The influence of trainees attitudes on training management essay

Our project at BNU-HKBU United International College which lasted nearly 8 months finally comes to the end. And here we wish to express our sincerely appreciation to those who have offered us help during the completion of our final year project. Firstly, we would like to express our grateful to our supervisor — Dr. Herman Tan, for his patient guidance and constant supervision. He has provided significant support and helped us walk through all the stage of writing this report. Without his instruction, we cannot successfully complete the report. Secondly, we would like to give our hearty thanks to those employees who work in Zhuhai Southern Software Park that help us to fulfill the questionnaires and provide us invaluable suggestions and advisements. Lastly, our thanks would go to our friends and classmates who gave us their help in companying us to work out the difficulties and problems we faced during writing this report. Table of content

Abstract

This study examined the influence of trainees’ attitudes on the effectiveness of training programs. A model was developed that suggests four aspects of trainees’ attitudes (choice in attending training, outcome expectancy, reaction to skill assessment, and job involvement) influenced training motivation to learn and overall training effectiveness. The model was tested using a sample of individuals (N= 115) who had taken training programs before in Zhuhai Southern Software Park Development Co, Ltd. Results show that training motivation to learn significantly predict two measures of training effectiveness (reaction & learning). Trainees’ who had a higher level of outcome expectancies towards training, better reaction to skill assessment which conducted before the training, and a higher level of job involvement had a higher motivation to learn. Trainees’ outcome expectancies were found to have significant effects on the training effectiveness via mediated by motivation to learn. The implications of these findings for future research on training effectiveness are identified along with the practical implication for the design and conduct of the training program.

1. Introduction

1. 1 Statement of the problem

Training can be defined as: ‘ A planned effort by a company to facilitate employees’ learning of job-related competencies’ (Noe, 2010). Nowadays, companies keep investing money into the development of training programs, and pay a lot of attention to the effectiveness/outcomes of training. Many investigations aimed to explore the influential factors that affect the training effectiveness and gain certain achievements. Problematically, mainstream training and HR literature placed relatively less emphasized on the issue of how trainees’ attitudes influence on training effectiveness (Santos and Stuart, 2003). Against this gap in the literatures, this paper is designed to investigate how and by which form trainees’ attitudes impact the effectiveness of training.

1. 2 Literature review

Training effectiveness

Before going into the details of training effectiveness, it is important and helpful to make a distinction between training evaluation and training effectiveness. According to Noe (2010), training evaluation means the process of collecting information about the training outcomes needed to determine whether training is effective. Training effectiveness refers to the benefits that the company and the trainees receive from training (Noe, 2010). Trainees’ benefits may include learning new skills or behaviors, while benefits for the company could be increased sales and more satisfied customers. In the study of Alvarez, Salas & Garofano (2004), they claimed that training evaluation and training effectiveness are sometimes interchangeable, but they are two separate constructs. In the same study, Alvarez, Salas & Garofano (2004) also stated that training evaluation is more preferred to be a methodological approach for measuring learning outcomes, while training effectiveness refers to a theoretical approach for understanding those outcomes. Previous studies (e. g.: Kirkpatric 1994, Clements and Josiam 1995, and Bedingham 1997) demonstrated that different kinds of analysis are used by companies to evaluate training effectiveness. Particularly, Ibrahim (2004) pointed out that some companies use a traditional approach which focuses on trainees’ attitudes or reactions to a training program such as trainees’ opinions about training materials, others use measured outcomes of the training program like skills learned or knowledge gained, and still some other companies measure the financial returns of the training program for the company. However, the most famous model used to evaluate training effectiveness must be Kirkpatrick’s four-level model (1994). Kirkpatrick (1994) suggested that training effectiveness should be evaluated at four levels: Reaction to the training, Learning measures, Behavior measures, and Results. Besides, Tracey and Tews (1995) indicated that when evaluating the effectiveness of training, individual employee characteristics and the work environment must be considered along with program content, design, and implementation. Also, in Alvarez, Salas & Garofano (2004), they expressed that training effectiveness is the study of the individual, training, and organizational characteristics that influence the training process before, during, and after training. In fact, there are many factors or criteria that could influence training effectiveness. These may include pre-training needs assessment, employee attitude, corporate culture, learning environment, and management support. Klink and Streumer (2002) examined the effectiveness of on-the-job training and some potential factors that explain effectiveness of two samples drawn from two Dutch companies. They found out that trainees’ perceptions of managerial support and experience and workplace and trainees’ self-efficacy were the main explanatory variables for training effectiveness. Leat and Lovell (1997) pointed out that a variance between actual performance and expected performance should disclose training needs. Effective training must match the organizational culture. Trainees will not be willing to learn new things, get involved in training, or to use what they have learned if they do not have the positive learning attitude (Steensma and Groeneveld, 2010). Bramley and Kitson (1994) revealed that measuring the effectiveness of a training program at the reaction level and/or the levels of skills learned or knowledge gained are the most common approaches that companies use. According to Noe (1986), the attitudes, perspectives, interests, values, and expectations of trainees could affect the training effectiveness. In his training effectiveness model, he suggested trainees’ attitudes of jobs, working environment, and careers may have an impact on training effectiveness. Testing Noe’s (1986) model, Noe and Schmitt (1986) found that high job involvement trainees were more motivated to learn and transfer the learned skills to real work practices. Some others studies also tried to explore the relationship between trainees’ attitudes and training effectiveness. For example, in Santos and Stuart’s (2003) study, they found that employees’ experience and attitudes mediate the transfer and effectiveness of training. Li and Li (2007) stated that ‘ Positive reaction to training program and supportive learning climate had important consequences for training transfer.’However, according to Noe (1986), there is relatively ignored research area concerning the influence of trainees’ attitude on training effectiveness. Therefore, this paper will mainly examine the influence of trainees’ attitudes on the training effectiveness, finding out how exactly the attitudes of the trainees changed or impacted the thinking or behaviors towards training and, therefore, influence the training effectiveness. Other factors will not be discussed.

