Kirkpatrick vs. LTEM: Two Models, One Mission (Evaluating Impact)

When we talk about evaluating our learning programs—whether that’s a formal workshop or on-the-job coaching—two models often come up: Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels and the Learning-Transfer Evaluation Model (LTEM). Each has its own spin on how (and why) we should measure training success. Below is a brief comparison based on my recent deep-dive into these frameworks.

1. Why Compare the Models in the First Place?

Kirkpatrick’s model is classic, widely recognized, and easy to digest with four neat levels. LTEM, developed by Will Thalheimer, is newer and more nuanced. Both aim to capture whether training really makes a difference—but in different ways.

2. Key Differences

Focus on Memory & Causal Chain

LTEM highlights long-term memory and the chain from learning to performance, explicitly differentiating immediate comprehension from retention weeks later.
Kirkpatrick lumps all “learning” in Level 2, rarely detailing how or when we confirm knowledge has stuck.

Clarity on Learning Outcomes

LTEM flags the difference between trivial vs. foundational knowledge. It also gives a spotlight to decision-making competence and task performance.
Kirkpatrick basically says “Learning: Did they learn something?” without drilling down into whether that learning is crucial or fleeting.

Greater Depth

Kirkpatrick has four big levels: Reaction, Learning, Behavior, Results.
LTEM has eight tiers, giving more granularity (e.g., immediate knowledge vs. decision-making vs. actual performance).

Integration into Learning Design

Kirkpatrick doesn’t strongly address where or how evaluation ties into designing the training itself.
LTEM encourages us to work backward from final outcomes, clarifying which tasks or decisions we want learners to master and then building practice around that.

3. Similarities

Multi-Level Approach: Both say you shouldn’t rely on just learner satisfaction or knowledge checks.
Behavior & Results: Each ultimately wants to ensure new skills transfer to on-the-job application and produce organizational benefits (e.g., better ROI).
Goal of Organizational Impact: Kirkpatrick’s Level 4 and LTEM’s Tier 8 both look at how training affects overarching results—like performance metrics, revenue, cost, or intangible outcomes.

4. What to Know About LTEM

Emphasis on Task Performance: It’s not enough to just show knowledge; learners should demonstrate decisions in action under realistic conditions.
Memory & Realistic Practice: LTEM strongly suggests waiting several days or weeks before measuring performance, because immediate tests might not guarantee long-term retention.
Depth of Evaluation: By dissecting everything from trivial knowledge to genuine task execution, LTEM ensures we’re measuring what truly matters.

5. Pros & Cons

Kirkpatrick Pros

Well-known & Simple: Easy to explain “Reaction, Learning, Behavior, Results” to stakeholders.
Encourages deeper look than just a “happy sheet.”

Kirkpatrick Cons

Not super specific: Tends to group all “learning” in a single level, ignoring memory vs. immediate recall.
Risk of partial use: Many organizations stop at Reaction or Learning data and claim “done.”

LTEM Pros

Granular: Distinguishes different kinds of learning (decision-making vs. knowledge retention).
Connects training design to real tasks: Encourages designing for decision-making competence, not just facts.

LTEM Cons

Complex: Eight tiers can be intimidating to some training teams.
Heavy on Memory: Might need adaptation for certain training contexts where job aids or performance support do the heavy lifting.

6. How LTEM Could Have Helped in Our Course/Projects

Decision-Focused: Using LTEM, we’d measure not just “did they pass a quiz?” but also whether they’re making correct decisions in realistic scenarios.
Delayed Assessment: It suggests testing performance weeks later to confirm real retention. Many times, we treat an immediate test as “mission accomplished,” but LTEM warns us otherwise.

7. Which Model Is More Effective?

For detailed evaluations, LTEM shines. It addresses memory, real tasks, and environmental support more explicitly. Kirkpatrick is simpler, widely recognized, and still valuable—just be mindful you don’t shortchange deeper measures like memory retention or decision-making because the model lumps “learning” into one catch-all level.

In short: Kirkpatrick is easier to get stakeholder buy-in fast, but LTEM has stronger guidance if you want to measure “Are they actually retaining and using this knowledge weeks down the line?”

8. Why Knowing Multiple Models Helps

Each framework offers different reminders and processes—Kirkpatrick for broad levels, LTEM for deeper focus on long-term memory and real-world tasks. If you’re only aware of one model, you might overlook advanced considerations, or stop short of truly tying learning outcomes to ongoing workplace performance.

Ultimately, whether you choose Kirkpatrick, LTEM, or a blend, you’ll be better equipped to design, measure, and refine learning programs that generate real impact for learners and organizations alike.

References

Kirkpatrick, J. D. & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation. Association for Talent Development.
Thalheimer, W. (2024). The Learning-Transfer Evaluation Model: Sending messages and nudging evidence-informed thinking to enable learning effectiveness. Available at WorkLearning.com/LTEM.

Thanks for reading! Have any thoughts on whether “simple but broad” or “deep but nuanced” is your style? Drop a comment below!

Jason Boursier

Learning Designer