Creating a Training Budget for Departments

Every year around this time, when I led L&D globally, I’d start mapping out what the next year would look like…for my team and for the business we supported. Budget season was ALWAYS a reality check. Would we need more budget to meet evolving business needs and client expectations? Or would we have to defend our spend to keep the programs that mattered? By the way, I also made sure to offer a few programs that employees ‘liked’ - can’t be all business! Here’s what I learned: If you’re still measuring L&D success with smile sheets and completions, stop. Your CEO/CFO doesn’t care how many people “liked the course.” They care about impact…the kind that shows up in the business. Here are some ideas to Measure L&D ROI That Actually Gets You Budget Approval: ✅ Measure Speed to Impact How fast do new skills turn into results? Example: Leadership training cut turnover-risk conversations from 90 days to 30. ✅ Track Behavior Change, Not Confidence Are managers coaching in 1:1s? Are leaders using inclusive language? Because what people DO matters more than what they know. ✅ Connect Learning to Dollars Revenue at risk or captured = your CFO’s favorite metric. Example: Consultative selling training protected $1.2M in upsell revenue. As we head into 2026 planning, this is the conversation executives want: Stop talking about hours of training delivered…start talking about impact and revenue. 👉 What metric would make your CEO say “yes” to L&D budget? Drop it in the comments. Or message me if you want help building an ROI story that secures your 2026 funding. #Learninganddevelopment #LeadershipDevelopment #BusinessImpact #BudgetSeason #ROI #employeedevelopment #training

“Show outcomes, not outputs!” I’ve given (and received) this feedback more times than I can count while helping organizations tell their impact stories. And listen, it’s technically right…but it can also feel completely unfair. We love to say things like: ✅ 100 teachers trained ✅ 10,000 learners reached ✅ 500 handwashing stations installed But funders (and most payers) want to know: 𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵? That’s the outcomes vs outputs gap: ➡️ Output: 100 teachers trained ➡️ Outcome: Teachers who received training scored 15% higher on evaluations than those who didn’t The second tells a story of change. But measuring outcomes can be 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗶𝘃𝗲. It’s easy to count the number of people who showed up. It’s costly to prove their lives got better because of it. And that creates a brutal inequality. Well-funded organizations with substantial M&E budgets continue to win. Meanwhile, incredible community-led organizations get sidelined for not having “evidence”- even when the change is happening right in front of us. So what can organizations with limited resources do? 𝗟𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗲𝘅𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗰𝗵: That study from Daystar University showing teacher training improved learning by 10% in India? Use it. If your intervention is similar, cite their methodology and results as supporting evidence. 𝗗𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗻 𝘀𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲𝗿 𝘀𝘁𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗲𝘀: Baseline and end-line surveys aren't perfect, but they're better than nothing. Self-reported confidence levels have limitations, but "85% of teachers reported feeling significantly more confident in their teaching abilities," tells a story. 𝗣𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗻𝗲𝗿 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗹𝗼𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀: Universities need research projects. Find one studying similar interventions and collaborate. Share costs, share data, share credit. 𝗨𝘀𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘅𝘆 𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘀: Can't afford a 5-year longitudinal study? Track intermediate outcomes that research shows correlate with long-term impact. 𝗧𝗿𝘆 𝗽𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗽𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆 𝗲𝘃𝗮𝗹𝘂𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻: Let beneficiaries help design and conduct evaluations. It's cost-effective and often reveals insights that traditional methods miss. For example, train teachers to interview each other about your training program. And funders? Y’all have homework too. Some are already offering evaluation support (bless you). But let’s make it the rule, not the exception. What if 10-15% of every grant was earmarked for outcome measurement? What if we moved beyond gold-standard-only thinking? 𝗟𝗮𝗰𝗸 𝗼𝗳 𝗮 𝗰𝗲𝗿𝘁𝗮𝗶𝗻 𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗱 𝗼𝗳 𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀𝗻’𝘁 𝗺𝗲𝗮𝗻 “𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗳𝘂𝗹”. We need outcomes. But we also need equity. How are you navigating this tension? What creative ways have you used to show impact without burning out your team or budget? #internationaldevelopment #FundingAfrica #fundraising #NonprofitLeadership #nonprofitafrica

