IMD Annual Report 2019

96

IMD ANNUAL REPORT 2019

Measuring IMD’s learning impact

To be clear, IMD Faculty remains very involved. When competing for custom programs with professional service firms, IMD notices how their senior partners tend to be involved at very selected junctures, while IMD faculty tends to be more involved throughout the interventions. IMD believes that strong faculty involvement is an important part of its value proposition. We also make sure that faculty intervenes where and when they can make the most difference , and we call on other teammembers whenever they can contribute effectively and/or efficiently.

IMD continuously monitors and measures its impact in order to understand how to design and deliver the most impactful interventions In 2019, IMD conducted in-depth, rigorous and data-based analysis of the way its programs and interventions support, impact and contribute to the performance and practices of executives and organizations.

IMD’s research team currently captures 15 key performance indicators spread across two-time frames – an immediate feedback captured at the end of the program, and a delayed assessment captured four months post-program. 1. Fresh knowledge 2. Practical tools and ideas 3. Reflection 4. Commitment to action 5. Support network 6. Emotions 7. Satisfaction (NPS) 8. Impact map 9. Priorities & decisions 10. Effective team conversations 11. Self-confidence 12. Perspective change 13. Actions to achieve objectives 14. Effective team initiatives 15. Apply learning

This project is helping IMD to build reliable datasets and insights that will be used to improve the design and effectiveness of its programs, whilealsoshowcasing thepower of its learning journeys for prospective learning partners, clients and audiences. 2019’s results confirm that IMD participants expect a very high level of positive impact at both individual and organizational levels.

Participants generally see the impact of programs to be high both for themselves and their organizations

HIGH

73%

3%

21%

3%

Organizational impact

LOW

Source of data for graphic: Surveys completed by 2,900 alumni, July – December 2019

Individual impact

LOW

HIGH