Motivation to learn

To measure employees’ attitudes towards the training program, the big concern is employees’ perception and willingness; whether trainees are willing to learn in the training program; or they just take it as one of their job tasks and complete it in a passive way. Noe (1986) described motivation to learn as trainees’ specific desires to learn the content in a training program. More specifically, motivation to learn can also be called trainees’ self motivation because the motivation-related factors are more concerned about trainees’ own perceptions and thinkings. According to Aharon, Michal, Tami and Jacob(2007) ‘ s study, there is a significant positive effect for trainees’ motivation to learn on both their training grade and supervisor evaluation. This means that trainees who have higher motivation to learn may invest greater efforts in the training program and therefore more effective in gaining knowledge and acquiring skills than those with low motivation to learn. Similarly, there are a few studies that found that motivation to learn is related to what employees exactly learn and the program completion (Hicks, 1984; Ryman & Biesner, 1975). However, the number of studies that aim to investigate the relationship between motivation to learn and training effectiveness is still very limited. Motivation to learn may be influenced by trainees’ choice in attending training, outcomes expectancies, job involvement and reaction to skill assessment.

H1: Trainees’ motivation to learn is positively related to their reaction to the training program (reaction criteria in measuring training effectiveness).

H2: Trainees’ motivation to learn is positively related to their learning improvements (learning criteria in measuring training effectiveness).

Choice in attending training

There may be three possible reasons why employees enter into a training program. First is that they are forced by company to accept the training. Second is that an organization provides the training but the decision to attend or not is left to employees. The last one is that employees themselves require or request relevant training be provided. The first one is relatively negative as it may arouse the dissatisfaction of employees and therefore they will have a low motivation to learn. The last two are positive as companies respect employee and allow them to make choices by themselves, not simply forced them into training without considering their feelings. They may prefer taking training through a positive way rather than a negative way. In fact, according to Hicks and Klimoski (1987), employees’ motivation to learn will be higher if they have a choice in attending training. Employees who actively attend the training may have more passion for learning things.

H3: The degree of freedom in attending training is positively related to trainees’ motivation to learn.

H4: The effect of the degree of freedom in attending training on the training effectiveness is mediated by trainees’ motivation to learn.

Outcomes expectancies

Outcome expectancies refer to beliefs concerning the extent to which one’s behavior will produce the intended outcomes (Bandura, 1982). In other words, this means that trainees may expect what they learn from training to generate good results such as a salary increase or promotion. According to Fudge & Schlacter (1999), expectancy theory is a process theory of motivation which is a function of individuals’ perceptions of their environment and the expectations they form based on these perceptions. One study investigated by Froman(1977) found that individual expectancies concerning training programs are related to performance and behavior change. When employees perceived that there is a connection between what they learned (e. g. the improved skills) and rewards (e. g. promotion, salary increase), which implies high expectancies, they may have a driving force to learn to get the good results.

H5: Outcome expectancies associated with the training are positively related to trainees’ motivation to learn.

H6: The effect of trainees’ outcome expectancies on the training effectiveness is mediated by trainees’ motivation to learn.

