The Power of Analysis in Learning Design: Laying the Foundation for Success

I may sound a little zealot like here, but bear with me. If you're building learning without an analysis to determine what you actually require, how do you know you're building the right stuff and what are you measuring your success against?

In the world of learning design, everything starts with analysis. As Rossett and Sheldon (2001) wisely said, “Analysis is the study we do in order to figure out what to do.” Without a solid analysis phase, the entire learning process can fall short of business goals, leaving employees underprepared and organisations struggling to see results.

Conducting a needs analysis doesn’t have to be overly complicated. A well-structured analysis can guide every phase of instructional design, ensuring learning interventions are purposeful, effective, and aligned with both organisational and employee goals.

Why Analysis is Key

The analysis phase is where we can identify the business need and whether training will address?it.?If the analysis does point us to training as the solution, then it will also help us to determine:

-The performance requirements necessary to meet this need

-The knowledge, skills, and attitudes employees need to succeed

-Who needs to improve their performance

This phase is often referred to as Front-End Analysis because it lays the foundation for everything that follows. Without this, the entire structure of your learning program could crumble.

To clarify this process, here’s a flowchart from Christenson (2018) outlining the critical steps involved in conducting a Needs Assessment and Performance Analysis. This chart guides us from identifying the problem to developing business requirements that can inform our learning intervention.

As you can see, the flowchart helps determine whether the issue at hand is a "want" or a genuine "need," identifies gaps in performance, and prioritises those gaps. This analysis ensures performance improvement efforts are directly aligned with business goals.

Training Needs Analysis (TNA) vs. Needs Assessment

One key component of analysis is distinguishing between Training Needs Analysis (TNA) and a Needs Assessment. Many assume that training is the solution to all performance problems. A TNA helps determine if training is truly the answer, or if another solution is needed (Rothwell et al., 2020).

On the other hand, a Needs Assessment focuses on uncovering hidden gaps—what do teams really need to improve? It’s about understanding the business unit or stakeholders’ specific training and performance needs, whether known or unknown.

Once these needs are identified, it’s essential to evaluate whether the proposed learning solutions are worth the investment. This is where the Return on Investment (ROI) of training becomes crucial. Understanding the ROI helps ensure that the training interventions not only solve immediate issues but also drive long-term business performance.

Research from Madgavkar et al. (2023), on behalf of the McKinsey Global Institute, shows that companies investing in employee development tend to outperform competitors in the stock market, demonstrate greater organisational resilience, and retain talent. The message is clear: investing in people isn’t just about addressing immediate needs; it’s about ensuring long-term success.

So How Do You Get Started?

A Backward Design approach (McTighe et al., 2012) is a great way to begin. You start with the end in mind, identifying the desired outcome, and then determine the steps needed to achieve it. This approach ensures every phase is focused and efficient.

Here’s a simple way to apply it:

• Results: What outcomes will improve business performance?
• Performance: What actions must employees take to achieve these results?
• Learning: What skills, knowledge, and resources are needed for employees to perform effectively?
• Motivation: How do we ensure employees see the value in learning and performing?

This process ensures that training is directly aligned with business and employee goals, ideally supports improved performance and helps measure success through clear benchmarks.

To better understand how performance improvement aligns with organisational goals, take a look at the Performance Improvement/HPT Model from Dessinger et al. (2012). This diagram offers a comprehensive view of how performance analysis, intervention design, and evaluation are interconnected.

This model demonstrates that learning interventions must be aligned with performance goals and evaluated continuously to ensure they deliver measurable business outcomes. It reinforces the idea that performance analysis and evaluation should be part of every stage, not just at the end of the process.

Taking this approach, organisations can ensure their learning interventions are driving both Return on Investment (ROI) and Return on Engagement (ROE) and broader social impact like well-being and industry and social contributions.

Measuring Effectiveness and Impact Through Evaluation

When we're evaluating the effectiveness of training interventions, it’s important to choose the right tools and methods that align with business outcomes and learner needs. Here are a few critical evaluation options to consider:

• Kirkpatrick's Four Levels of Evaluation: Assesses reaction, learning, behaviour, and results to determine the overall impact of training.
• Phillips ROI Model: Adds a fifth level to Kirkpatrick’s model, focusing on Return on Investment (ROI), linking the cost of training to the benefits it delivers. (Phillips, 2012)
• The Success Case Method (SCM): Identifies the most and least successful cases of training application and evaluates what factors contributed to success or failure.
• Learning Transfer Evaluation Model (LTEM): Measures how well the knowledge and skills gained in training are applied on the job and contribute to performance improvements.
• Balanced Scorecard: Links learning outcomes to broader business performance indicators across financial, customer, process, and growth perspectives.