💡 "What if the key to your success was hidden in a simple evaluation model?” In the competitive world of corporate training, ensuring the effectiveness of programs is crucial. 📈 But how do you measure success? This is where the Kirkpatrick Evaluation Model comes into play, and it became my lifeline during a challenging time. ✨ The Turning Point ✨ Our company invested heavily in a new leadership development program a few years ago. I was tasked with overseeing its success. Despite our best efforts, the initial feedback was mixed, and I felt the pressure mounting. 😟 Then, I discovered the Kirkpatrick Evaluation Model. This four-level framework was about to change everything: 🔹Level 1: Reaction - I began by gathering immediate participant feedback. Were they engaged? Did they find the training valuable? This was my first step in understanding the initial impact. 👍 🔹 Level 2: Learning - Next, I measured what participants learned. We used pre-and post-training assessments to gauge their acquired knowledge and skills. 🧠📚 🔹 Level 3: Behavior - The real test came when we looked at behavior changes. Did participants apply their new skills on the job? I conducted follow-up surveys and observed their performance over time. 👀💪 🔹 Level 4: Results - Finally, we analyzed the overall impact on the organization. Were we seeing improved performance and tangible business outcomes? This holistic view provided the evidence we needed. 📊🚀 🌈 The Transformation 🌈 Using the Kirkpatrick Model, we were able to pinpoint strengths and areas for improvement. By iterating on our program based on these insights, we turned things around. Participants were not only learning but applying their new skills effectively, leading to remarkable business results. This journey taught me the power of structured evaluation and the importance of continuous improvement. The Kirkpatrick Model didn't just help us survive; it helped us thrive. 🌟 Ready to transform your training initiatives? Let’s connect with a complimentary 15-minute call with me and discuss how you can leverage the Kirkpatrick Model to drive results. 🚀 https://lnkd.in/grUbB-Kw Share your experiences with training evaluations in the comments below! Let's learn and grow together. 🌱 #CorporateTraining #KirkpatrickModel #ProfessionalDevelopment #TrainingEffectiveness #ContinuousImprovement

Your training budget is bleeding money. Here's why: You're measuring the wrong thing. Most manufacturers track: → Hours in training sessions → Certificates earned   → Courses completed → Knowledge tests passed But here's the brutal truth: Training is a COST until it's applied. I've seen teams ace Six Sigma exams, then go back to the same wasteful processes. I've watched operators get certified in TPM, then ignore equipment maintenance schedules. I've met managers who can recite lean principles but can't eliminate a single bottleneck. The problem isn't the training. The problem is the gap between learning and doing. The Real ROI Formula: Training Cost ÷ Measurable Floor Improvement = Actual ROI If the denominator is zero, your ROI is zero. No matter how much you spent. No matter how good the training was. Here's the system that actually works: STEP 1: Identify Your Losses First ↳ What's costing you money right now? ↳ Downtime? Defects? Delays? Waste? ↳ Quantify the pain before you buy the solution STEP 2: Map Skills to Losses ↳ Which skills would directly impact these losses? ↳ Root cause analysis for quality issues? ↳ Preventive maintenance for downtime? ↳ Value stream mapping for delays? STEP 3: Assess Current Capabilities ↳ Who has these skills already? ↳ Where are the gaps in your workforce? ↳ Don't train everyone in everything STEP 4: Train with a Target ↳ Before any training: "We will apply this to solve X problem" ↳ Set a specific improvement goal ↳ Timeline for implementation STEP 5: Apply Immediately ↳ The window between learning and doing should be days, not months ↳ Start with a pilot project ↳ Measure the impact STEP 6: Scale What Works ↳ If it worked on one line, expand it ↳ If it didn't work, understand why ↳ Refine and try again The shocking reality: Most training fails not because of poor content. It fails because of poor application. Your operators know what to do. They just don't do what they know. The question isn't: "What should we learn next?" The question is: "What have we learned that we're not using yet?" That podcast on lean you listened to last week? Apply one concept today. That Six Sigma training from last month? Start a small improvement project tomorrow. Because untapped knowledge isn't potential. It's waste. What's one thing your team learned recently that they haven't applied yet?