Reaction to skill assessment

After taking a skill assessment or a person analysis about self strengths and weaknesses, employees may react by either accepting or not accepting the results. Trainees’ reaction may therefore affect their motivation to improve skills in the training program. According to Noe & Schimitt(1986), the results of path-analytic demonstrated that the path coefficient was significant for the reaction to skill assessment and reaction to the training program (β= . 51), which suggested that trainees who perceive the needs assessment procedure as credible and the evaluation results of their strengths and weaknesses as useful and helpful will tend to be satisfied with the content and administration of the training program. As a result, trainees are likely to have higher motivation to improve their skill weaknesses by taking the training program. Whether the feedback of skill assessment is perceived as positive or negative may be determined by several factors such as credibility of the source, belief in the accuracy of the information presented and so on (Noe, 1986).

H7: Reaction to skill assessment feedback is positively related to trainees’ motivation to learn

H8: The effect of trainees’ reaction to skill assessment feedback on the training effectiveness is mediated by trainees’ motivation to learn.

Job involvement

Job involvement is the degree to which a person is identified psychologically with or addicted to his work, or the importance of work in his life (Lodahl & Kejner, 1965). This can also be described as the extent to which they are involved in their jobs. In a training situation, highly job-involved trainees anticipate higher performance as a result of doing well in training (Mathieu et al., 1992). Employees with high job-involved level may focus more on improving themselves. That is to say, trainees who have a high level of job involvement are more likely to be motivated to learn because trainees perceived that attending training activities is a way to increase their skills, improve their job performance and enhance feelings of self-worth (Noe, 1986).

H9: Job involvement is positively related to trainees’ motivation to learn

H10: The effect of trainees’ job involvement on the training effectiveness is mediated by trainees’ motivation to learn.

1. 3 Objectives of the study

This paper is designed to investigate trainee attitudes that influence training effectiveness. Also, it provides some implications or ideas for HR managers about when they need to increase training effectiveness through influencing trainees’ attitude in a positive way.

2. Methodology

2. 1 The Sample

People we targeted to fulfill our research are employees who work in Zhuhai Southern Software Park Development(ZHSSPD) Co, Ltd and had previously participated in a training program during 2012. ZHSSPD Co, Ltd is a professional service provider that engages in domestic science and technology industrial park development, management and operation. An expected sample of 130 participants is required to complete measures that assessed their attitudes towards the training program and training effectiveness. By using a paper questionnaire, we got 115 shares from 13 different IT companies in Southern Software Park. The ratio between male and female is about fifty to fifty (Male= 59 Female = 56).

2. 2 Data source

Data collected for our research are primary data from trainees. The attitudinal measures were collected prior to trainees’ participation in the program by using a specially-developed questionnaire. Actually there are different kinds of training such as on-the-job training, skill training, etc. The samples we target belong to information technology industry, and this industry focuses more on vocational skills and certification, therefore, the questionnaire is designed to investigate trainees’ attitude mainly towards the skill training (classroom training). The improvements of trainees’ performance were used as indicators of training effectiveness before and after the training.

2. 3 Measurement

2. 3. 1 Measurement of attitudes

In our research, the independent variables are the trainees’ attitude dimensions and the dependent variable is the training effectiveness. Trainees’ attitudes are divided into five dimensions and will be separately assessed by the questionnaire. To indicate trainees’ reaction and response, we use the Likert 5-point Scale (strongly disagree, disagree, no difference, agree, and strongly agree and each represent 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) on each item on the questionnaire. About 2 to 5 items will be developed for each dimension to measure the relationship between them and trainees’ motivation to learn. Choice in attending training was assessed using 2 items, for example:” Whether attend the training program or not is optional, not compulsory” (Hicks, W. D. & Klimoski, R. J. 1987). A high score indicates a higher degree of freedom in attending training program. An internal consistency of α= . 354 was found for this measure. Outcome expectancy was assessed by means of 5 items such as:” I believe I can improve my skills through training” (Noe & Schimitt, 1986). A higher score in this scale reflects a higher level of outcome expectancy. This measure yielded an internal consistency of α = . 797. Reaction to skill assessment was measured by means of 3 items, including ” I more clearly understood my strengths and weaknesses as a result of participating in the assessment center” (Bell & Ford, 2007). A higher score indicates a better reaction to skill assessment. After deleting 1 of 3 items (Q9), the internal consistency of the measure increased to be α = . 655. Job involvement was tapped by means of 4 items, for example, ” I am very much involved personally in my job” (Daisy, 2009). A high score is indicative of higher level of job involvement. The internal consistency of the measure was found to be α= . 589 when Q12 and Q13 were deleted. Motivation to learn was measured by means of 5 items, such as” I am devoting a considerable amount of time to my training assignments.” A higher score reflects a strong motivation to learn. An internal consistency of α= . 727 was found for this measure.

