. Hamblin’s analysis is interesting because it 
discloses how the evaluation can be performed in various 
levels, every of levels have its own possibilities of 
evaluation, and different reference points. The first three 
levels are evaluating objects in “determining the whole”, 
the rest depends on the feedback. 
 Different attitudes towards training are introduced as 
strategy chains of interrelation and evaluation. An object 
evaluating spectrum is very wide. It involves not only the 
learners and executive of their training (organization and 
service suppliers), but also a context of training, content 
and methods.

Table 2. Strategies of Training Efficiency Evaluation

Event Strategy of Assessment orientation
Teaching Considers the teaching Resources of learning 
Trainees’ reaction Considers the reaction The learners
Learning Considers the process of learning The learners
Changes of behaviour at work Considers the behaviour at work The trainees and on lookers 
Changes in the institution Development of an organization Unanimous organization 
An impact on final objectives of 

organization 
Analysis of expenditures and incoming Financial aspect

 Besides, methods, materials and variation of 
behaviour are used in training. The curriculum efficiency 
is evaluated in accordance with the above enumerated 
objects. Consequently, the general assessment can be 
based on some or on all the factors. 
 An appropriate definition of evaluating criteria is 
the essential task in the process of evaluation. Many 
of organizations face some difficulties when defining 
a certain selection of criteria because of complications 
quantitatively evaluating most effects of training (an 
increase in personnel activity, fulfilment at work, etc.). 
 That is why, the variety of criteria is determined by the 
whole spectrum of quantitative and qualitative factors: the 

learners’ fulfilment, customers satisfaction, personnel’s 
ability to solve problems, personnel’s adaptation to 
situation, personnel’s receptivity to innovations, changes 
in cultural and work atmosphere in organization, changes 
in product quality, changes of profit and turnover, and 
changes in resources efficiency use. 
 There are also used appropriate methods of evaluation 
during the practice in assessing the training efficiency: 
table 3 introduces them.



ISSN 1822-8402 EUROPEAN INTEGRATION STUDIES. 2009. No 3

224

Table 3. Methods of Training Efficiency Evaluation

Methods of Evaluation Content of Methods of Evaluation

1. The trainees’ opinion questioning straight after the 
training

Performing an interview (questioning) with learners on the 
training process efficiency 

2. The trainees’ opinion questioning after a certain period of 
time after the training

Performing an interview (questioning) with learners on the 
training process efficiency after 1, 3 or 6 months

3. The participants’ self-examination Participants of the process evaluate the level of achieved 
objectives

4. A written form examination or testing of knowledge 
acquired during the training straight after the learning

The level of acquired knowledge is evaluated with the help of 
tests and tasks

5. A written form examination or testing of knowledge 
acquired during the training after a certain period of time

It is evaluated, whether the presentation of information is recalled 
after 1, 3 or 6 months, with the help of tests and tasks

6. A heads’ opinion inquiry on the evaluation of their 
personnel’s work after a certain period of time

Performing an interview (questioning) with the heads on the 
change of work efficiency of the personnel which participated 
in training

7. Inquiry on 360 degrees. The thorough evaluation (questioning heads, colleagues, clients 
on changes of personnel’s behaviour and work efficiency after 
trainings, and the participants’ self-examining) 

8. Experiment on verification Comparison of effects in work of two groups of people, one of 
which did not participate in training

9. Supervision in the organization Observations on participants’ behaviour and task performing 
during a certain period of time ( it is executed by the head or 
some external supervisors) 

10. The feedback on teaching – learning investments 
(ROTI)

a), an analysis of financial feedback (expenses and income 
analysis)  b) an analysis of factors related to investments 
in training (calculation of indicators directly related to the 
performed training in the organization: common expenditure 
in training, expenses afforded to one trainee, a number of days 
afforded to one trainee, a number of trainees    ); c) an analysis of 
the suggested objectives and of the achieved ones (it is based on 
the suggested objectives of training, methods of training, content, 
organizational aspects and their appropriateness to the suggested 
objectives are assessed); d) clients’ satisfaction in the activity of 
personnel which participated  in training; e) The improvement in  
the climate of organization (better relations among personnel)  

 To summarising the introduced information, it is 
worth to pay attention into integrated training efficiency 
evaluation model proposed by Hamblin A.C. (1974) and 
Kirkpatrick D.L. (1967). Four levels are involved in the 

integrated training efficiency evaluation: an acquisition 
of reaction, knowledge and skills (inner validity), 
behaviour at work and work indicators (outer validity), 
training efficiency in organization (Table 4). 