Ever wondered why your corporate trainings get no ROI? Let’s fix that. You’re investing time and money, but results don’t follow. Sound familiar? Here’s how corporations waste their training budget & how smart leaders reverse the trend: → Training isn’t tied to real business problems. Employees forget what’s not relevant now. → Managers aren’t involved. Without their buy-in, teams never apply what they learn. → Too much theory. Not enough actionable skills for the daily grind. → No follow-up. One-off workshops don’t change habits. → Results aren’t measured. If you don’t track impact, you can’t improve. Want quick wins? Here’s a better approach: → Link every session to pressing, measurable business goals. → Involve managers at every step. → Use real-life case studies, not generic slides. → Build mini-coaching or follow-up into every program. → Track simple before/after metrics, celebrate, tweak, repeat. Game-changing results don’t come from more training, they come from the right training delivered the right way. Are you ready to turn your training budget into actual business results? Let’s talk about building a program that works. DM me for a free strategy call.

CEO: Hey, I just saw a $50,000 line item on the sales training budget. What's our ROI on that? Head of Sales: Fair question. The return comes from higher win rates, faster ramp time, and a more consistent sales process across the team. CEO: It still feels like we’re paying twice. We hire smart people, then pay again to train them? Head of Sales: Hiring smart people is the starting point. But without training, they all sell differently, leading to inconsistent results. We ran a review last quarter. Reps who followed our discovery framework had a 21% higher conversion rate. CEO: I get that, but I don’t see that impact in revenue yet. Head of Sales: Most of those deals have 3 to 5-month sales cycles. What we’re seeing now is stronger pipeline quality, more accurate forecasting, and fewer stalled deals, which are strong leading indicators. CEO: I still need a clear business case for the spend. Head of Sales: If one rep improves their close rate by 15 percent on $100K deals, that’s $150K in additional revenue per year. Multiply that by five reps and you’re looking at $750K in return. More importantly, we’re building a team that scales, not one that depends on a few top performers to carry the load. CEO: So, when do we actually see the full impact? Head of Sales: By the end of next quarter. We expect a 20% increase in win rates on mid-market deals and more reps hitting quota without needing manager support. ------- Hiring smart people is step one. Training aligns them, sharpens execution, and drives consistent performance. The real cost isn't the training. It's the lost deals when you skip it.

The best training programs break three sacred HR rules. While most HR teams focus on completion rates and satisfaction scores, high-ROI learning experiences deliberately ignore these metrics. They measure behavior change at 30, 60, and 90 days instead of smile sheets at day one. Here's what's actually happening: Companies are throwing billions at learning programs that never stick. The "Great Training Robbery" study proves what many suspected all along. But here's the real problem. We're designing backwards. → Measuring engagement instead of application → Tracking completion rather than competency → Celebrating attendance over actual outcomes The organisations getting results? They flip this completely. Start with the business goal. Work backwards to the behavior change needed. Then design the learning experience. Simple. Instead of "Did people enjoy the session?" they ask "Can our people perform differently now?" This shift shows up in real numbers. Companies measuring behavioural change report 25% higher performance improvements compared to traditional training metrics. For HR teams, this means stepping away from being the completion rate police. Start being the performance change architect instead. Your learning budget is too valuable for vanity metrics. What are you actually measuring in your training programs?