2. 3. 2 Measurement of training effectiveness

In measuring training effectiveness, we suppose to apply Kirkpatrick’s four-level model (1994) as the foundation. As this paper is more related with and focus on employees’ attitudes and the actual performance which influenced by what they perceived. Thus, 2 criterions are chose out of Kirkpatrick’s four-level model, which are reaction and learning criterion. The reaction criterion is used to assess how satisfied trainees are with the content and administration of the training program. If the reaction is good, it means that the training could be regarded as effective. Four question items including ” What I learned in the training courses is useful for my job” and ” I was satisfied with the courses and instructor” will be developed under the reaction criteria by using the Likert 5-point Scale (strongly disagree, disagree, no difference, agree, and strongly agree). This measure yielded an internal consistency of α=. 647 after deleting Q21. Learning criterion measures the increase in knowledge or intellectual capability from before to after the learning experience. It cares about whether trainees learn what was intended to be taught. Therefore, 3 dimensions (Bramley and Kitson, 1994) including knowledge, technical skills and other skills will be designed to be assessed by trainees about their performance improvements by using a performance rating ranging from 0 to 100 percent (20% for each scale). The higher the score, the more they perceived they have learned, which in turn means that the training program is more effective. In this study, internal consistency was α =. 626

2. 4 Data analysis

Before going into the detail about the influence of trainees’ attitudes on the training effectiveness, we first do the reliability analysis of the data we collected. Only when the data is highly reliable can our study give responsible results. Pearson’s correlation analysis is used to investigate the relationship between any two of all the study variables while regression analysis is used to investigate the combined contribution of the independent variables on employees’ motivation to learn and also its effect on training effectiveness. Last, we do the mediation effect analysis to test the role of ” motivation to learn” in between four independent variables and training effectiveness (reaction & learning).

3. Results

3. 1 Pearson’s correlation analysis results

The results of the Pearson’s correlation analysis appear in Table1. The correlation coefficients in Table 1 reveal that all our hypotheses are confirmed, the coefficients between each of four independent variables (choice in attending training, outcome expectancies, reaction to skill assessment, and job involvement) and the mediation variable (motivation to learn) are 0. 331, 0. 502, 0. 489, 0. 406 and all are significant with p value lower than 0. 01. In addition, a weak correlation is found between TE (reaction) and TE (learning) (r= 0. 269). Though reaction and learning are both criteria of evaluating training effectiveness, they cannot be treated as one when doing the analysis because the aspects they measure are not totally the same. There may have a situation that trainees feel unsatisfied with the training program but did learn anything from it. Trainees’ outcome expectancies and job involvement yield significant correlation with both good reaction and effective learning. The higher their outcome expectancies, the better they perceived the training program (r=. 413, p=. 000) and the higher they perceived they have improved(r=. 376, p=. 000). Similarly, higher job involvement is associated with better reaction(r=. 249, p=. 015) and higher learning improvements(r=. 216, p=. 037)Moreover, the correlation coefficients between the four independent variables (except the one between choice in attending training and job involvement) are significant, they are not high(r=. 418, p=. 000; r=. 410, p=. 000; r= 176, p=. 088; r=. 516, p=. 000; r=. 349, p=. 001; r=. 316, p=. 002), which means that there is lack of multi-colinearity bias.

Table 1. Means, Standard Deviations, and Intercorrelations

VariablesMeanSDChoice inAttendingtrainingOutcomeExpectancyReactionTo skillassessmentJobinvolvementMotivation to learnTE(reaction)Choice in attending training3. 853. 707(. 354)Outcome expectancies3. 783. 619. 418**(. 797)Reaction to skill assessment3. 90. 721. 410**. 516**(. 655)Job involvement4. 047. 570. 176(NS). 349**. 316**(. 589)Motivation to learn3. 682. 480. 331**. 502**. 489**. 406**(. 727)TE (reaction)3. 744. 499. 304**. 413**. 396**. 249*. 441**(. 647)TE (learning)2. 993. 686. 174(NS). 376**. 190 (NS). 216*. 203*. 269**Note: significant at the level **p <0. 01; *p <0. 05; NS= not significant

3. 2 Regression analysis results

The regression analysis results of the effect of trainees’ motivation to learn are presented in Table 2. Model 1 tests the effects of trainees’ motivation to learn on the trainees’ reaction and reveal that motivation to learn have a significant direct effect on trainees’ reaction (β=. 459; p=. 000). Model 2 tests the effects of trainees’ motivation to learn on the learning aspect of training effectiveness. In this model, motivation to learn displays borderline significant effect on trainees’ learning improvements (β=. 295; p=. 041). Hypotheses verified from Table 2 are:

H1: ” Trainees’ motivation to learn is positively related to their reaction to the training program”

H2: ” Trainees’ motivation to learn is positively related to their learning improvements.”