Table 4. Levels of Integrated Training Efficiency Evaluation

Level objective
Who Executes and 

When
Methods Activities

1 2 3 4 5
Reaction Trainees’ and executives’ 

reaction to training, 
its structure, content, 
methods, teaching style, 
etc. 

Throughout the training 
course and/or after it (a 
lecturer)

Daily reviews, 
questionnaires, assemblies

The structure of 
curriculum and 
amendment of content

Acquisition of 
knowledge and 
skills, change of 
attitude (inner 
validity)

Find out how the 
knowledge and skills are 
acquired, and whether 
attitude has changed

Throughout the training 
course and/or after it (a 
lecturer)

Tests, practice, a verbal quiz The adjusted course 
for separate trainees, 
the repeated training, 
an improvement of 
knowledge and skills, 
the change of training 
methods



ISSN 1822-8402 EUROPEAN INTEGRATION STUDIES. 2009. No 3

225

1 2 3 4 5
Behaviour 
at work, a 
completion of 
work (outer 
validity)

Examine the ability of 
trainees to apply the 
acquired knowledge 
and skills in the work 
environment; how 
trainees’ and heads’ 
needs were satisfied

2-3 months later (a 
lecturer, a department 
of personnel training, 
the direct heads)

Questionnaires, interviews 
with the former trainees 
and their direct heads; 
personnel’s observations

A continual 
improvement and 
renewal of curriculum 
due to changes of 
needs

Effects of 
training on 
organization 
(evaluation)

Evaluate the benefit of 
the training (on money 
or non-money terms) for 
organization

   Periodically. Some 
time should pass in 
order that effects 
were noticeable in the 
organization

Refund of investments in 
teaching-learning

Inform the office of 
the training about 
the efficiency of the 
used procedures, 
and introduce the 
appropriate procedures

 After the analysis of competitive resources 
evaluation introduced in the scientific literature, it can 
be presumed that a formation of the competitiveness 
and of the competitive advantage is approached as a 
versatile and changing phenomenon. In the formation of 
competitive advantage more and more attention is paid 
to a notion of the working productivity which involves 
the manufacturing efficiency, innovations, internecine 
compatibility of spheres in the activity of the subject, 
the management efficiency of a company, the human 
enterprise of the subject, etc. The latter factor more and 
more often is related to process of training; economists 
connect it with the training efficiency evaluation (return). 
The training efficiency evaluation can be stated to be a 
complicated problem which causes lots of discussions 
among researches. Although, radically, the training 
efficiency evaluation can be based on 3 elements: 1) 
on the objectives of training that are set (when methods 
of training, the content, and their appropriateness to 
the set objectives are examined); 2) on a psychological 
prosperity of an individual and a group (when the 
attitude is mostly paid to the trainees’ satisfaction); 3) on 
factors of the return on economic investments (that are 
not always appropriate to define the return because of 
large number factors determining return of training and 
delayed effect). 
 Naturally, to pay attention not only to the theorists’ 
point of views, but also to very participants’ and heads’ 
standpoint, needs and of process evaluation. 

Research on personnel training efficiency 
evaluation

 A research on the customers who applied for training 
services and on companies offering training services was 
carried out on purpose to find out a problem solution of 
training efficiency in environment of the company. Two 
groups of participants concerned with personnel training 
efficiency were questioned during survey: on the one 
side, Vilnius city consultancies offering services for the 