I analyzed 7019 training sessions to identify the “sweet spot” on maximizing your training budget. 𝗪𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗮 𝗰𝗮𝗺𝗲 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺: Actionable.co is a training sustainment platform, specifically focused on measuring the behavior change impact of corporate learning programs. For this analysis, I pulled data from the 7019 training sessions that were run over the last 3 years, consisting of 2 – 100 participants. 𝗔𝘀𝘀𝘂𝗺𝗽𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀: A couple assumptions are baked into this analysis: 1. The purpose of training is to drive change. In the case of the data leveraged here, that’s certainly the case (consultants only use Actionable when the goal is to drive behavior change)., If your goal is NOT to drive change with your program, you can stop reading now. The results won’t be useful. 2. Self-reported behavior change has value. It’s not conclusive, and it’s not exhaustive. It is, however, the earliest impact data we can capture (before 360s/KPIs, etc.) and – in our experience – is typically highly accurate as a leading indicator. If you don’t believe self-reported data has value then, again, these results won’t be useful to you. 𝗖𝗮𝗹𝗰𝘂𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀: To determine total cost for a session, I made a couple assumptions: - $5000 for the facilitator (fixed cost) - $1500 in labour costs for logistics and planning (fixed cost) - I assumed a half-day session (4 hours) x an average hourly wage of $50/participant. - Assumed a blanket “materials” cost of $50pp. - I assumed this was virtual (no travel costs, meals, per diem, etc.) To calculate impact, I looked at two factors: - The percentage of attendees who committed to changing a behavior after the session - The self-reported improvement in said behavior. - I multiplied these two elements together (% of people committing to change x realized change) to create an Aggregate Cohort “Efficacy Score" score (displayed in the graph) 𝗔𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘂𝗹𝘁𝘀 (𝗶𝗻 2 𝗳𝗹𝗮𝘃𝗼𝗿𝘀):   𝗜𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁 #1: 𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝘁𝗼 𝗠𝗮𝘅𝗶𝗺𝗶𝘇𝗲 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗰𝘁 If you want to maximize impact, focus on smaller groups. Group sizes of 2-7 participants consistently generate 33% greater impact than groups of 8-14. Now, the per-person cost on the smaller groups is > $1000. So, the nature of the change needs to be considered, obviously. But, for topics that have a greater than $1000/person impact to the business, this feels like a bit of a no brainer. Break a group of 12 in half, if you can afford it. 𝗜𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁 #2: 𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝘁𝗼 𝗠𝗮𝘅𝗶𝗺𝗶𝘇𝗲 𝗕𝘂𝗱𝗴𝗲𝘁 If you want to stretch your budget further, focus on groups of 18-24 participants. Your cost per person goes by 50%pp (~$525pp vs >$1000pp) while your aggregate impact only decreases by ~30%. No, it’s not as impactful on a per-person basis, but it stretches your dollar further. Like most things, the decision on the optimal group size is dependent on your goals.

Smile Sheets: The Illusion of Training Effectiveness. If you're investing ~$200K per employee to ramp them up, do you really want to measure training effectiveness based on whether they liked the snacks? 🤨 Traditional post-training surveys—AKA "Smile Sheets"—are great for checking if the room was the right temperature but do little to tell us if knowledge was actually transferred or if behaviors will change. Sure, logistics and experience matter, but as a leader, what I really want to know is: ✅ Did they retain the knowledge? ✅ Can they apply the skills in real-world scenarios? ✅ Will this training drive better business outcomes? That’s why I’ve changed the way I gather training feedback. Instead of a one-and-done survey, I use quantitative and qualitative assessments at multiple intervals: 📌 Before training to gauge baseline knowledge 📌 Midway through for real-time adjustments 📌 Immediately post-training for immediate insights 📌 Strategic follow-ups tied to actual product usage & skill application But the real game-changer? Hard data. I track real-world outcomes like product adoption, quota achievement, adverse events, and speed to competency. The right metrics vary by company, but one thing remains the same: Smile Sheets alone don’t cut it. So, if you’re still relying on traditional post-training surveys to measure effectiveness, it’s time to rethink your approach. How are you measuring training success in your organization? Let’s compare notes. 👇 #MedDevice #TrainingEffectiveness #Leadership #VentureCapital

Harassment training completion rates look good — until you see the number of employee relations claims. Now, executives are asking tougher questions. There’s a disconnect between how HR teams measure training success and how leadership evaluates its impact. How HR typically measures training: • Completion rates • Satisfaction scores • Training hours logged • Content quality ratings • Engagement metrics How executives actually measure training: • Reduction in employee relations claims • Lower attrition and hiring costs • Fewer compliance violations • Improved team productivity • Tangible risk mitigation tied to business performance This gap isn’t just about language. It fundamentally changes how workplace training needs to be designed, delivered, and reported. At Emtrain, every program is built around a business outcome. We aren’t asking, “Did employees complete the training?” We’re asking, “Can we predict where the next employee relations complaint is likely to happen—and prevent it before it escalates?” Communicating value to leadership requires a different mindset. It’s not: "We achieved 95% completion on harassment training." It’s: "Our targeted training approach reduced investigation costs by 12% this quarter." It’s not: "Employees rated our DEI program 4.8/5." It’s: "Teams that completed our inclusion program saw 18% lower turnover than comparable groups." If you want your programs to survive—and matter—start by asking yourself three hard questions: • Can you clearly articulate which business problems your training solves? • Are you measuring real outcomes, not just participation? • Can executives see a direct connection between your programs and the company's financial health? In this economic environment, HR initiatives that can’t prove business impact won’t just struggle for budget—they’ll be first on the chopping block. If you’re not already connecting your training strategy to business outcomes, now is the time to start.