Introduction and Perspectives on Training - Essay Example

 Investing in human resources is a strategic choice and expensive investment (Cheng and Ho, 1999) that helps in gaining competitive advantage (Adler and Kwon 2002; Bontis 2001; Hand and Lev 2003; Nonaka and Takeuchi 1995; Nooteboom 2000; Storberg and Walker 2004 cited in Cheng and Hampson 2008). Effectiveness of formal training program is the degree to which transfer of training occurs on the job. (Kirkpatrick, 1996). The socio-cultural, technological, economic, and political pressures have made the organizations have a close look at the human capital and their training in particular. Training is a source of information and guidance, in relation to the portfolio of skills and knowledge, relevant to the present and future development of human resources (Antacoplau, 1999). Despite its being an area of importance for an individual growth, it is still under-researched subject (Antonacopoulu, 1999). There is a growing concern for transfer of training problem amongst training professionals and practitioners despite its being a core human resource development area. Baldwin and Ford (1998) also noted that there is a general lack of comprehensive review and empirical research on transfer of training (Baldwin and Ford, 1988). Despite the fact that scientific interest in transfer of training dates back to the eighteenth century (Patrick, 1992 cited in Rose, Attree, Brooks., Parslow, Penn, 2000), there is a general lack of theory guiding research into transfer of training (Baldwin and Ford, 1988). However, a spate of research into the field followed the publication of the seminal work of Baldwin and Ford on training transfer in 1988. Even fewer studies have examined how the work environment influences the transfer (Baldwin and Ford, 1988 cited in Tracey, Tannenbaum and Kavanagh, 1995). Definition Transfer of training is defined as the degree to which trainees apply knowledge, skills, behaviours, and attitudes gained in training to their jobs (Tracey et.al, 1995, Baldwin and Ford, 1988). Purpose of Training Organisations employ training for operational and strategic issues consequent to internal and external changes (Antonacopoulu, 1999). Organizations train their employees for skill enhancement, knowledge acquisition, honing of abilities for increase of performance in the work settings (Holladay and Quinos, 2003). The success of the training programme does not guarantee that training would be successfully transferred to the workplace. Trainability, the ability to learn and apply training material imbibed during the training programme at the workplace, is a function of ability, motivation and environmental favourability (Cheng and Ho, 1999). Along with interest in training has arisen an increased interest in learning technologies and performance enhancement processes practices and services (Salas-Cannon-Bowers, 2001). The study of transfer of training has evolved from notions of ‘shared elements’ to ‘cognitive interpretations’ of transfer. Transfer of training construct is used to describe those aspects of the work environment that directly influence the generalisation and maintenance of knowledge and skills learned during training (Rouiller and Goldstein, 1993 cited in Machin and Fogarty. Baldwin and Ford, 1988). Tracey et.al (1995) cited in Velada, Caetano, Michel, Lyons, and Kavanagh (2007) found that when organizational climate is supportive, there is a greater likelihood of employees applying their newly acquired knowledge to the workplace. The Transfer of Training Process In a survey of 150 organizations, less than 50 percent of employees transferred only one half of their newly acquired skills six months after the transfer (Saks and Belcourt, 2006 cited in Hutchins and Burke, 2007). On the other hand, the importance of transfer climate can be gauged from the fact 50 percent of all the performance improvement resulting from training intervention, may be attributed to those post-training activities, which support the transfer process (Hutchins and Burke, 2007). Expenditures on training activities are witnessing a surge worldwide (Velada et.al, 2007).Companies spend around $50 billion on formal training each year (Dolezalek, 2004 cited by Velada, et.al, 2007), yet learning investments fail to produce the desired. Other estimates put the figure at $100 billion. Only 10% of this investment results in behavioural change on the jobs (Georgeson 1982 cited at Marilyn, et.al, 1990). There is a dynamic progress in science and practice of training (Salas- Cannon-Bowers, 2001). Training not supported by organizational change efforts is ineffective (Machin and Fogarty, 2004). Positive Transfer of Training Simply stated, positive transfer of training is application to job of what is ingrained in the training (Howley and Barnard, 2005). It is application, generalizability, and maintenance of newly acquired skill sets (Ford and Weisbenn cited in Cheng and Hampson, 2008). Transfer of training is a key HRD issue (Holton III, Chen and Naquin, 2003). Considerable amount of research has gone into understanding the factors that affect transfer of training. Transfer of training occurs when knowledge or skill sets gained are put to use at the workplace. The last decade has been important in the study of ‘transfer’ issue. Thus it is important that trainees retain the knowledge gained during training to facilitate transfer process (Velada et.al, 2007). A lot many factors have been discussed in the transfer of training literature. Pre-training self-efficacy also plays a dominant role in