personnel training standing, the customers who applies 
for personnel training services (herein, the companies of 
the IT department) – on the other side. During the survey 
278 IT companies and 40 consultancies were questioned. 
The integrated pattern of the training efficiency evaluation 
proposed by Hamblin A.C. and Kirkpatrick D.L. was 
chosen for the composition of the questionnaire, and 
involved four levels of the training efficiency evaluation: 
a reaction, an acquisition of knowledge and skills (inner 
validity), the behaviour at work and indicators of activity 
(outer validity), effects of training for the company are 
widely used. 
 Analysis of the effects of research in IT companies 
and consultancies (Figure 1) states the problem in 
incompatibility of the objectives in the training efficiency 
evaluation exists between customers who apply for the 
training service and suppliers. According to the clients, 
fundamental objectives in training efficiency evaluation 
are directed towards the decision on the further training 
(61 percent) and towards the identifying the adequacy for 
expectations of the quality in the training (25 percent). 
Only 10 percent of respondents seek for the financial 
payback in training. Although, according to specialist 
experts some companies who seek to financially assess 
the payback of the training, or to define whether the 
quality of training satisfies employers’ expectations 
are those whose systems of the activity evaluation and 
motivation are not connected. Thus, in essence, the 
quality of the training is not evaluated or it is evaluated 
inefficiently (because the results of analysis are not 
used). 

Whereas, training service suppliers’ aims are related 
to feedback (83 percent) that provide an information of 
training efficiency methods, of the content of the training 
and an appropriateness of a structure that is beneficial for 
suppliers’ of the training only. 



ISSN 1822-8402 EUROPEAN INTEGRATION STUDIES. 2009. No 3

226

 
fig. 1. Attitude towards objectives, criteria, methods, objects and levels of evaluation (%) in consultancies and IT 
companies

 Trainees’ knowledge and reaction (83 percent) are 
the most popular objects of evaluation. Meanwhile, the 
training methodology, a content and structure as objects 
of the evaluation determining trainees’ knowledge and 
reaction are mentioned considerably rarely (relatively, 48 
and 17 percent). Examination with the help of tests and 
(trainees’ and their heads’ questioning) questioning are the 
most popular methods of evaluation among consultancies 
(relatively, 87 and 96 percent). When a certain period of 
time passed, only 17 percent of respondents mentioned 
an examination of knowledge after training, though the 
method is an excellent way to evaluate the success of 
use of the acquired knowledge in practice. In the foreign 
countries the verification experiment is absolutely 
unpopular in Lithuania (4 percent), and only 61 percent 
of companies use the questioning for clients, although 
the survey of clients exposed the fact that a criterion of 
clients’ opinion was one of the essential. 
 A level of trainees’ reaction (the first one) is the most 
popular in evaluation (83 percent), whereas the training 
efficiency is evaluated more rarely in the three upper 
levels of the evaluation. Knowledge and skills play 
an important role (87 percent, Figure 1), whereas 52 
percent rank the change of behaviour at work, and only 
30 percent of respondents rank effects of the training in 
organization. Some authors prove our conclusion that 
claims the most popular level of the training efficiency 
evaluation is the trainees’ reaction; effects of the training 
are rarely evaluated in other levels of training efficiency 
evaluation
 To sum up, the research confirmed the presumption 
emphasized in the theoretical analysis: incompatibility 
exists in perception of training efficiency evaluation 
process among suppliers of the training service and 

customer which is, the essence and benefit of training 
evaluation system, especially when forming competitive 
advantage, is not realized. In this way, the necessity of 
the arrangement of the training efficiency evaluation 
system is motivated. 

personnel training efficiency evaluation 
and its position in the general system of the 
competitiveness evaluation 

 After the theoretical principles analysis of the 
competitiveness and the methodology used in the 
competitiveness evaluation, and after the designation 
of the essence of improvement in continual personnel’s 
qualification and of impact on working productivity, 
and of necessity of the personnel training efficiency 
evaluation, there is considered appropriate to offer 
an integrated personnel training efficiency evaluation 
system, and its position in the general evaluation system 
of the competitiveness. 
 There should be remarked that competitiveness of a 
company must be evaluated during the performance of 
personnel training not only according to the attainment 
of the competitive advantage, but also according to the 
return in process. Thus, it is significant to determine 
principles of the competitive evaluation which might be 
used when assessing an impact of inner and outer factors 
on competitive advantage. None the less important to 
predict how the benefit of the economy subject (herein, 
a company) - that provides a possibility to define a 
level of the efficient activity, and a degree of impact on 
factors determining the latter indicator - will be assessed. 
Referring to the previously introduced arguments and 
analysis of theoretical scientific literature, the possible 
scheme of competitiveness evaluation is proposed. 
(Figure2).



