Head of Content at Promote
Clients renew with providers whose work they can see. When a client leader can point to what participants did differently after your training, the next conversation starts from results, not from a price list.
This article describes how to build that summary without a large measurement project. It draws on the High Performance Learning Journey (HPLJ) methodology, developed by Dr. Robert O. Brinkerhoff and Edward Boon, which treats evaluation as a practical tool that every party in a program can use.
The most useful measurement question is also the earliest one: what would the client find convincing?
Ask your client sponsor, and ideally one or two senior leaders, before the program starts. Some will want to hear directly from participants. Others will look for a number they already track, such as time to close a deal or the share of one-on-ones that happen on schedule. Many will want both.
The methodology recommends asking audiences up front what evidence would help them make a decision. The answer shapes everything else, and it prevents a common surprise at the end of a program, when a report arrives that answers a question nobody asked.
Write the answers on a single page. That page becomes the plan for the evidence summary.
Measurement takes time and energy, and both could also go into direct support for participants. So it pays to start small. Begin by asking whether records already exist. In a learning journey, several do:
These come from the journey itself, so nobody has to fill out an extra survey. A survey adds effort for participants and tends to be less reliable than records of what people actually did.
Choose the few measures that answer the client's question. Each should have a clear use: who will read it and what they might do next. If nobody will act on a number, leave it out.
Numbers show how many participants took part. Stories show what changed in someone's week.
One recommendation is supplementing statistics with real examples of learning applied at work. A few short interviews with participants and their managers are enough. Ask what the participant tried, what happened, and what difference it made.
Here is a hypothetical example. A provider runs a six-week follow-up journey after a workshop on feedback conversations. The summary reports that 18 of 24 participants completed at least four of six assignments. Next to the number sits a short account from one team leader: she opened her weekly one-on-one with a new question, her direct report raised a scheduling problem that had gone unmentioned for months, and the two of them fixed it that week. (All figures and the story are invented to show the format.)
The number says the program was used. The story shows what use looks like.
Evidence becomes more convincing when more than one perspective supports it. The methodology calls this triangulation.
In practice, it can be light. A participant describes a new approach. Their manager confirms they have seen it. A business measure the client already follows moves in the same direction. Each source on its own is useful, and together they give a senior leader something to act on.
This also protects you. A claim about impact that rests on one source is easy to question. A claim supported by participants, managers and existing business data is hard to dismiss, and it shows that you took care to get it right.
Timing matters. A thorough report that arrives after the decision has been made helps no one. Evaluation findings need to be timely to be useful.
So share a short summary at three points:
Before the program: the evidence plan from the first step, so everyone knows what to look for.
Midway: progress so far. Who is practicing, what participants are trying, and one early example. Midway is also the time to adjust. If a group of participants has not started, the client can help while it still matters.
After the program: the full picture. Participation, a few stories, the supporting business data if the client tracks it, and a short note on what to do next.
Keep each summary to a single page. A busy client leader will read a page. They are less likely to read twenty.
Results do not come from the provider alone. The methodology describes impact as a partnership among the training leaders, the participants, their managers and senior leaders. Each group has a part to play, and results grow when each group sees and takes it.
A good evidence summary makes those parts visible. If participants whose managers discussed the assignments completed more of them, say so. If a shared tool or a heavy meeting schedule got in the way for one team, say that too. These findings give the client concrete actions, such as asking managers for ten minutes a week, and they show you as a partner who helps the client get more from its investment.
The summary also makes the next step natural. Instead of asking whether the client wants another workshop, you can share what participants did and ask where else the client would like to see the same result: another team, another region, the next skill.
Collecting records by hand works for one cohort. Running it across several clients and programs calls for a system.
Promote is built to connect a provider's content and delivery with the client's daily work and to create a consistent way of delivering and measuring training impact. Managers and leaders can follow participation and progress in one place, and facilitators can see how participants are applying what they learn, which makes the summary quicker to assemble. A learning management system (LMS) continues to serve as the system of record for enrollment and content. A learning journey platform acts as the system of action for what happens afterward. The two complement each other.
Pick one program you deliver often. Before the next cohort, ask the client sponsor what evidence they would find convincing, and write the answer on one page. Choose two records the journey already produces and plan two short interviews.