Table 2. Regression results for training effectiveness.

(Motivation to learn -> TE1 / TE2)

Model 1: Training effectiveness(reaction) TE1Model 2: Training effectiveness(learning) TE2β sig R²β sig R²Motivation to learn. 459** . 000 . 194. 295* . 050 . 041Note: significant at the level **p <0. 01; *p <0. 05

Table 3. Regression results for motivation to learn.

(IV1+IV2+IV3+IV4  Motivation to learn)

Model 3: Motivation to learn

β sig

Variables

Choice in attending training

Outcome expectancy

Reaction to skill assessment

Job involvement

. 054 . 403. 203* . 013. 167* . 016. 186* . 017

R²

. 370

Note: significant at the level **p <0. 01; *p <0. 05Table3 shows the regression results of the effects of choice in attending training, outcome expectancy, reaction to skill assessment, and job involvement on trainees’ motivations to learn. Model 3 in this table reveals that outcome expectancy (β=. 203; p=. 013), reaction to skill assessment (β=. 167; p=. 016), and job involvement (β=. 186; p=. 017) all display significant effect on trainees’ motivations to learn. However, trainees’ choices in attending training shows no significant effect on motivation to learn (β=. 054; p=. 413). Hypotheses confirmed by model 3 are:

H5: ” Outcome expectancies associated with the training is positively related to trainees’ motivation to learn”

H7:” Reaction to skill assessment feedback is positively related to trainees’ motivation to learn”

H9: ” Job involvement is positively related to trainees’ motivation to learn”

3. 3 Mediation effect test results

Table 4 shows the result of effects of four independent variables (choice in attending training, outcome expectancy, reaction to skill assessment, job involvement) on the dependent variables. Model 4 tests the effects on trainees’ reaction towards the training program while Model 5 tests the effects on trainees’ learning improvements. Within the four independent variables, only outcome expectancy has a significant effect on trainees’ reactions to training program (β=. 188; p=. 046) and also on trainees’ learning improvements (β=. 382; p=. 005).

Table 4. Regression results for training effectiveness.

(IV1+IV2+IV3+IV4  TE1 / TE2)

Model 4: Training effectiveness(reaction) TE2Model 5: Training effectiveness(learning) TE2

β sig

β sig

Choice in attending training

Outcome expectancy

Reaction to skill assessmentJob involvement

R²

. 076 . 307

. 188* . 046

. 142 . 072. 073 . 406. 231. 029 . 788

. 382** . 005

-. 030 . 791. 124 . 331. 151Note: significant at the level **p <0. 01; *p <0. 05From Table 3 and Table 4 we know that: IV (outcome expectancy) significant effect Mediation (motivation to learn) (β=. 203*)IV (outcome expectancy) significant effect DV (reaction) (β=. 188*) / DV (learning) (β=. 382**)Therefore, the next step is to test the effect of trainees’ motivations to learn and four independent variables on the dependent variables separately. This step aims to see when adding up motivation to learn, whether the effect of outcome expectancy on DV1 and DV2 would change. The result is appeared in Table 5. Model 6 tests the effect of trainees’ motivations to learn and four independent variables on trainees’ reactions towards the training program. Here, only motivation to learn (β=. 255; p=. 035) had significant effect on trainees’ reactions. Comparing to model 4, when adding up motivation to learn, outcome expectancy no longer have effect on trainees’ reaction (β=. 136; p=. 152). Therefore Table 5 proves that:

H6: ” effect of outcome expectancy on trainees’ reaction is mediated by trainees’ motivation to learn.”

Model 7 tests the effect of trainees’ motivation to learn and four independent variables on trainees’ learning improvements. Model 7 shows only outcome expectancy had significant effect (β=. 384; p=. 007) on trainees’ learning improvements even though motivation to learn had been added. Surprisingly, here motivation to learn has no significant effect on learning improvement (β=-. 006; p=. 975). Therefore, motivation to learn is not the mediator that influences the effect of outcome expectancy on trainees’ learning improvement. The rejected hypotheses are including:

H3: The degree of freedom in attending training is positively related to trainees’ motivation to learn.

H4: The effect of degree of freedom in attending training on the training effectiveness is mediated by trainees’ motivation to learn.

