An HR audit of training and development looks beyond short-term participant reactions to determine whether the organization is receiving a measurable payoff. The dominant metric used is return on investment (ROI) because it links training costs to quantifiable business results, providing senior management with evidence that learning expenditures generate value. Audits therefore concentrate on calculating monetary benefits attributable to the program versus its total cost, rather than narrower learning or satisfaction measures.

B. Tests learning (Kirkpatrick Level 2) but does not establish organizational value; audits require financial impact.

C. Engagement monitoring is a real-time facilitation concern, not a post-program audit outcome.

D. Satisfaction (Level 1 reaction) is subjective and insufficient for demonstrating business payback.

1. Phillips, J. J. (1996) “Measuring ROI in HRD,” Training & Development, 50(4), pp. 20-27 (see ROI as central audit criterion).

2. MIT OpenCourseWare, 15.660 Strategic HRM, Session 8 slides 16-18 (emphasizes ROI as primary evaluation focus).

3. Mathis, Jackson & Valentine (2017) Human Resource Management, 15e, pp. 308-309 (“HR audits examine ROI of training investments”).