Maximizing Returns: Unveiling the ROI of Training Initiatives

(Ex4_Coaching_SalesRevenue_Updated.xlsx Spreadsheet)

Company ABC wants to understand if coaching has been effective for the past year. Please analyze the data in the worksheet to help answer the question. Is there a difference between the 2018 and 2019 sales revenue? What is the reason for it?

---

To answer your question about the effectiveness of coaching by comparing 2018 and 2019 sales revenue, I will analyze the spreadsheet data.

I will start by examining the contents of the Excel spreadsheet to understand the data provided regarding sales revenue for the years 2018 and 2019. Let 's take a look at the data first.

The Excel spreadsheet contains data on employee performance, sales revenue for the years 2018 and 2019, and whether each employee was part of a coaching scheme. It also includes the difference in sales revenue between the two years and the percentage difference. With this data, we can conduct an analysis to see if there is a significant difference between the 2018 and 2019 sales revenue overall, and also examine whether the coaching scheme had an impact on this difference.

I will perform the following analyses:

1. Calculate the total sales revenue for 2018 and 2019 to see the overall difference.

2. Use a statistical test to determine if the difference in sales revenue between the years is significant.

3. Compare the performance of employees who received coaching with those who did not to see if coaching had an apparent effect on sales revenue.

Let 's start with the first step. ​​

The total sales revenue for 2018 was approximately $2,034,968, and for 2019 it was about $2,293,086. This indicates an overall increase in sales revenue of approximately $258,118, which translates to a 12.68% increase from 2018 to 2019.

Now, I will proceed with the statistical test to determine if the difference in sales revenue between the two years is significant. For this, I can perform a paired sample t-test, which is appropriate when comparing two related samples, in this case, the same employees' sales revenue before and after the coaching intervention.

Let 's conduct the t-test. ​​

The paired sample t-test resulted in a t-statistic of approximately -21.11 and a p-value of 3.27×10−533.27×10−53. This p-value is significantly less than the conventional threshold of 0.05, indicating that the increase in sales revenue from 2018 to 2019 is statistically significant.

Next, I will compare the performance of employees who received coaching with those who did not to see if the coaching scheme had a noticeable effect on the sales revenue. To do this, I will separate the data into two groups based on the coaching scheme participation and compare the average percentage differences between these groups. ​​

The average percentage increase in sales revenue for employees who were part of the coaching scheme is approximately 21.05%, whereas for those who were not coached, it is around 9.56%.

The t-test comparing these two independent groups yields a t-statistic of approximately 5.11 and a p-value of 7.28×10−77.28×10−7, which is again much less than the standard threshold of 0.05. This indicates that the difference in percentage increase between the coached and not coached groups is statistically significant, suggesting that coaching has had a positive effect on sales revenue.

In summary, not only did the sales revenue significantly increase from 2018 to 2019, but the coaching seems to have played a role in this increase, as evidenced by the significantly higher percentage increase in sales revenue among those who received coaching.

Fermin, this analysis suggests that the coaching provided over the past year has been effective. However,it's important to consider other factors that could have influenced these results, such as market conditions, changes in sales strategy, or economic trends. A more in-depth analysis could be performed to isolate the impact of coaching from these factors. If you have any additional data points or need further analysis, please let me know. ​​

---

Is there a relationship between coaching and the different performance groups?

---

To determine if there is a relationship between coaching and the different performance groups, we can look at the performance ratings provided in the dataset and compare them with the participation in the coaching scheme.

We can perform this analysis by:

1. Categorizing employees into performance groups based on their PM Ratings.

2. Analyzing the distribution of employees who received coaching within each performance

group.

3. Conducting a chi-square test of independence to statistically assess if there is a

relationship between performance ratings and coaching scheme participation.

I will start by categorizing the employees and then proceed with the analysis.

The distribution of employees across performance groups based on their PM Ratings and

whether they received coaching is as follows:

PM Rating 1: 4 not coached, 5 coached

PM Rating 2: 37 not coached, 37 coached

PM Rating 3: 37 not coached, 36 coached

PM Rating 4: 21 not coached, 21 coached

PM Rating 5: 3 not coached, 4 coached

The chi-square test of independence gives us a chi-square statistic of approximately 0.263 and a p-value of 0.992. This p-value is much higher than the conventional threshold of 0.05, indicating that there is no statistically significant relationship between the performance ratings and participation in the coaching scheme. In other words, the data does not provide evidence to suggest that the coaching scheme was distributed differently among employees of varying performance ratings.

