IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Testing Kirkpatrick's Four-Level Hierarchy of Training Evaluation: Evidence from Thailand's Automotive Industry


  • Homklin Tassanee

    (Graduate School for International Development and Cooperation, Hiroshima University)

  • Takahashi Yoshi

    (Graduate School for International Development and Cooperation, Hiroshima University)

  • Techakanont Kriengkrai

    (Faculty of Economics, Thammasat University)


Several studies of training evaluation have failed to confirm the hierarchy relationship of reaction, learning, and behavior to results because of the difficulty of evaluating training. Furthermore, research in this area has tended to downplay the importance of level one (reaction) evaluation. In this study, we proposed investigating Kirkpatrick’s four-level hierarchy of training evaluation, focusing specifically on two types of reactions, affective and utility, to predict training outcomes. The results of this study expand our understanding of the progressive causal relationship of reaction, learning, and job behavior to results. In particular, this study highlighted the utility reactions in predicting training effectiveness. Implications and future research directions suggested by the results are also discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Homklin Tassanee & Takahashi Yoshi & Techakanont Kriengkrai, 2013. "Testing Kirkpatrick's Four-Level Hierarchy of Training Evaluation: Evidence from Thailand's Automotive Industry," IDEC DP2 Series 3-4, Hiroshima University, Graduate School for International Development and Cooperation (IDEC).
  • Handle: RePEc:hir:idecdp:3-4

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: First version, 2013
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. A. Giangreco & A. Sebastiano & R. Peccei, 2009. "Trainees' reactions to training: an analysis of the factors affecting overall satisfaction with training," Post-Print hal-00323772, HAL.
    2. Bates, Reid, 2004. "A critical analysis of evaluation practice: the Kirkpatrick model and the principle of beneficence," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 341-347, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    Kirkpatrick's training evaluation model; training effectiveness; training evaluation;

    JEL classification:

    • M53 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Personnel Economics - - - Training

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hir:idecdp:3-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Keisuke Kawata). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.