ISSN 1822-8402 EUROPEAN INTEGRATION STUDIES. 2009. No 3

227

 
fig. 2. A position of personnel training evaluation system in the competitive evaluation system (created by the authors) 

After the authors’ analysis which investigates 
competitiveness evaluation and determining factors, the 
inferences can be drawn such as both inner and outer 
competitive advantage forming factors can be identified. 
It seems likely that evaluating possibilities of an impact 
on company’s environment, factors of inner environment 
might be purposefully oriented towards the maximum 
efficiency in activity of a company. Recently, the scientific 
literature grants its attention to investments on human 
resources which are determined as one of the possible 
factors composing acquired competitive advantage. That 
is why it is considered appropriate to determine how these 
factors influence the competitiveness of a company in the 
market. Thus, it might be purposeful to find out how the 
objectives of the training agree with common factors of 
formation of competitiveness in a company. In the context 
of acquired competitive advantage the personnel training 
efficiency evaluation system (payback) is involved into 
the total system of factors of the competitive evaluation 
in company. Personnel training efficiency evaluation 
system (payback) may be approached as one of directions 
to enhance the competitiveness. 
 After the analysis of methodology in personnel 
training efficiency evaluation – with the reference to 

analysis of the research data – it may be purposeful 
to provide an integrated personnel training efficiency 
evaluation system (Figure 3). 
 The authors examine the problem of personnel 
efficiency evaluation in accomplished studies propose 
the purposeful enumeration of objectives that are 
influenced by training efficiency evaluation, when the 
formation of personnel training efficiency evaluation 
takes place. The information for personnel evaluation is 
collected after the assessment of a level of the suggested 
objectives accessibility. The suggested objective of 
personnel training may has an impact on different levels 
of evaluation. That is why the most significant in the 
stage is to properly determine the level of evaluation 
(trainees’ reaction; acquisition of knowledge and skills; 
behaviour at work, accomplishment of work; training 
effects on organization). 
 The chosen levels of evaluation influence criteria of 
evaluation and objectives; consequently the method of 
evaluation is chosen and the achieved result is defined, 
and it permits evaluation of clients’ expectations for 
further training.



ISSN 1822-8402 EUROPEAN INTEGRATION STUDIES. 2009. No 3

228

 

fig. 3. personnel training efficiency evaluation system (composed by the authors)

 To sum up, there can be stated that the integrated 
personnel training evaluation system allows to achieve 
the best representative results in the training efficiency 
when the customer’s and the supplier’s objectives training 
service and evaluation levels, and the understanding of 
criteria and objects, are matched up.

Conclusions

 1. Finally, a conclusion can be drawn: all the provided 
methodology on the competitive evaluation may be used 
evaluating the competitiveness of company. Although 
the possibilities of use are limited because of lack of 
information in calculations of factors, or because of 
attitude of company when the personnel is not adequately 
evaluated as a resource of competitive advantage (a fact 
was confirmed by performed empirical survey). 
 2. The theoretical conceptual analysis in personnel 
training efficiency evaluation indicates that, basically, 
training efficiency evaluation may be motivated by 
3 factors: 1) the suggested training objectives (when 
training methods, their content and agreement with the 
suggested objectives are studied); 2) the psychological 
welfare of individual and group (when attention is mostly 
paid to trainees’ satisfaction); 3) the factors of return on 
investments (which are not always appropriate for the 

training return evaluation because of plenty of factors 
determining training return and delayed effect, having 
respect to time). 
 3. The accomplished survey is confirmed by 
proposed presumption in the theoretical analysis. It says 
that the incompatibility exists between the customers’ 
and suppliers’ understanding of a process of training 
efficiency evaluation process, that is, the essence and 
benefit of training evaluation system is not realized, 
especially in the formation of competitive advantage. 
The fact motivates necessity of formation of integrated 
training efficiency evaluation system. 
 4. The position of personnel training efficiency 
evaluation system determined in common evaluation 
system of competitiveness permits evaluation and not 
only the impact of material devices on benefit, but also 
the return on investments in human factor, and the impact 
on working profitability. 
 5. The proposed integrated training efficiency 
evaluation system is based on various objectives, 
levels, criteria, objects and methods in evaluation, and 
evaluation of the effects. An integrated training efficiency 
evaluation system allows selection of an appropriate 
evaluation methodology and the achievement of the best 
representative results in training efficiency. 