H8: The effect of trainees’ reaction to skill assessment feedback on the training effectiveness is mediated by trainees’ motivation to learn.

H10: The effect of trainees’ job involvement on the training effectiveness is mediated by trainees’ motivation to learn.

Table 5. Regression results for training effectiveness.

(IV1+IV2+IV3+IV4 + Motivation to learn  TE1 / TE2)

Model 6: Training effectiveness(reaction)Model 7: Training effectiveness(learning)

β sig

β sig

Choice in attending training

Outcome expectancy

Reaction to skill assessmentJob involvement

Motivation to learn

R². 062 . 395

. 136(NS) . 152

. 100 . 211. 026 . 772

. 255* . 035

. 269. 030 . 788

. 384** . 007

-. 029 . 805. 125 . 344

-. 006 . 975

. 151Note: significant at the level **p <0. 01; *p <0. 05; NS= not significant

4. Discussion

This investigation examined the influences of trainees’ attitudes (motivation to learn, choice in attending training, outcomes expectancies, job involvement, and reaction to skill assessment) on training effectiveness (Reaction and Learning). According to the data analysis which has been conducted above, the findings are showed as follows: 1. Motivation to learn is positively affect trainees’ reactions and learning improvement on training effectiveness. Aharon, Michal, Tami and Jacob (2007) stated that motivation to learn has a significant positive effect on training grade and supervisor evaluation. That is to say, trainees with high motivation are more willing to expend efforts and time into the training programme, devoting themselves into the studies and trainings in a large extent when comparing to those who with low motivation. However, a point must be noticed that motivation to learn could comes from the trainees themselves and their supervisors or the management level. Therefore, not only a better self-motivation but also enough supports provided by the management level could help to pursuit a better training effectiveness by boosting employees’ motivations to learn. Trainees with high self-motivations believe they are capable to complete the training and apply what they have learned into their daily works and tasks. Obtaining supports from the management level makes trainees experience that they are provided opportunities. Under the combination of two kinds of motivation, increase the training effectiveness. 2. Outcome expectancies, Reaction to skill assessment, and Job involvement are positively related to trainees’ motivations to learn. When trainees perceive the benefits from attending training courses, or they have high expectations on the training outcome, this will encourage and motivate trainees to pay more attentions on learning and acquiring new skills and knowledge. Froman(1977) found that individual expectancies of training programs are related to performance and behavior change. Trainees will be driven to learn more when they realize their expectations could be beneficial from learning. On the other hand, when trainees perceive that their skill assessments are fairly displaying their strengths, weaknesses, and capabilities, objective, and accurate, they will obtain confidents and self-affirmation to learn something new or difficult. Trainees who committed to the skill assessment would be more confirm that not only they think they can complete the courses, but also acquire the affirmation from the evaluation. Thus, increase their motivation to learn. Moreover, trainees with a high level of job involvement are more likely to be motivated to learn because trainees think that attending in training activities is a way to increase their skill levels, improve job performance and elevate feelings of self-worth (Noe, 1986). Trainees who committed and get involved into their job would expect that learning new skills and knowledge enable them to have better performance and get recognitions from supervisors. In this regard, it pushes trainees to learn and improve. 3. Choice in attending training has NO relationship with affecting trainees’ motivations to learn. According to Hicks and Klimoski (1987), employees’ motivation to learn will be higher if they have a choice in attending training. However, the finding of this investigation stands on the opposite. We consider a possible reason generates this result could be the provided training courses are not specific or helpful enough to trainees’ jobs and personal development. When trainees found that the courses cannot provide assistances and improvement to their skills, abilities, and tasks accomplishment, whether trainees have the choices to attend training cannot assist to increase their motivations to learn. Another possible reason could be the training courses are the attachments when companies purchased some software or equipments. Since the field of the investigation is targeted at a software park, companies are categorized into IT industry. Therefore, some training courses are attached to software or equipments when companies purchased. These training courses are supplied by the suppliers and the only way to enable employees to learn how to master the software or equipments. Employees might perceive that whether they have choices to attend these training courses is not important, because taking training has become a job requirement. In other word, trainees’ motivations to learn are not that related to their choices when the courses are tied with further career development. 4. When examining the combined effects of four independent variables on training effectiveness, only the independent variable ” Outcome expectancy” is proved that has certain influence on reaction of training effectiveness with a β=. 188 (sig=. 046) and positive influence on learning improvement of training effectiveness with a β=. 382 (sig=. 005). Since three of four independent variables are proved have no direct influences on reaction and learning improvement of training effectiveness. Therefore, another regression analysis is conducted by adding motivation to learning as the mediation. The result reveals that the independent variable ” Outcome expectancy” has two paths influences on training effectiveness. On the side, outcome expectancy has a greater positive influence on trainees’ reactions on training effectiveness under the mediating of Motivation to learn. On the other side, learning improvement on training effectiveness is not influenced by Outcome expectancy through the mediation effect of motivation to learn. Furthermore, the other three independent variables still are proved that not related to affect training effectiveness even under the mediating of motivation to learn. In our analysis, we explain this finding in dual ways. First, when trainees have high expectancies on the training outcome (promotion or better payment), we ensure that it will lead to greater motivation to learn from the previous discussion. This kind of motivation is induced by the trainees themselves. Once the trainees with high motivation to learn, they will insert more efforts and time into training. In the other way to understand, inputting more efforts and time means trainees have a better reaction to training programmes. However, as mentioned before, motivation to learn could be provided by the management level. Thus, if a trainee with high outcome expectancy and motivated by his or her supervisor, for example, the trainee got flexible work time allowance, it will make the trainee getting more involved into training. Second, when trainees’ outcome expectancies on training outcome are not relating to benefits like promotion or better payment but aiming at learning new skills or adding personal values, their motivations to learn become not that important, especially for those higher level managers and professional IT technicians. That is to say, trainees perceive attending training as a way to learning acknowledges and skills, they learn because they just want to learn something but no others intentions. Therefore, trainees with such a ” pure” intention in training, their outcome expectancies will directly influence their learning performance on training effectiveness. For further discussion, this kind of trainees might become the internal trainers of organization because they put training more technically and academically. In this regards, it helps to create a learning organization by maintaining a positive learning cycle and environment.