That is enough to send a first one-page summary at the midpoint. Which client conversation would be easiest to start with it?
Head of Content at Promote
A strong training session ends well. Participants are energized, the feedback forms are positive and the client says thank you. What happens in the following weeks often decides whether the work leads to the next engagement.
This article shows what such a journey looks like, how to plan one around a workshop you already deliver, and how to share progress with the client along the way.
In typical event-based training, only about 20% of participants find the moment to apply what they learned. The event delivers the knowledge and skills, and the search for the right moment to use them is left to each participant.
That search happens back at work, among routine demands and a full calendar. A participant may leave the workshop with a clear plan and still find the first real opportunity slipping past.
You are well placed to help. You know the content, you know the participants, and you know what good application looks like. The weeks after the workshop are a natural place to put that knowledge to work.
Your workshop stays at the center. The methodology describes a journey that stretches across time, with the workshop as one part of it. Workshops in a journey are mostly used for practice, while theory can be handled in short, self-paced steps before and after.
The right length is as long as it takes participants to reach confident, independent performance. In one example from the methodology, a journey ran 30 weeks, and the participant was already applying her learning on the job within the first three.
A follow-up does not need to be that long. Here is a hypothetical example: a two-day workshop on coaching conversations is followed by six weeks of small, guided assignments. The workshop is unchanged. The six weeks are added around it.
The methodology uses the term Moments-that-Matter for the on-the-job situations where improved performance makes the biggest difference. Naming them is the first design step for a follow-up.
Ask the client before the workshop where participants will use the skill: which meetings, which conversations, which tasks. Three to five moments are enough. For a coaching workshop, one might be the weekly one-on-one with a direct report.
Each participant then picks the moments with the highest leverage in their own role. The methodology calls this the Personal Performance Path. Everyone follows the same program, and each person focuses on the situations that matter most to them. It takes a short conversation with the participant, ideally with their manager present.
A follow-up journey works best when the weekly ask is small. Participants try something in real work, get feedback, reflect and adjust.
Here is a hypothetical week-by-week plan for a coaching workshop:
The steps follow the Crawl, Walk, Run idea from the methodology. Early practice takes place where risk is low, and each new attempt moves closer to the real situation.
Job aids help along the way. A one-page checklist for a coaching conversation is a good example. Introduced during the workshop and used often afterward, it becomes a habit.
The methodology describes the manager's part as perhaps the most important way to strengthen the results of a journey. The manager identifies job opportunities where the participant can apply the new skill and gives ongoing coaching and feedback.
You do not need to train every manager. You can make the role easy. Send each manager a short note: what their team member is practicing this week, and one question to ask in the next one-on-one.
A hypothetical note might read: "This week Sara is trying a new opening question in her team meeting. You could ask her afterward what she noticed." That takes a minute to read, and it tells the participant that someone expects the skill to be used.
The methodology describes impact as a partnership among L&D, participants, managers and senior leaders. Each group has a role, and results grow when each group sees its part.
A follow-up journey gives you something to share with each group while the program runs. Participants can see their own progress. Managers can see what their people are practicing. The client's L&D contact can see how many participants have tried the skill in real work, and what they learned.
Good evidence can be simple: a few short examples of what participants tried and what happened. You can add a brief summary for the client's senior leaders.
Running a follow-up for one cohort is manageable by email. Running it for several cohorts and clients at the same time takes structure.
Promote is built for this. Journeys are laid out over time, with application-based tasks, reflection and peer feedback built in. Facilitators can stay in contact with participants, and enrollment and tracking run in one place. A provider can turn a time-limited classroom training into a full learning journey with practical application and measurement, and reach a larger audience with it.
A learning management system (LMS) continues to do what it does well as the system of record for enrollment and content. A learning journey platform works as the system of action for what happens after the workshop. The two complement each other.
Pick one workshop you deliver often. Name the three moments where participants need to use the skill, and write down one small action for each of the next four weeks.
That outline is the start of a follow-up journey, and you can test it with your next cohort. When participants have something to try, someone to ask and a way to share what happened, the workshop becomes the first step in a longer conversation with the client.
Which session in your portfolio would benefit most from four more weeks of support?
A few things to consider before trying the platform:
…there’s a Demo guide within each module, explaining all the nifty features of the Promote Platform! You can find it under resources on the right hand side of the screen.
