Your Chief Virtual Learning Architect

Learning to Performance

Read More
Custom Design & Delivery

Read More
Predictive Evaluation

Read More
Enterprise Learning Strategy

Read More

› ‹

1
2
3
4

Dave Basarab Consulting has elevated the training experience, offering an end-to-end comprehensive approach that includes training strategy, instructional design, development, delivery , post program training transfer, and evaluation (via the unique Predictive Evaluation methodology). Virtual Chief Architect Dave Basarab has combined all of these individual training elements with his user-friendly, comprehensive Learning to Performance approach, which significantly increases companies' training ROI.

Why we are different

Innovation: Our primary focus is creating learning programs using a Learning to Performance approach.
Expertise: Dave offers the depth and breadth of his experience, including working internally at prestigious companies (Motorola, Ingersoll Rand and Pitney Bowes) as well as his knowledge and expertise as a highly-respected, sought-after consultant.
Partnership: Basarab collaborates with companies, serving as their own Chief Learning Officer whenever they need to plan, strategize, or implement training initiatives.

Training Services

Enterprise Learning Strategy

Enterprise Learning Strategy

At Dave Basarab Consulting, we're experts in creating Enterprise Learning Plans. We work with you to develop your company's learning strategy and direction.

Custom Design, Development, & Delivery

Custom Design, Development, & Delivery

Custom training is an effective way of developing the capability required to execute your strategy. We are a custom design house that creates programs specific to your business.

Learning Burst Development

Learning Burst Development

We can create and deliver your courses via our unique Learning Burst Method - keeping your employees at their jobs while receiving world-class training.

Predictive Evaluation

Predictive Evaluation

We predict the ROI for your courses and establish success gates. We then evaluate the course against the success gates to show value realized and continually improve results.

Leadership Development

Leadership Development

Turn-key virtual custom leadership development program that combines world-class leadership speakers/educators with post-event personalized coaching to provide you with a cadre of highly skilled leaders.

Predictive Evaluation

Measuring Manager Involvement in Training Follow-Through

Training rarely creates lasting performance change through attendance alone. What managers do after a course—setting expectations, discussing application and removing barriers—often determines whether new knowledge becomes part of daily work. Measuring this involvement gives learning teams a clearer view of why adoption varies between teams.

For Australian organisations, the issue is particularly relevant when employees are spread across Sydney, Melbourne, regional Queensland or FIFO operations in Western Australia. A manager may support a learner face to face, through Microsoft Teams or during a short site visit, so follow-through needs to be assessed across different working environments.

A useful evaluation approach connects manager behaviour with employee application and business outcomes. It moves the conversation beyond completion rates and smile sheets, showing whether leaders are helping people use capability where it matters.

Why Manager Follow-Through Matters

Managers influence the conditions that surround learning. They can explain why a programme matters, provide opportunities to practise, review progress in one-to-ones and recognise improvement. Without these actions, employees may return to established routines, especially when workloads are high or processes are unclear.

The effect can be significant in industries where work is operationally demanding. A supervisor at a Pilbara mining site may need to reinforce a safety conversation during a pre-start meeting, while a manager in a Melbourne office may embed new coaching habits into weekly team rituals. The setting changes, but the mechanism is similar: workplace reinforcement supports transfer.

Define What Good Involvement Looks Like

“Manager support” is too broad to measure reliably. It should be translated into observable actions, such as discussing learning goals before training, asking employees to apply a skill within ten business days, reviewing evidence of use and addressing obstacles with the relevant stakeholder.

These behaviours can be assessed through a short manager pulse survey, learner feedback, observation checklists and workflow data. A team leader who schedules a follow-up conversation has demonstrated an activity; a team leader whose staff consistently use the new process has contributed to an outcome. Both are useful, but they should not be confused.

Clear definitions also make expectations fairer. Managers need to know whether they are being asked to coach, approve time for practice, provide feedback or change a performance process. Specific commitments are easier to measure than a general request to “support the training”.

Link Manager Actions To Business Results

A strong evaluation model maps the chain from involvement to adoption and then to performance. For example, a manager briefing may lead to more frequent practice, which may improve customer call quality, reduce rework or shorten response times. The measures should reflect the original business case rather than defaulting to attendance.

The Predictive Evaluation model can help organisations forecast likely adoption and estimate the contribution of learning and workplace support before a programme is fully rolled out. This is valuable when leaders need to decide whether a capability investment will produce a measurable return.

Use comparison carefully. Teams with highly involved managers may differ from other teams in workload, staffing or customer mix. A practical evaluation can combine baseline data, manager activity measures and trend analysis, rather than claiming that every improvement came from training alone.

Gather Evidence At Several Points

Timing matters. Before training, ask managers what performance gap they expect the programme to address and what opportunities employees will have to practise. Immediately afterwards, check whether managers completed the agreed follow-up actions. Thirty, sixty and ninety days later, examine employee application and relevant operational indicators.

Evidence can include coaching records, quality scores, sales conversion, incident reports, customer feedback, productivity measures or reduced escalation. Qualitative comments add context. An employee in regional New South Wales may explain that limited connectivity affected practice, while a manager may identify a policy constraint that no course could solve.

A balanced dashboard might show manager commitment, employee confidence, observed behaviour and business impact. This makes it easier to distinguish weak learning design from missing reinforcement, system friction or competing priorities.

Build Shared Accountability

Manager involvement should be designed into the learning strategy rather than treated as an optional add-on. Senior sponsors can agree what managers will do, how often evidence will be reviewed and which outcomes matter. Building stakeholder consensus early helps prevent learning teams from carrying sole responsibility for results.

Accountability does not mean turning managers into trainers. It means giving them simple tools, realistic timeframes and access to performance information. In an Australian workplace, that may involve adapting resources for shift workers, recognising enterprise agreement requirements or ensuring regional teams receive equal support.

The tone matters as well. Leaders who say, “Let’s see how this works in practice,” are more likely to encourage honest reporting than leaders who demand inflated success figures. A fair go for managers and employees produces better evaluation data.

Practical Measures To Use

Select a small set of indicators that can be collected consistently across teams. The following measures provide a useful starting point:

Percentage of managers completing a pre-training briefing
Number of documented follow-up conversations within 30 days
Employee rating of manager reinforcement and access to practice
Frequency with which the target behaviour is observed
Change in a relevant operational or customer metric
Number and type of barriers resolved by managers
Difference in adoption between high- and low-involvement teams

Review the measures together rather than ranking managers by a single score. A low adoption result may reflect poor system access, unclear processes or insufficient staffing. Combining activity, behaviour and outcome data gives decision-makers a more credible explanation.

Turn Evidence Into Better Decisions

The purpose of measurement is to improve future action. If manager involvement is high but application remains low, the course, workflow or tools may need redesign. If employee capability improves only where managers coach regularly, reinforcement should become a formal part of the rollout plan.

Learning teams should also account for different career stages and working preferences. Guidance on multigenerational workforce design can support programmes that respect varied experience, confidence with technology and expectations of feedback.

Begin with one priority programme, define three manager behaviours, collect a baseline and review the evidence after 30 days; then use those findings to adjust the broader learning rollout.

Learning to Performance

Learning to Performance, a complete training approach, gives companies world-class training to drive significant return. This approach includes upfront work (Impact Mapping, design), training (for staff and company executives), and post-training efforts to ensure training transfer. This unique recipe - the key for successful training and adoption - is changing the way companies implement training. This methodology could work with any content for organizations in any industry.