5. Limitation

The study of the influence of trainees’ attitudes on training effectiveness has several limitations that should be addressed in the future research. The nonprobability sampling. Since most sample elements we selected are employees in Zhuhai Southern Software Park, the samples cannot provide enough precision and generalize the findings to the employees from different industries of interest. The small sample size (N= 115). Due to the small sample size with N= 115, the model may be unlikely to remain stable in future samples and carry out reliable results. The limited data source. Since we only collected data via questionnaire survey (primary data) from trainees, it may not guarantee the accuracy and reliability of information. And we didn’t get permission to review the trainees’ information sheets, training evaluation forms and test scores before and after training provided by supervisor. Therefore, there may have some bias between supervisor’s evaluation and trainees’ own perception. Moreover, we only consider trainees’ attitude of the choice in attending training, outcome expectancy, reaction to skill assessment and job involvement that influence the training effectiveness. However, there is also other factors influence training effectiveness, for instance, career and job attitudes, perception concerning the work environment and so on (Noe, 1986). The effects of these factors need further investigation. The imperfect questionnaire design. Since most measurement questions are found from English language literature but our sample targets are Chinese people, the translation we make from English to Chinese may not be proper and efficient enough to express the original meaning and it may not be precise for people to understand. Time issues. Employees we targeted were those who have received training now or before, there may have a time gap that they have unclear impression and feeling about the training.

6. Implication for Human Resource Development

This study focused on what kind of and how trainees’ attitudes affect training effectiveness. According to the research findings, we argue that by generating and increasing trainees’ motivation to learn enable companies to pursuit higher and remarkable training effectiveness. On the other hand, there are many methods to increase and generate high motivation to learn including providing better outcome expectancies, being more objective and accurate on skills assessment, and higher job involvement. Although the findings of this study reveal that only higher outcome expectancies could through motivation to learn to positively affect trainees’ reaction on training effectiveness, we still considering that by generating positive reaction to skill assessment and higher job involvement can raise the motivations to learn of trainees, and therefore increase the training effectiveness in a certain extent. Relating the findings of this investigation, we suggest that: Management could provide trainees specific and clear expectations as well as the benefits from the training before assigning them to training. This could give trainees a better understanding of what the trainees are expected to achieve and how they can be benefited if they achieve the company’s expectations. People are purpose-oriented, if they know that something beneficial of what they want after inputting efforts in, they get motivated to contribute their efforts. While on the aspect of learning, supervisors and managers could assign some projects or tasks which allow trainees to apply what they learned from the training courses for complement. This approach enables trainees to recognize that their learning outcomes actually leads to self-improvement, therefore enhance their outcome expectancies for the further training and receive a greater motivation to learn by creating a positive cycle. Besides, be more specific, fair, and objective when conducting skill assessment could also help to obtain more motivation to learn of trainees. Use different methods of assessment and alternative sources of information can assist to achieve the requirements of being objective. By doing this, it can satisfy trainees’ needs and generate better reaction to skill assessment, therefore motivated trainees to learn more. However, a key point for achieving all above requirement is the effective communication. Effective communication at pre- and post-training could facilitate managers to better transfer expectations and benefits of training to trainees. Moreover, communication allows trainees and managers to discuss the viewpoints and opinions of skill assessment, thereby reduces unnecessary misunderstanding and conflicts. When achieving all of these, trainees satisfy both training they attended and job, generating high job involvement and organization recognition which help to create greater motivation to learn. There are many ways to motivate trainees to learn, companies have to base on the particular situations using and evaluating the most suitable methods to create a better learning environment within companies. Therefore, pursuing a good training effectiveness is not just only a paper war.

