Chapter 2

Developing Powerful Program Objectives

Heather M. Annulis and Cyndi H. Gaudet

In This Chapter

This chapter explores the levels of objectives essential to designing and measuring programs that make a difference in organizations. Upon reading this chapter, you will be able to

• describe reasons to link objectives to organizational needs and priorities
• identify levels of objectives
• write a powerful objective.

 

The Importance of Developing Powerful Objectives

Powerful objectives drive powerful results. Linking program objectives to organizational objectives allows top-level executives to recognize the value of learning initiatives to the bottom line of the organization. Asking three simple questions will create a roadmap to powerful program outcomes that link to the organization’s bottom line.

• What will the training accomplish for the organization?
• What will the training accomplish for the participants?
• How will the accomplishments be measured?

The Meaning and Value of Objectives

Objectives provide direction, focus, and guidance as well as create interest, commitment, expectations, and satisfaction. An objective is a statement describing an intended outcome rather than a “how to” statement. It describes the intent of the program and allows the reader to visualize final results. Objectives are linked to organizational needs and should reflect measures of value important to all stakeholders. These statements help determine if programs are tightly linked to the business and if the work is relevant to the business. If it’s not measured, is it a necessary activity? Objectives help determine if efforts are exerted in the correct places. They are “necessity not luxury” (Phillips and Phillips, 2008).

Objectives drive everything that happens in a program, including teaching strategies, assignments, and assessments. Therefore, it’s hard to believe that many programs are delivered without formal statements. The effort to formalize objectives at the onset of the program design and communicate them to participants enhances the ability to plan the course and the participants’ ability to achieve program goals. These statements are essential in communicating to participants and stakeholders expectations before, during, and after the program. Objectives clearly define the purpose and expected outcome of the program and drive an organization’s results.

Levels of Objectives

It is helpful to link objectives to evaluation strategies. This linkage provides a systematic, results-based process. Six levels of objectives position programs for success from multiple stakeholder perspectives. Some stakeholders will only be interested in data collected at the higher levels; however, the levels create a chain of impact. Table 2-1 describes the six levels of objectives. Level 0 describes inputs and indicators. Level 1 focuses on reaction and planned action of the program participants. Level 2 assesses the participants’ learning during the program. Level 3 determines if the participants can use the information learned during the program. Level 4 captures how the participants’ use of the information affects the business. Finally, Level 5 compares the cost to the benefits of the program. This data categorization is the foundation for developing powerful program objectives. The levels of objectives take the learning leader from needs assessment to final stages of evaluation, thereby establishing the chain of impact of performance improvement programs.

Constructing Powerful Objectives

Objectives should have SMART characteristics: They should be specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time bound. SMART characteristics ensure powerful objectives are set. Table 2-2 details the characteristics of SMART objectives.

Table 2-1. Levels of Objectives

---

Level of Objective	Measurement Focus	Typical Measures
0—Inputs and Indicators	Scope, volume, efficiencies, and costs of the project	• Participants • Hours • Costs • Timing
1—Reaction and Perceived Value	Reaction to the project or program, including the perceived value	• Relevance • Importance • Usefulness • Appropriateness • Intent to use motivation to take action
2—Learning and Confidence	Learning to use the content and materials, including the confidence to use what was learned	• Skills • Knowledge • Capacity • Competencies • Confidence • Contacts
3—Application and Implementation	Using content and materials in the work environment, including progress with actual items and implementation	• Extent of use • Task completion • Frequency of use • Actions completed • Success with use • Barriers to use • Enablers to use
4—Impact and Consequences	The consequences of using the content and materials expressed as business impact measures	• Productivity • Revenue • Quality • Time • Efficiency • Customer satisfaction • Employee engagement
5—ROI	Comparing monetary benefits from program to program costs	• Benefit-Cost Ratio (BCR) • ROI (%) • Payback period

Source: Phillips and Phillips (2008).

Table 2-2. Characteristics of SMART Objectives

---

	Description
Specific	Objectives must represent the specific desired outcomes from the standpoint of all critical stakeholders.
Measurable	Objectives must be developed so that measures of success are evident. Measurable indicators make it possible to assess whether the objectives are achieved or not. Program owners must be able to measure the objective, considering the type of measure and resource constraints.
Achievable	Objectives must stretch participants, designers, and developers toward improvement but remain reasonable in doing so.
Realistic	Objectives must be realistic given the conditions, resources, time period, and support available to achieve the objectives.
Time bound	Objectives must represent the achievement of results within a certain period.

Note: For variations of SMART objectives, visit http://rapidbicom/created/WriteSMARTobjectives.html.