predicting a trainee’s pre-training motivation levels (Machin and Fogarty, 2004). For positive transfer of training, human resource professionals should identify the key factors that influence trainees’ transfer of learning (Holton et.al III, 2003). The stage wise transfer process includes learning the training material and utilization of knowledge and skills acquired during training outside of the learning environment. Positive transfer of training includes generalization of material learned during training and maintenance of learned material over a period of time on the job. It is the framework of training inputs, training outputs, and conditions of transfer (Baldwin and Ford, 1988). Despite the heavy expenditures involved, only training commensurate to 10 percent of the total expenditure incurred on it is positively transferred to the workplace (Cheng and Ho, 1999). This makes transfer a matter of critical concern. Transfer of training, as opposed to learning cannot be evaluated through metrics. It can only be evaluated on perceptual basis (Taylor, Taylor, and Eft, 2005). Effectiveness of training depends on whether learning outcomes are used at the workplace or not (Salas, and Cannon-Bowers, 2001). It has been observed that when the employees receive proper information about training program, they feel accountable for the training and perceive training as mandatory. Transfer of training is a dynamic process while its research is static in nature (Baldwin and Ford, 1988). Alvarez cited at Velada et.al (2007) emphasizes the use of instructional techniques and learning principles. Theorists also emphasize self-management, goal-setting and relapse prevention strategies for positive transfer of training. The important factors that can be used to increase the likelihood of transfer are influenced by factors like instructional techniques and learning principles. Personality is important in training as it creates different set of goals and cognitive construction of individuals’ environment resulting in person to person difference in behaviour. Goal-setting and feedback increases the motivation of the employee to transfer the learned skills to job profile. Besides physical fidelity, trainees develop psychological fidelity by attaching similar meaning in training and organizational context. The importance of psychological fidelity has been considerably undermined in the industrial training literature. Hence, training should not only be aimed at the physical characteristics like products type, surroundings, distraction, etc, but also focus on creating accurate reproduction of behavioural and cognitive processes that provide the necessary stimuli for a job. However, more research is required to explore the type and level of fidelity to maximize transfer in given time and resource constraints (Baldwin and Ford, 1988). Baldwin and Magjuka cited in Tracey et.al (1995) identify three organizational signals that influence trainees’ intentions to apply what they have learned in job. It was found that trainees reported greater intentions to transfer learning back to their jobs, when they received the three signals of a) when trainees received the information of training before the start of the program b) recognized that they would be held accountable for learning and c) perceived training as mandatory. In the absence of systematic metrics to measure the transfer of training, it is only assessed through surveys. Employees often take training with cynicism berating it as a means for managers to take a few days off from the job (Taylor et.al, 2005). The failure of training transfer occurs when the training is not designed and delivered without connecting training back to the work environment (Howley and Barnard). The three key aspects of training transfer are: training inputs, training outputs and conditions of transfer (Baldwin and Ford, 1988). Holton III et.al (1996) emphasize on performance and organizational results to evaluate positive transfer of training. It is important that training managers consider all the environmental factors in an organization to provide a kind of training that is aligned with their organization’s strategic directions (Machin and Fogarty, 2004). Transfer Climate The transfer of training from training intervention programs to the work environment remains an area of interest for the theorists and practitioners. Transfer research is generally directed at the role the managers and supervisors and peers play in the transfer process (Clarke, 1993, Howley and Barnard, 2005). The climate for transfer of training to the work environment can be essentially categorized positive or negative. Transfer climate is descriptive of those aspects of work environment that directly influence the generalisation and maintenance of knowledge and skills learned during training (Roullier and Goldstein cited in Machin and Fogarty, 2004). The features of environment that are conducive to transfer are adequate resources, cues to remind the employees of what they have learnt, opportunities to use skills, frequent feedback and favourable consequences for using training content (Colquitt, 2000). Transfer climate is a strong determinant of post-training behaviour and positive transfer of training (Machin and Fogarty, 2004). However, it is highly recommended that training programs be designed to transfer maximum of training outcomes to the workplace. Cheng and Ho (1999) study the transfer of training to the workplace under the four stages of pre-training motivation, learning, training, and transfer. Roullier and Goldstein cited in