Reference

Alvarez, Salas & Garofano (2004). An integrated model of training evaluation and effectiveness. Human Resources Development Review, Dec 2004, 3, 4, pp. 385. Bandura, A. (1982). ”Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency”, American Psychologist, Vol. 37, pp. 122-47. Bedingham, Keith (1997). Proving the Effectiveness of Training, Industrial and Commercial Training 29(3): 88-91. Bramley, Peter & Kitson Barry (1994), Evaluating Training Against Business Criteria, Journal of European Industrial Training 18(1): 10-14. Clements, Christine J. & Bharath M. Josiam (1995). Training: Quantifying the Financial Benefits, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 7(1): 10- 15. Chauhan, D. (2009). Effect of Job Involvement on Burnout, The Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 44, No. 3, Jan. Eddie W. L. Cheng; Danny C. K. Ho (2001). The influence of job and career attitudes on learning motivation and transfer. Career Development Internationalhttp://search. proquest. com/assets/r10. 0. 1-0/core/spacer. gif6. 1http://search. proquest. com/assets/r10. 0. 1-0/core/spacer. gif pp. 20-28. Froman, L. (1977). Some motivational determinants of trainee effort and performance: An investigation of expectancy theory. Dissertation Abstracts, 45, 2411 -5 (University Micro-films No. 77-23975). Fudge, R. S. & Schlacter, J. L. (Feb 1999). Motivating employees to act ethically: An expectancy theory approach. Journal of Business Ethicsfalse, 18. 3, pp. 295-304. Hicks, W. D. & Klimoski, R. J. (1987). ” Entry into training programs and its effects on training outcomes: a field experiment”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 30, pp. 542-52Hicks, W. D. (1984). The process of entering training programs and its effects on training outcomes. Dissertation Abstracts, 44, 3564B (University Microfilms No. DA8403528). Ibrahim, M. E. (2004). Measuring training effectiveness. Journal of Management. Vol. 4, No. 3. Kirkpatric, D. L. (1994), Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels, Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco, CA. Klink, Marcel R. & Streumer, Jan N. (2002), Effectiveness of on-the-job Training, Journal of European Industrial Training 26(4): 196-199. Leat, Michael & Lovell Murry (1997), Training Needs Analysis: Weaknesses in the Conventional Approach, Journal of European Industrial Training 21(4): 142- 153. Li Chun Yan & Li Wei Ming (2007). An investigation of employee attitudes towards training effectiveness. International Conference On Management Science and Engineering. Sep 2007, pp. 818-823. Mathieu, J. E., Tannenbaum, S. I. and Salas, E. (1992). ” Influences of individual and situational characteristics on measures of training effectiveness”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 35 No. 4, pp. 828-47Ryman, D. H., & Biesner, R. J. (1975). Attitudes predictive of diving training success. Personnel Psychology, 28, pp. 181- 188. Noe, R. A. (1986). Trainees’ Attributes and Attitudes: Neglected Influences on Training Effectiveness. The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 736-749. Noe, R. A. (2010). Training Evaluation. Employee Training and Development, pp. 216-227. Noe, R. A. & Schmitt Neal (1986). The influence of trainee attitudes on training effectiveness: Test of A Model. Personnel Psychology, 1986. 39: 3, pp. 497-523. Santos Amalia & Stuart Mark (2003). Employee perceptions and their influence on training effectiveness. Human Resource Manangement Journal. Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 27-45. Steensma Herman & Groenveld Karin (2010). Evaluating a training using the ” four levels model”. Journal of Workplace Learning. Vol. 22, No. 5, pp. 319-331. Tracy, J Bruce & Tews, Micheal J (1995). Training effectiveness: Accounting for individual characteristics and the work environment. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly. Dec 1995, 36, 6, pp. 36. Tziner Aharon, Fisher Michal, Senior Tami & Weisberg Jacob (2007). Effects of Trainee Characteristics on Training Effectiveness. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, Vol 15 No. 2 Journal compilation Journal compilation & 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd