Thanks for your response Ajai,
>>>>The final goals are measurable. Can we apply benchmarking to effectiveness here?
No. What parameters are you measuring? What do you mean by audience?
The only measures you have are the results of delegates happy sheets, any trainer feedback and any knowledge or skills measurement that takes place. Its not enough and does not take into account whether the learning objectives have been met, any outside factors, long term impact or any measurement against other forms of training. Its simply a snapshot of that learning intervention at that given time, its over significance is very limited.
I think I understand what you are saying, if we have 'x' and put in 'y' under very controlled conditions then the result should be x+y and we should be able to measure it.
To view training as this is to misunderstand what learning is; learning is not a structured process, it is not something you 'do' to someone, it is something that the learner does for themselves. Thus it cannot be measured in your terms.
Firstly establish you training needs,using a training needs analysis, then design your learning objectives around this then deliver training and finally evaluate. You make no mention of learning needs and I can only assume that they haven't been identified clearly.
Learning can however be evaluated as I mentioned earlier, the most widely accepted models for this are CIRO (developed by Warr, Bird and Rackman -1970) and Hamblins 5 level model (1974).
The evaluation of learning is not simply what comes out at the other end but other factors such as; context, structure/culture of the organisation, what type of learning event took place - classroom based, CBT etc etc, what were the learning objectives, all are crucial to examining the context of the learning event.
Next resources available, content, methods, final cost versus other resources. We also need to consider whether the delegates themselevs were valid. If you deliver your bucket training to delegates who have 2-3 years experience in call centres I'm sure the evaluation of the same training will be totally different.
Next reactions, those involved to see whether it achieved what it set out to - all parties.
Lastly outcome; outcome versus objectives.
One must also add in the element of time here, its no good simply measuring this all when delegates leave the classroom, of due to management culture, lack of follow up etc etc learning is not being implemented 2 weeks later then clearly an immediate classroom reaction produces the wrong result.
Hamblin takes all this a stage further and looks at 'ultimate' value to departments and the organisation.
As you see there is quite a lot too it and the effective evaluation of training performance is of itself one of the criteria for success. I note your questions are phrased in business process terms and not training terms should you wish to research further please examine the two models above all within the context of a systematic training cycle, you will find the work of Honey and Mumford as well as Robert Hamblin of particular use, they have all examines learning, its processes and outcomes in great depth.