Machin and Fogarty (2004) use the typologies of consequences and antecedents to develop a transfer model based upon social learning theory. Organizational culture and climate are two dimensions of the work environment that have an impact on the transfer of training process (Baldwin and Ford, 1988, Rouiller and Goldstein, 1993, Tracey et.al (1995) cited in Velada et.al, 2007). Training Design It is concluded by Velada et.al (2007) that in order to maximize the return of investment on training and development, organizations need to focus on training design, individual characteristics and work environment. Foremost of all, training should be designed so that it matches the abilities of the trainee. Transfer of training should also be so designed to prevent relapse (Velada et.al, 2007). It is important that the organizations design their training programs to include such factors that increase the likelihood of transfer (Velada et.al, 2007). Training transfer should also be so designed to maximize the ability of the trainee to transfer training outcomes to the job (Holton; 1996, 2005 cited in Velada et.al, 2007). The information gathered by the trainee at the training classroom is imbibed to construct knowledge in their minds (Pintrich, Cross, Kozma, and McKeachie, 1986 cited in Colquitt and Lepine and Noe, 2000). Thus what the learner brings to the instructional situation in form of cognitive ability and prior knowledge is of importance (Colquitt, Lepine and Noe, 2000). The transfer climate should provide adequate opportunities to put to practice what is imbibed in the training process. Lack of Knowledge There is a general lack of theoretical knowledge of training outcomes and their underlying principles amongst practitioners. Consequently, the practitioners adopt a hit and trial approach (Cheng and Ho, 1999). Colquitt and Lepine and Noe (2000) also contend that there is a void of literature on personality dimensions and training outcomes. The Baldwin and Ford Model According to Baldwin and Ford Model training outcomes and training input factors have both direct and indirect effect on the conditions of transfer. Fig 1 shows six linkages of the training transfer. Learning and Retention have direct effect on conditions of transfer. Characteristics of Trainee, Training Design and the Work Environment are three aspects that influence learning and retention and the transfer of training process. Training characteristics and work environment have a direct and indirect effect on the conditions of transfer. Baldwin and Ford (1988) argue that the work environment factors like supervisory support and organizational climate are two key factors that influence the transfer process. For example, well learned skills may not be maintained on the job due to lack of motivation or lack of supervisory support (Baldwin, Ford, 1988, p 67). Fig. Baldwin and Ford Model. It is important that the trainees learn the new material and utilize their knowledge, skill and abilities to the workplace (Velada et.al, 2007). The trainees should be confident that they will receive full support and feedback necessary regarding their performance from the organization (Velada et.al, 2007). Training should be imparted with an ethos that the employees perceive it as important ingredient for self and organizational development. According to Baldwin and Ford (1988) maximum transfer takes place if there is identical stimulus in the training and transfer setting. Work environment provides support and opportunity to use the learning outcomes of the training. Work environment factors can be classified as work system factors and people’s factors. Work system items relate to cultural elements such as open communication, change resistance, alignment of training goals and organizational goals, providing for an atmosphere conducive to training. People’s factors include support from the supervisors and the peers (Howley and Barnard, 2005). Managerial support, for example, is likely to be of central importance in creating a ‘transfer friendly’ climate (Axtell and Maitlis, 1996). Work environment and characteristics and research posit a typical problem. Surroundings, tasks, and equipment of the training program should match the work environment (Baldwin and Ford, 1988). Continuous Learning Environment Transfer of training is supported by continuous learning environment. Training climate and learning culture are directly related to the transfer of trained behaviours (Tracey et.al, 1995). Continuous learning work environments are the ones where learning, knowledge and skill acquisition are part of every employee’s job. Knowledge and skill acquisition are supported by social interaction and work relationships. Transfer is greater achieved in those organizations that have developed formal systems. These organizations reinforce achievement and provide opportunities for personal development (Dubin cited at Tracy et.al in 1995). The work environment is characterized by an emphasis on innovation and competition both within and outside the organizational context. Employees working in a continuous-learning culture were directly related to post training behaviour (Cheng and Ho, 1999). Transfer of training is affected by a range of environmental characteristics like supervisory and peer support, constraints and opportunities to put to practice the learning outcomes. Howley and Barnard (2005) stress that trainees would not use skills learned in training if they returned to an environment that didn’t support the use of learned skills. Researchers have developed integrated models to