The effects of alternative reports of human resource development results on managerial support.

摘要

Managerial responses to human resource development (HRD) results assessments were experimentally investigated as a function of (1) how assessment information was presented and (2) reported HRD program impact levels. Managers (N = 233) read a business scenario in which they were asked to make a decision about whether to implement a development program. Managers were then exposed to one of nine experimental treatment conditions (assessment report type x reported program impact level). The report types included utility analysis, critical outcome technique, and anecdotal assessment. Results were varied at three impact levels (low, average, and high). Findings of the study showed that managers perceived utility analysis and critical outcome technique reports as almost equally useful in decision-making; however, the anecdotal assessment report was found to be significantly less useful than either of the other two report types. There was no effect of the reported program impact level on the perceived usefulness of the assessment reports for decision-making. Further, there was no interaction between report type and impact level on the perceived usefulness of the reports for decision-making. These findings represent support for presenting managers with information about the financial results of human resource development interventions.