Objectives should be specific, not vague. They should be measurable so that success is immediately evident. They should also be achievable while remaining challenging. Always set objectives higher than achieved previously, but not so high that they can never be achieved. For instance, a 99-percent uptime is more achievable than 100 percent. The closer to a near perfect score, the more difficult it becomes. Objectives should be realistic. Conditions and resources must support the opportunity to achieve the objectives. Finally, objectives must be time bound. In the example, “achieve annual sales figure of 30,000 machines,” the “annual” criteria makes it time bound. Otherwise, the team would not have a deadline for achieving the target.

To construct powerful objectives, three Cs should be included: conduct, condition, and criterion.

Conduct. Conduct is also known as performance or behavior of the participant and is the most observable part of the learning objective. If the learning leader can observe the conduct, then it can be measured. Once the designer determines which objective should be included, then he or she can determine which verb best describes the behavior.

Condition. Conditions ensure that learners understand what is expected of them. For example, managers may be tasked with creating department purpose statements. A condition could include incorporating the companies’ core competencies from the mission statement. This level of specificity communicates not just what to do but also identifies the requirements associated with the expectation.

Criterion. Criterion states how well the participant should perform. Criterion is the measure of success. Accuracy, speed, and quality are associated with criterion of learning objectives. These variables suggest the importance of how well a task is completed. The explanation expressed in the criterion helps the learning leader better assess the conduct of the participant. Accuracy communicates how close to perfect one must complete the task. For example, the participant must connect the life support tubes using the checklist 100 percent of the time. Failure to meet the accuracy clause could result in death. Sometimes the speed with which a task is completed is critical to the situation. For example, the participant must connect the life support tubes in less than one minute. In this example, the speed with which the objective is completed could save the life of the patient. When speed and accuracy are not critical, quality emerges as an essential measurement. Quality suggests that a standard is expected from the learner. For example, the learner will hook up the life support unit in less than one minute with system-ready displays.

Levels of Objectives

As presented in table 2-1, there are six levels of objectives. These levels follow the scheme of the levels of evaluation. The levels of objectives represent the chain of impact that occurs as people become involved in a project.

Level 0: Input Objectives

Input objectives relate to the resources and conditions required to accomplish a project. As programs begin, some issues arise: How much will it cost? What resources are required? What expertise should be included? How many employees are needed? How much time is required? When will the program occur? How long will it last? Input objectives are based on input needs. This level of objective is referred to as Level 0 because it includes items that all programs must consider. Reviewing analysis data that support program appropriateness is considered at this level. Is this a compliance issue or is it a program that fills a need for profit making or cost avoidance?

Input objectives are often overlooked as critical success factors of programs. Table 2-3 lists a few examples of input objectives. The planning phase of a program requires appropriate input objectives. People involved in the program should be determined from the onset of the program. Scope provides information about the program so that stakeholders understand what will and will not be included in the program. The audience of a program helps focus appropriateness of content and delivery methods.

Level 1: Reaction Objectives

Reaction objectives are a first indication of success. Although some argue that reaction objectives are implied or understood, they should be communicated specifically to help participants identify what they will do differently as a result of the program. Helping participants focus on desired planned action(s) after the program keeps the learning centered around results. Defining desired participant reaction helps create powerful programs that help participants purposefully plan to use the knowledge from the program. The chain of impact in measurement and evaluation begins with constructing reaction objectives. Table 2-4 details several reaction objectives.

Reaction, or Level 1, objectives can be used to improve program design to achieve positive reactions. If people do not figure out the WIIFM (what’s in it for me?) early in the program, they may lack the motivation to participate, disrupt learning, or sabotage project success. Engaging participants from the beginning of the program will ensure they are more likely to learn new knowledge and skills, transfer learning to their jobs, and affect the success of the organization.

Level 2: Learning Objectives

The most common objective is the learning objective, otherwise known as an instructional objective. Compared with the previous two levels of objectives, this level is more complex. The learning objective refers to the performance of the participant and assesses the participants’ learning during the program. The knowledge the participant gains to implement a particular skill or apply information on the job drives business results. Learning objectives begin to illustrate the chain of impact of powerful objectives. Constructing the learning objective appropriately ensures program success. Table 2-5 provides several examples of learning objectives.

Table 2-3. Examples of Input Objectives

---

• The program will be conducted with at least 20 participants per session.

• For sales staff only.

• Begins in February and concludes in May.

• Keeps within a budget of $50,000.

• Uses in-house e-learning modules.

 

Table 2-4. Examples of Reaction Objectives

---

At the end of the conference, participants should rate each of the following statements four out of five on a five-point scale:

• The facilitator responded to questions effectively.

• The materials were well organized.

• Exercises demonstrated the connection between theory and reality.

