Satisfaction Scores Measure the Wrong Thing
Most corporate training programmes in Nigeria are evaluated using a satisfaction survey distributed immediately after the session ends, how engaging the facilitator was, how useful the content felt, whether participants would recommend the training. These scores are easy to collect and almost always look favourable, but they measure how the session felt in the moment, not whether anything actually changed in how participants do their work afterward.
What Genuine Training Impact Measurement Looks Like
Measuring whether training actually changed behaviour requires checking in after enough time has passed for participants to have had real opportunities to apply what was covered, and looking at concrete indicators connected to the training’s actual goal rather than self-reported confidence alone.
- Follow-up check-in 4-6 weeks post-training, not just an immediate end-of-session survey
- Track specific behavioural indicators tied to the training goal (e.g., use of a specific sales framework on calls)
- Where possible, connect training to a measurable business outcome (close rate, campaign performance, error rate)
- Ask managers directly whether they have observed behaviour change in their team, not just participants themselves
Why This Matters More Than It Might Seem
Without genuine impact measurement, companies have no real way of knowing whether training investment is producing a return, which makes it difficult to decide whether to repeat, adjust, or abandon a given training approach. Companies that build a habit of measuring actual behavioural change, even informally, make significantly better decisions about where to invest future training budget than companies relying purely on how enjoyable a session felt to attendees.
