According to Daniel L. Stufflebeam, the creator of the CIPP Model of Evaluation, “The primary reason for evaluation is to aid in decision-making and thereby help us improve what we are doing.” The CIPP Evaluation Model is made to guide evaluators and and stakeholders to the proper questions at the beginning of a project, while it’s being worked on, and at its end.
The CIPP Model of Evaluation represents four concepts:
Context, Input, and Process are considered to be “formative” steps intended to produce the Product, which is the “summative” step.
Context is essentially the same thing as Stephen Covey’s “Begin with the end in mind.” Managers check to make sure that goals fit with the organization’s needs and decide whether or not the project’s objectives will - if accomplished - lead to the realization of said goals. In order for the CIPP Model of Evaluation to work, one must be crystal clear with company objectives.
If the CIPP Evaluation Model were a recipe, Inputs would serve as the ingredients: Goals, strategies, the skills of those who learn, the skills of those who teach, the books/materials/equipment needed, yadda yadda. Basically, inputs serve as anything needed to accomplish the project within the context of a company.
The Process is the challenging concept. Every training evaluation has a need to, well, evaluate. And that requires a lot of data. AKA work/time/money. Process seeks to assess the participants willingness and ability to carry out their roles. Is Jenny on top of her (insert objective here)? Has Joey been applying his goal to do (insert goal here)? There’s only three ways to find out: Evaluate, evaluate, EVALUATE! And I think managers agree that evaluation often times proves more costly than beneficial (See how Sprezie makes this process easy.)
Product is simple: Did the project succeed? One caveat to this step’s simplicity is the MOUND of evaluation that needs to take place. And even more evaluation if a company wants to assess success throughout the entirety of the project.