• The course provided me with new information.

• The course content is relevant to my job.

• The course content is important to my job success.

• I intend to apply the content.

Table 2-5. Examples of Learning Objectives

---

The participant will be able to

• identify three labels located on the cable while operating the handheld device

• demonstrate three mission-critical customer service skills over the telephone

• discuss the signs of potential safety issues on the platform

• complete change leadership simulation with assigned team members during the training session

• match cables to proper locations using company color codes while wearing protective gear.

 

Level 3: Application Objectives

Powerful reaction and learning objectives set the stage for participants to transfer knowledge and skills gained to the workplace. Application objectives, referred to as Level 3 objectives, determine if the participant can use information learned during the program. Participants focus on achieving reaction and learning objectives at the onset of a program. Application objectives are a necessary link between what was learned (Level 2) and determining the impact (Level 4) participant learning will deliver. Application objectives answer the following questions:

• What new or improved knowledge was applied to the job?
• What is the frequency of skill application?
• What new tasks will be performed?
• What new steps will be implemented?

See table 2-6 for examples of application objectives.

Level 4: Impact Objectives

Impact objectives are often the level of objective that gets the most attention at the executive level of the organization. Level 4 objectives capture how participants’ use of the information affects the business. A change in conduct will have some effect on the organization, even if it is a negative one. Impact objectives allow the learning leader to create statements clearly derived from the needs and goals of the organization. See table 2-7 for several
examples of impact objectives.

Impact objectives include hard data, soft data, or a combination of both. Often, the combination of the two data types creates the most powerful impact objective (Phillips and others, 2007).

Table 2-6. Examples of Application Objectives

---

• At least 90 percent of participants will be using WIMBA in their online instruction within 90 days of the training session.

• Sexual harassment activity will cease within two months after the zero tolerance policy is implemented.

• Within one year, 50 percent of participants will submit a prospectus demonstrating saving costs to their manager.

 

Hard Data. Hard data are the primary measurements of improvement presented in terms of black and white facts. Hard data are traditionally used to make decisions in organizations and are typically categorized as output, quality, cost, and time.

Soft Data. The preference of hard data over soft data should not minimize the importance of soft data. Soft data focused on customer service, work climate, and job satisfaction can provide much needed clarification of harder data.

When impact objectives show the consequence of the application, expressed in meaningful measures that include data that are understandable and desirable by top executives, the chain of impact of program objectives is realized. Impact objectives are essential to measuring business results. They link business performance-to-performance issues identified as gaps in the organization.

Level 5: ROI Objectives

The term return-on-investment (ROI) represents a precise and actual value calculated by comparing program costs to benefits. Phillips and Phillips (2008) recommend that ROI objectives (Level 5) be reserved for key strategic programs—important, expensive, and high-profile initiatives. Not all programs should have an ROI objective, but when used
correctly, ROI objectives can answer accountability concerns for your program sponsor.

Table 2-7. Examples of Impact Objectives

---

• Inventory shrinkage fell by 20 percent at the Northern Region stores, within one month.

• After three months, customer service complaints decreased by 10 percent in the Slots department.

• Customer interactions increased to 10 per day for 50 percent of the shipping staff.

• Product defects decreased from 250 to 200 by yearend.

• Department-wide engagement score increased by one point on annual index.

 

Four strategies can help set appropriate ROI objectives (Phillips and Phillips, 2008).

• Use the same values used to invest in capital expenditures such as equipment and facilities costs. Usually this figure ranges from 15 to 20 percent. Using this strategy, organizations would expect the ROI at the same expected value from other investments.
• Estimate an ROI at a higher standard than the value required for other investments. This usually means the value is set at 25 percent. The rationale for this strategy accounts for the subjectivity surrounding estimations and the new nature of an ROI process for performance improvement projects.
• Determine a break-even point for the ROI target. A 0-percent ROI indicates program costs were recaptured and the value is captured in intangible items that are not converted to monetary value, such as morale or behavior change.
• Allow the program sponsor to set the ROI target based on expectations of the return of the program. The sponsor is sometimes the responsible party that has the most information regarding what the return “should” yield.

Developing ROI objectives that are unrealistic only detracts from the value. What matters most is how the target audience perceives the value of the data and that the data communicate the value of the program. Table 2-8 outlines what the levels of objectives for a software implementation project might look like.

