› ‹
  • 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.

More...

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.

More...

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.

More...

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.

More...

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.

More...

Predictive Evaluation

Using Data to Identify Which Employees Need Training Most

Training budgets are under pressure, and a broad programme for everyone can obscure the employees, teams and skills that require attention first. A data-led approach helps organisations distinguish between a genuine capability gap, a process problem and a performance issue that training will not solve.

For Australian employers, the analysis must reflect the operating environment. A mining crew in Perth, a healthcare team in Brisbane and a retail workforce across Sydney may need different interventions, even when their performance metrics appear similar. Useful evidence combines business results, work context and employee behaviour rather than relying on course completion figures alone.

Start With Business Risk

The strongest training priorities are connected to measurable organisational outcomes. Begin with indicators such as safety incidents, rework, customer complaints, missed sales targets, production delays, quality defects and compliance findings. Then identify which roles, locations or tasks are most closely associated with those results.

A capability heatmap can show where risk is concentrated. For example, a manufacturer might compare near misses by shift, tenure, site and job family. When the evidence points to inconsistent equipment procedures, manufacturing safety training may be more valuable than a generic workplace learning package.

Combine Multiple Sources Of Evidence

No single dataset gives a reliable picture of readiness. Performance reviews can reveal recurring skill gaps, while assessments show whether employees understand a process. Operational systems may expose errors or delays, and manager observations can explain why those issues occur.

Learning management system data is useful, but it should be treated as supporting evidence. A low completion rate may reflect poor scheduling, limited access or an irrelevant course rather than a lack of motivation. Conversely, high completion can coexist with weak application on the job. Combining data creates a clearer view of training need, adoption and transfer.

Segment Employees With Care

Employee groups should be defined by the work they perform and the capability required, not by assumptions about age, location or employment status. Relevant segments might include new starters, frontline supervisors, technical specialists, customer-facing teams and employees moving into leadership.

Australian organisations also need to consider dispersed workforces. FIFO arrangements in Western Australia, seasonal staff in regional tourism and hybrid teams in Melbourne or Sydney can produce different access patterns. A short learning burst, coached practice or mobile resource may suit one group, while a structured workshop is more appropriate for another.

Separate Training Gaps From Other Causes

Data can identify an undesirable result, but it cannot automatically prove that training is the answer. Employees may know the correct procedure yet lack suitable tools, manager support, time or authority. A confusing workflow, outdated system or unrealistic target may be driving the issue.

Use interviews, observation and task analysis to test the diagnosis. Ask what employees do now, what the standard requires and what prevents them from meeting it. This prevents organisations from assigning courses to people who need clearer instructions, better equipment or a process redesign.

Protect Fairness And Privacy

Individual-level analytics should be handled carefully. Under the Privacy Act 1988, organisations need a legitimate purpose for collecting and using personal information, with appropriate controls around access, retention and disclosure. Employees should understand how data informs development decisions and should have a way to correct inaccurate records.

Fairness also requires checking for hidden bias. If casual employees appear to need more training, the reason may be that they receive fewer inductions or have less rostered learning time. Compare access, assessment conditions and manager support before labelling a group as underperforming.

Match The Intervention To The Need

A priority score can combine business impact, frequency, skill criticality, employee exposure and confidence in the evidence. High-impact, high-confidence gaps deserve immediate action. A low-confidence result may justify more observation before money is committed.

Interventions should fit the work. A supervisor may need practice in feedback and coaching, while a new warehouse employee may need demonstrations, guided practice and a verification check. For leadership and commercial capability, business acumen expertise can help connect learning with decisions managers make every day.

Measure Change And Refine Priorities

Before delivery, define the behaviour or result that should change. Measures might include fewer quality errors, faster resolution times, improved safety observations or stronger manager confidence. Predictive evaluation can estimate likely adoption and business impact before a programme is scaled.

After delivery, compare results with a suitable baseline and review the findings by role, site and cohort. An organisation using custom training development can then adjust content, reinforcement and delivery rather than treating the first rollout as final.

Evidence pattern Likely interpretation Suitable response
Low assessment scores and frequent errors Knowledge or skill gap Targeted instruction and supervised practice
Good assessment scores but poor workplace results Transfer, process or manager-support issue Coaching, workflow changes and job aids
Low course completion in remote teams Access or scheduling barrier Mobile learning, local facilitation or paid learning time
Strong results after onboarding but decline later Weak reinforcement Refreshers, manager check-ins and performance support
Results vary sharply by site Local leadership or process variation Site diagnosis before organisation-wide training

Practical Priorities For A Data-Led Programme

  • Link every proposed learning intervention to a business or risk measure.
  • Combine operational, assessment, manager and employee evidence before ranking need.
  • Analyse access conditions so workforce differences are not mistaken for capability gaps.
  • Use privacy controls, transparent criteria and bias checks for individual data.
  • Measure workplace behaviour and business outcomes, not attendance alone.

The practical takeaway is simple: prioritise employees where evidence shows a critical capability gap, a meaningful business consequence and a realistic opportunity for training to change behaviour. That discipline directs learning investment to the people and situations where it can produce the greatest measurable value.

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.

More...