Transcript Employee perceptions and their influence on training effectiveness

Employee perceptions and their
influence on training effectiveness
Adviser: Ming-Puu Chen
Presenter: Yu-Ting Tsai
2007.10.09
Santos, A. & Stuart, M. (2003). Employee perceptions and their influence on training effectiveness.
Human Resource Management Journal, 13(1), 27-45.
Introduction
• Economic studies identify training and development investments
as key determinants of organizational performance and economic
growth. (Mason et al, 1996; Prais, 1995; Romer, 1993)
• The mainstream HR literature has devoted little empirical attention
to the issue of how companies evaluate the effectiveness of
training investments and, in particular, the way in which employee
perceptions, attitudes and experiences might have an impact
on training effectiveness.
Introduction
• The article presents evidence from a detailed case study designed
to explore the effectiveness of training at the workplace.
• 2 central empirical objectives：
First, it aims to evaluate employees' experiences of, and attitudes
towards, training activity and the organization context of training
investments.
Secondly, it assesses how these experiences of training shape the
'transfer' of training into the workplace and thus mediate
effectiveness.
1.Evaluating training effectiveness
Levels of outcomes (1)
• The HR and training literatures emphasize the organizational
benefits to be gained from adopting a systematic approach to
HRD whereby the ongoing development of employees‘ skills
underpins broader business objectives. (Keep, 1989)
• Core elements of a systematic approach to training often include
identifying needs, planning, delivery and evaluation. The
evaluation stage is arguably the most problematic part of the
training process. (Reid and Barrington, 1997)
→ Only 3% of UK establishments undertook any cost-benefit analysis
(Deloitte Haskins and Sells, 1989: 46)
1.Evaluating training effectiveness
Levels of outcomes (2)
Kirkpatrick model：4 levels of training outcomes (Kirkpatrick, 1967)
• Level 1： reactions (反應)
trainees' reactions to the program content and training process
• Level 2： learning (學習)
knowledge or skill acquisition at the end of the program
• Level 3： behavior (行為)
behavior change in the job
• Level 4： results (結果)
improvements in tangible individual or organizational outcomes
such as turnover, accidents or productivity
→ ASTD：Kirkpatrick model is the most commonly used evaluation framework
(Bassi and Cheney, 1997)
→ The model is widely accepted in the field of industrial/organizational psychology
(Cascio, 1987)
1.Evaluating training effectiveness
Levels of outcomes (3-1)
CIRO (Warr et al , 1976)
• Context evaluation(內容)
focuses on factors such as the correct identification of training needs and
the setting of objectives in relation to organization culture and climate
• Input evaluation (投入)
concerned with the design and delivery of the training activity
• Reaction evaluation(反應)
looks at gaining and using information about the quality of trainees' experiences
• Outcome evaluation(結果)
focuses on the achievements gained from the activity and is assessed
at three levels
1.Evaluating training effectiveness
Levels of outcomes (3-2)
Immediate
Evaluation
Intermediate
Evaluation
Ultimate
Evaluation
attempts to measure changes in knowledge,
skills or attitude before a trainee returns to the job
refers to the impact of training on job performance
and how learning is transferred back into the workplace
attempts to assess the impact of training on departmental
or organizational performance in terms of overall results
Kirkpatrick (1994) and Warr et al (1976) recognize, that the cause-effect chain is
often difficult to demonstrate, especially with regard to ultimate level evaluations.
1.Evaluating training effectiveness
Levels of outcomes (4)
CAIPO framework (Easterby Smith, 1986)
• Context evaluation
focuses on factors outside and beyond the training program
• Administration evaluation
concerned with the mechanisms of nomination, selection and briefing
before any training starts, and any follow-up activities
• Input evaluation
examines the content and methods of training
• Process evaluation
focus on what actually happens during a training activity and
how the participants experience it
• Outcome evaluation
concerned with establishing the outputs or outcomes of employee
training and development
1.Evaluating training effectiveness
Evaluation issues
• Many training and development programs are monitored only at the
reactions level (Bramley, 1996) and articles regularly appear lamenting
the lack of evaluation efforts (Goldstein, 1993).
→whether the training provided was effective?
1.Evaluating training effectiveness
Trainee attitudes, motivation and expectations
• Noe and Schmitt (1986) found that trainees with high job
involvement were more motivated to learn and transfer skills to the
work setting.
• The effectiveness of a training program can also be influenced by
events prior to training (Baldwin and Magjuka, 1991) as well as
post-training activities (Baldwin and Ford, 1988).
• Supervisor and peer support, goal setting, feedback mechanisms,
the opportunity to use new skills and the availability of resources are
all thought to influence the process of transfer (Noe, 1986).
2.Methodology-Case study
• A financial services organization
• The company was at the frontier of
good practice in HRD, moving
towards implementing many of the
people management processes that
Tyson and Doherty (1999) describe
as `best practice'.
Finance Co.
•
A key component of this was an
increased emphasis on training
and development activities.
2.Methodology-Case study
• A questionnaire ：3 issues
1.
2.
3.
employees' experiences of training and development
employees' perceptions with regard to training outcomes
work environment factors affecting training transfer
•
Target population：
4,055 employees working in the core financial services business
(45%head office and 55%branches)
•
Questionnaires were posted directly to individuals through the company's
internal mail system and a pre-paid envelope was enclosed, addressed
to the researcher to guarantee anonymity and confidentiality of
responses
•
An overall response rate of 47.7 %
3.Employees’ Perceptions
The training environment
3.Employees’ Perceptions
Perceived outcomes
3.Employees’ Perceptions
Transfer of training(1)
3.Employees’ Perceptions
Transfer of training(1)
3.Employees’ Perceptions
Transfer of training(2)
※A lack of opportunity to use skills!!
3.Employees’ Perceptions
Transfer of training(3)
4.Discussion
• Developed an evaluation procedure that focused on individual
behavior and the transfer of training rather than on achieving
'ultimate goals‘.
• Managers were highly involved in discussing training needs, setting
development goals and reviewing progress and providing coaching
and guidance, training was more likely to have a favorable impact
on employees' motivation, job satisfaction and personal growth.
• Higher pay or better promotion prospects were significantly more
likely to transfer training to the workplace.
→ establishing more explicit links between personal
development and career progression and reward.