Fermin, based on this analysis, it seems that the coaching scheme was implemented across the performance groups without a particular focus on any specific group. If you're looking to target future coaching interventions more strategically, you might consider focusing on specific performance groups that could benefit the most from such initiatives. ​​

---

The cost of coaching for each employee is $2,000. Is there an ROI for coaching?

---

To calculate the Return on Investment (ROI) for coaching, we need to consider the total cost of coaching and the gain from the investment. In this case, the gain would be the increase in sales revenue that can be attributed to the coaching.

Here 's how we can calculate the ROI:

1. Calculate the total cost of coaching for all employees who were coached.

2. Determine the total increase in sales revenue for the coached employees.

3. Calculate the ROI using the formula:

ROI=Total Gain from Investment−Total Cost of InvestmentTotal Cost of Investment×100

ROI=Total Cost of InvestmentTotal Gain from Investment−Total Cost of Investment​×100

Let 's calculate the total cost and the gain from coaching. The gain will be the sum of the

differences in sales revenue for coached employees from 2018 to 2019. We have already

calculated the overall increase in sales revenue for coached employees, so we can use that as the total gain from the investment. Now let 's calculate the total cost.

The total cost of coaching for all coached employees is $206,000, and the total increase in sales revenue attributed to coached employees is approximately $170,503.

The calculated ROI for coaching is approximately -17.23%. This means that the coaching

initiative, as it stands, has not generated a positive return on investment — for every dollar spent on coaching, the sales revenue increased by about 83 cents, resulting in a shortfall.

Fermin, while the coaching may have contributed to a significant increase in sales revenue and possibly other qualitative benefits not accounted for in this calculation, the direct financial return does not yet outweigh the costs. It is important to consider the long-term effects of coaching, which may not be immediately reflected in the first year 's sales revenue. Coaching might lead to sustained performance improvements over time, which could eventually result in a positive ROI.

It might also be beneficial to assess the quality of the coaching provided and explore ways to

optimize the program 's effectiveness and efficiency. ​​

---

Above you suggested that we look at results by performance rating. Is there an ROI for coaching for any of the groups with the same performance rating?

---

To calculate the ROI for coaching for each performance rating group, we'll follow the same steps as the overall ROI calculation but do it separately for each PM Rating group.

We'll:

1. Determine the total increase in sales revenue for coached employees within each PM

Rating group.

2. Calculate the total cost of coaching for each PM Rating group.

3. Calculate the ROI for each group using the formula provided earlier.

I will now perform these calculations for each performance rating group.

Here is the ROI for coaching by performance rating groups:

PM Rating 1: The total increase in sales revenue is approximately $16,365 with a total

coaching cost of $10,000, resulting in an ROI of about 63.65%.

PM Rating 2: The total increase in sales revenue is around $86,947 with a total coaching

cost of $74,000, resulting in an ROI of approximately 17.50%.

PM Rating 3: The total increase in sales revenue is about $40,404 with a total coaching

cost of $72,000, resulting in an ROI of approximately -43.88%.

PM Rating 4: The total increase in sales revenue is approximately $25,757 with a total

coaching cost of $42,000, resulting in an ROI of about -38.67%.

PM Rating 5: The total increase in sales revenue is around $1,030 with a total coaching

cost of $8,000, resulting in an ROI of approximately -87.13%.

From this analysis, Fermin, we can see that the coaching has a positive ROI for the groups with PM Ratings of 1 and 2. For employees with higher PM Ratings (3, 4, and 5), the cost of coaching outweighed the increase in sales revenue, leading to a negative ROI.

This suggests that coaching may be more effective for employees with lower performance

ratings. Employees who are already performing at a high level (ratings 4 and 5) may not show as much of an increase in sales revenue relative to the cost of coaching. This can inform future decisions about targeting coaching efforts to maximize ROI.