understand transfer and post transfer behaviour (Cheng and Hampson, 2008). Two major transfer variables are motivation to transfer and transfer behaviour itself. The independent variables studied in the period were categorised as individual characteristics, job/career variables and situational variables. Transfer of training is affected by trainee characteristics and work environment characteristics. Work environment factors are further characterised work system factors and people’s factors. Transfer of training in Private, Public and Non-profit Organizations. Holton III et.al (2003) observed that transfer systems significantly differed across organization types (Holton et.al, 2003). Holton III (2003) et.al also discovered that non-profit organizations displayed higher motivation levels than private and public organizations for transfer of training. Public organizations also showed the greatest resistance to learning and private organizations provided the greatest opportunity to learning. (Holton III et.al, 2003). Holton III et.al (2003) observed that in private organizations employees felt that changing their performance is more likely to lead to valued outcomes. They had greater opportunity and greater capacity for learning. The public sector organization employees felt that they are likely to face more resistance to change. The non-profit organizations had a strong training transfer system with higher motivation to transfer and receive more supervisor support (Holton III et.al, 2003). Holton et.al III (2003) also observes that overall in three kinds of organizations; supervisory support for transfer of training was minimal. This confirmed the viewpoint that supervisors do not support training as they should (Holton III, 2003). Conclusion Systematised research is to establish the principles of transfer of training in which models are tested, and developed on the empirical research. Though theorists have identified key personality and motivational efforts factors, yet more efforts at development of models to establish linkages and relationships among these factors and transfer are required. This is especially important if the companies want to curtail training costs and stay in tune with changing work cultures, aims and objectives of the ephemeral business scenarios in context of globalisation and trade liberalisations regiments. . References Axtell, C, M., Maitlis, S, Yearta, S, K, (1996) Predicting immediate and long-term transfer of training. Personal Review, 26 (3) pp 201-233. Antonacopoulu, E, P., (1999) Training does not imply learning: individual’s perspective International Journal of Training and Development, 3:1 14-33. Baldwin, T, T., Ford, J, K., (1988) Transfer of training: a review and directions for future research, Personnel Psychology, 41 63-105. Cheng, E, W, L., Hampson, I., (2008) Transfer of training: a review and new insights International Journal of Management Reviews, 10(4), 327-341. Cheng, E, W, L, Ho, D, C, K.,(1999) A review of transfer of training studies in the past decade, Personal Review 30(1) 102-118. Clarke, N., (2002) Job work environment factors influencing training transfer within a a human service agency: some indicative support for Baldwin and Ford’s transfer climate construct, International Journal of Training and Development 6:3 146-162. Colquitt, J, A., LePine, J, A., Noe, R, A, (2000) Towards an integrative theory of training motivation: a meta-analytic path analysis of 20 years of research, Journal of Applied Psychology 85 (5) 678-707. Holladay, C, L., Quinones, M, A., (2003) Practice variability and transfer of training: the role of self-efficacy generality, Journal of Applied Psychology, 88:6 1094-1103. Holton III, E, F, Chen, H-C, Naquin, S, S (2003) An examination of learning transfer system characteristics across organizational settings, Human Resource Development Quarterly, 4(14) 459-482. Howley, J, D., Barnard, J, K., (2005) Work environment characteristics and implications for training transfer: a case study of the nuclear power industry, Human Resource Development International, 8 (1) 65-80. Hutchins, H, M, Burke, L, A., (2007) Identifying trainers’ knowledge of training transfer research findings—closing the gap between research and practice, International Journal of Training and Development, 11:4 236-264. Kirkpatrick, D, (1996) Great ideas revisited, Training and Development 54-59. Machin, M, A., Fogarty, G, J., (2004) Assessing the antecedents of transfer intentions in a training context. International Journal of Training and Development 8:3 222- 236. Marilyn, G, E., Bavetta, A, G., Stevens, C, K, (1990) Transfer training method: its influence on skill generalisation, skill repetition, and performance level, Personnel Psychology 43. Salas, E., Cannon-Bowers, J, A., (2001)The science of training: a decade of progress, Annual Reviews, 52:471-99 Taylor, P, J, Taylor, H., Russ-Eft, D, F., (2009) Transfer of management training from alternative perspectives, Journal of Applied Psychology 1(94) 104-121. Tracey, J, B., Tannenbaum, S, I., Kavanagh (1995) Applied trained skills on the job: the importance of the work environment Journal of Applied Psychology 80(2) 239-252. Rose, F, D., Attree, E, A., Brooks, B, M., Parslow, D, M., Penn, P, R., Ambihaipahan, N., (2000) Training in virtual environments: transfer to real world tasks and equivalence to real task training, Ergonomics, 43(4) 494-511. Velada, R, Caetano, A., Michel, J.W., Lyons, B, D., Kavanagh, M, J., (2007) The effects of training design, individual characteristics and work environment on training . Read More