High Impact Evaluation vs Traditional Evaluation

High Impact Evaluation vs Traditional Evaluation 2017-08-22T06:25:13+00:00
Traditional Training Evaluation High Impact EvaluationTM
Develops evidence of program impact Ensures and maximizes program impact
Rear-view mirror evaluation

Data gathered (evidence) after execution of the learning initiative to determine if intended outcomes have been achieved

Forward-looking & proactive

Evaluation is on-going from program conception to implementation to ensure that intended outcomes will be achieved

Results are passively monitored

Evaluator observes impact and reports on program’s success in meeting intended outcomes.

Impact is actively managed

Evaluator observes impact throughout the process but actively intervenes as needed to make adjustments to ensure that intended outcomes are achieved.


Most common, four levels—widely accepted, traditional wisdom in vogue for more than 50 years


Evolved & field-tested in comprehensive, national 3-year research program (Investing in PeopleTM). Examination & verification of key factors that most influence learning, performance, and organizational results.

Evaluation at the end of ADDIE process

Evaluation is typically an add-on to design and development… hence a key activity that can be (and often is) dropped when time and resources are lacking.

Evaluation integrated with ADDIE process

High Impact Evaluation infuses ADDIE with results-based thinking. Evaluation seamlessly integrated into smart program design and implementation.

Evaluation to summarize results

When evaluation does occur, it’s largely at program’s completion—too late for significant changes to be implemented.

Evaluation ongoing to monitor and drive impact

Impact analysis begins early in the process—when problems can be avoided, corrected, and money saved.  Greater reliance on risk assessment, predictive indicators, and forecasting to minimize risk and enhance impact.