ISSN 1822-8402 EUROPEAN INTEGRATION STUDIES. 2009. No 3

229

 Suggestions
 1. The personnel evaluation system should be used 
in organizations in which the training is performed, and 
the system should be the basis of personnel training 
efficiency evaluation. In this case, the training efficiency 
evaluation acquires the strategic significance in the 
competitive advantage formation. 
 2. Consultancies should popularise the training 
efficiency evaluation service in order the customers would 
understand the significance of the received information 
in the period of evaluation. Thus, during the survey, the 
efficiency evaluation methodology, criteria, levels and 
the use of results in practice should be introduced to 
customers. 
 3. Consultancies should more actively adapt 
methodologies created in foreign countries, and analysing 
training conditions and consulting experience they should 
create their own methodology. 

References

Amit, R. and Belcourt, M. Human Resources 
Management Processes: A Value – Creating Source 
of Competitive Advantage, European Management 
Journal, 1991. Vol. 7,2. P. 174 -181.

Balassa, B. Trade Liberalization and Revealed 
Comparative advantage. The Manchester School of 
Economic and Social Studies, 33. Assessment, New 
York: Cambrige University Press, 1965.  P. 99-123.

Baumol, W.J., Panzar, J.C., Willig, R.D. Contestable 
Markets and Theory of Industry Structure. New 
York, 1998. Vol. 7, No. 1.

D’Aveni, R.A. Hypercompetitione: Managing the 
Dynamics of Strategic Manoeuvring. Free Press, 
New York. 1994.

Goldstein, I.L. Training in Organizations: Needs 
assessment, development and evolution, Pacific 
Grove, CA: Brooks – Cole. 1986.

Guba, E.G., Lincoln, Y.S. Effective evaluation. Jossey-
Bass. 1981.

Hamblin, A.C. Evaluation and control of training. 
McGraw-Hill. 1974.

Holton III, E.F. The flouved Four – Level Evaluation 
Model, Human Resource Development Quartely. 
1996.  Vol. 7(1), P. 5-21.

Kirkpatrick, D.L. Evaluation of Training. In Training 
and Development Handbook. New York: McGraw 
Hill. 1967, P. 87-112.

Kumpikaitė, V. and Sakalas, A. The model of 
human resource development system focused on 
consistency of the organization and its employee’s . 
8th Conference on International HRM, International 
Human Resource Management: Making a Difference 
in a World of Differences. Cairns, Queensland, 
Australia, 2005.

Lietuvos pramonės konkurencingumas (2000); accessed 
20 September 2008, available from: http://www.
ukm.lt/catalogs/konkurenc/…htm

Rugman, A., D‘Cruz, J. The ”double diamond“ model 
of international competitiveness. The Canadian 
experience, Management International Review, 
1993. Vol. 33, P.17-39.

Phillips, J.J. ROI: How much is the Training? Training 
& Development. 1996, April. P. 20-24.

Porter, M. The Competitive Advantage of Nations. 
London, 1990. 885 p.

Orla, M., Chabchoub, H. On the methodology of the 
World Competitiveness Report. European Journal of 
Operational Research. 1996. 

Scriven, M. The methodology of evaluation. AERA 
Monograph, Rand Mc Nally. 1967.

The Competitiveness of European industry. Report 
1999. European commission, Luxemburg. 1999.

Vollrath, T.L. Theoretical Evaluation of Alternative 
trade Intensity Measures of Reveles Comparative 
Advantage. Weltwietschaftliches Archive, 1991. Vol. 
130 (2), P. 265-279.

Weston, F., Chung, K. S., Hoag, S. I. Mergers, 
Acquisitions, Restructuring and Corporate Control. 
Prentice-Hall. 1990.

Портер, М.Э. Конкуренция. Москва: Вильямс. 2000.

The article has been reviewed.

Received in March, 2009; accepted in April, 2009.