In addition to ROI, we should also consider Return on Engagement (ROE). ROE broadens the scope to include the achievement of stakeholder expectations, which may not always be financial. As Reed and Vakola (2006) point out, involving stakeholders - especially senior management - throughout the Training Needs Analysis (TNA) process significantly enhances its effectiveness. Their research shows that when senior leaders are engaged, it drives participation and ensures learning initiatives are more strategically aligned with broader organisational goals.

Outcomes like improved employee engagement, enhanced customer service, or alignment with organisational goals are harder to quantify monetarily but just as valuable. Reed and Vakola’s findings also underscore the importance of addressing cultural and structural barriers within the organisation during the needs analysis process. By actively engaging teams and encouraging and supporting collaboration, L&D can help break down these barriers, driving stronger organisational alignment and more successful learning interventions.

ROE offers a broader lens to evaluate the success of learning interventions, focusing on how well they drive engagement and meet qualitative objectives. TNA is not just about identifying training gaps - it can serve as a catalyst for larger organisational changes, reinforcing ROE as a more holistic measure of success in L&D.

You could also consider:

• Performance Dashboards: Real-time tools to track key learning metrics and performance outcomes.
• Behavioural Observation and 360-Degree Feedback: Common methods used in performance management and evaluation, where feedback is collected from multiple sources
• Pre- and Post-Training Assessments: Compare learners' knowledge and skills before and after training to measure learning gains.
• Qualitative Feedback (Focus Groups, Interviews): Provides insights into the perceived impact of training and areas for improvement.

Four Facets of Learning

Martin et al. (2017) identified four types of learning within performance measurement, which can guide organisations to focus on different outcomes:

1. Reproductive Learning: Supports the development of routine competencies through repeated actions.
2. Rule-Oriented Learning: Allows for minor adaptations in practice within predefined methods and tasks.
3. Goal-Oriented Learning: Encourages exploratory learning, giving individuals discretion in methods and results.
4. Creative Learning: Empowers employees with full discretion over tasks and methods, fostering innovation and problem-solving.

They also discuss the dual purpose of performance measurement: control and improvement.

Control ensures compliance and standardisation and Improvement drives creative and developmental actions, leading to continuous progress.

Organisations need to be deliberate in designing learning environments and performance measurement systems that support the desired type of learning - whether it’s focused on control or improvement.

Something to be mindful of is creating learning environments that match the performance goals: Align training, feedback mechanisms, and incentives with the type of learning needed. For control, provide structured learning environments with clear guidelines. For improvement, encourage open-ended learning opportunities, collaboration, and feedback.

Creating Lasting Impact

By focusing on these foundational aspects of analysis, learning designers can create solutions that address immediate performance gaps while adding to long-term business success. The right training can be the difference between a team that survives and one that thrives.

In today’s fast-paced business environment, aligning learning with performance outcomes is critical. Conducting a thorough analysis and using models like those shared above can set your L&D teams on a sustainable path that addresses real business needs, drives performance, and delivers measurable results.

If you'd like to learn more Australian Institute of Training & Development - AITD delivers a wide range of courses including Adult Learning, Instructional Design and Needs Analysis & Evaluation.

If you'd like work with an experienced team to support you in designing, developing and delivering your adult learning requirements, lxdesignagency would love to help! Message me directly and we can make a time to discuss.

References

Christensen, B. D. (2018). From needs assessment to needs analysis. Performance Improvement Journal, 57(7), 36–44. https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.21785

Dessinger, J. C., Moseley, J. L., & Van Tiem, D. M. (2012). Performance improvement/HPT model: Guiding the process. Performance Improvement Journal, 51(3), 10–17. https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.20251

Madgavkar, A., Schaninger, B., Maor, D., White, O., Smit, S., Samandari, H., Woetzel, J., Carlin, D., & Chockalingam, K. (2023). Performance through people: Transforming human capital into competitive advantage. In L. Renaud (Ed.), McKinsey Global Institute. https://www.mckinsey.com/mgi

Martin, J., Elg, M., Wallo, A., & Kock, H. (2017). Four facets of learning in performance measurement. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-11-2017-0320

McTighe, J., Wiggins, G., & ASCD. (2012). UNDERSTANDING BY DESIGN FRAMEWORK. https://www.ascd.org

Phillips, J. J. (2012). Return on investment in training and performance improvement programs. In Routledge eBooks. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780080516257

Phillips, J. J., & Phillips, P. P. (2002). Eleven reasons why training and development fails.

Reed, J., & Vakola, M. (2006). What role can a training needs analysis play in organisational change? Journal of Organizational Change Management, 19(3), 393–407. https://doi.org/10.1108/09534810610668382

Rossett, A., & Sheldon, K. (2001). Beyond the podium: Delivering Training and Performance to a Digital World. Pfeiffer.

Rothwell, W. J., Williams, S. L., & Zaballero, A. G. (2020). Is training the answer? Assessing learning needs. In Springer eBooks (pp. 93–109). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14004-5_6