Summary: Connecting Needs, Objectives, and Evaluation

Hopefully, training programs are not dreamed up in a vacuum. They are well-thought-out efforts designed and developed based on driving forces of business needs. By basing program objectives on stakeholder needs, programs are aligned with business outcomes in mind. Objectives are the result of careful analysis that links learning leader efforts to strategic goals of the organization. The actions of program audiences help drive the most effective results. These results can be designed, linked, and subsequently communicated using six levels of objectives. Powerful objectives representing the six levels position the program for ultimate success. In addition, it positions the evaluator so that relevant measures of program success can be taken. Program objectives are the foundation for good measurement and evaluation. Clear alignment between stakeholder needs, program objectives, and measurement and evaluation ensure not only successful programs, but successful evaluation. Figure 2-1 shows a V-model of connection among levels of objectives.

Table 2-8. Levels 1–5 Objectives for a Software Implementation Project

---

Level 1—Reaction Objectives After reviewing the software, the participants will • provide a rating of four out of five on the relevance for specific job applications • indicate an intention to use the software within two weeks of the workshop (90-percent target).

Level 2—Learning Objectives After participating in the workshop, participants will • score 75 or better on a software test (80-percent target) • demonstrate four of the five key features of ACT! with zero errors: —enter a new account —create a mail-merge account —create a query —send an email —create a call report.

Level 3—Application Objectives Following the workshop, the participants will • enter data for 80 percent of new customer prospects within 10 days of workshop completion • increase the number of planned follow-up contacts with customers within three months of workshop completion • use the software daily as reflected by an 80-percent score on an unscheduled audit of use after one month of workshop completion.

Level 4—Impact Objectives Three months after implementation, there should be • fewer customer complaints regarding missed deadlines, late responses, and failure to complete transactions • reduced time to respond to customer inquiries and requests • increased sales for existing customers • increased customer satisfaction composite survey index by 20 percent on the next survey.

Level 5—ROI Objective Implementing new software should achieve a 25-percent return-on-investment using first-year benefits.

Source: Phillips and Phillips (2008).

 

Knowledge Check: Identify the Level of Objective

In the table, indicate the level of evaluation that matches the objective. Check your answers in the appendix.

Objective	Evaluation Level
1. Decrease time spent on completing scheduled machinery maintenance from two days to one.
2. Complete all 10 steps on the teller checklist before noon each day.
3. Calculate a 1:4 cost-benefit ratio for the leadership development program two years after implementation.
4. Increase posttest scores by 10 points over pretest scores.
5. Increase customer satisfaction scores on annual stakeholder survey.

About the Authors

Heather M. Annulis, PhD, CPLP, is assistant director of the Jack and Patti Phillips Workplace Learning and Performance Institute (WLPI) and associate professor of Workforce Training and Development at the University of Southern Mississippi. She is the director of the Workforce Training and Development master’s degree program and WLPI’s Training and Development Certificate Program. In 2006, she was named to the Mississippi Business Journal’s prestigious list of Mississippi’s Top 40 Under 40. She holds a PhD from the University of Southern Mississippi, is a Certified Professional in Learning and Performance (CPLP) from ASTD, and recently earned the honor of Distinguished e-Learning Professor at USM. She can be reached at [email protected].

Cyndi H. Gaudet, PhD, is director of the Jack and Patti Phillips Workplace Learning and Performance Institute (WLPI) at the University of Southern Mississippi, a full-time professor in the Department of Economic and Workforce Development, and director of the Human Capital Development doctoral program. Her cutting-edge workforce development research received awards from NASA, the Southern Growth Policies Board, and ASTD. She has presented at more than 100 regional, national, and international conferences, and her research has been published in journals such as the HRD Quarterly, International Journal of Instructional Media, NABTE Review, URISA Journal, and the Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, with the most recent acceptance in the Performance Improvement Quarterly focusing on post-Katrina workforce development for the Gulf coast region. She can be reached at [email protected].

References

Phillips, J. J. and P. P. Phillips. (2008). Beyond Learning Objectives. Alexandria, VA: ASTD.

Phillips, J. J., P. P. Phillips, R. Stone, and H. Burkett. (2007). The ROI Fieldbook: Strategies for Implementing ROI in HR and Training. Burlington, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Additional Reading

Carliner, S. (2003). Training Design Basics. Alexandria, VA: ASTD.

Gagné, R. M. (1985). The Conditions of Learning and Theory of Instruction. New York: CBS College Publishing.

Mager, R. F. (1997). Preparing Instructional Objectives: A Critical Look in the Development of Effective Instruction, 3rd ed. Atlanta: CEP Press.

McArdle, G. E. (2007). Training Design and Delivery, 2nd ed. Alexandria, VA: ASTD.

Phillips, J. J. and P. P. Phillips. (2002). Measuring ROI in the Public Sector. Alexandria, VA: ASTD.

Phillips, P. P. and J. J. Phillips. (2005). Return on Investment Basics. Alexandria, VA: ASTD.