What Impact Does Training Have on Employee Commitment and Employee Turnover? Scott Rb Um University of Rhode Island

University of Rhode Island DigitalCommons@URI

Seminar Research Paper Series Schmidt Labor Research Center

2007 What Impact Does Training Have on Employee Commitment and Employee Turnover? Scott rB um University of Rhode Island

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/lrc_paper_series

Recommended Citation Brum, Scott, "What Impact Does Training Have on Employee Commitment and Employee Turnover?" (2007). Seminar Research Paper Series. Paper 45. http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/lrc_paper_series/45http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/lrc_paper_series/45

This Seminar Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the Schmidt Labor Research Center at DigitalCommons@URI. It has been accepted for inclusion in Seminar Research Paper Series by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@URI. For more information, please contact [email protected].

WHAT IMPACT DOES TRAINING HAVE ON EMPLOYEE COMMITMENT AND EMPLOYEE TURNOVER?

SCOTT BRUM University of Rhode Island

Training is of growing importance to companies seeking to gain an advantage among competitors. There is significant debate among professionals and scholars as to the affect that training has on both employee and organizational goals. One school of thought argues that training leads to an increase in turnover while the other states that training is a tool to that can lead to higher levels of employee retention (Colarelli & Montei, 1996; Becker, 1993). Regardless of where one falls within this debate, most professionals agree that employee training is a complex human resource practice that can significantly impact a company’s success. The training industry as a whole has shown significant growth through the years. Statistics indicate that investment in training is continuing to grow as more and more companies realize its importance. In 1995, $7.7 billion was spent on the wages and salaries of in-house company trainers and $2.8 billion was spent on tuition reimbursement (Frazis, Gittleman, Horrigan, Joyce, 1998). The American Society for Training and Development found that in 2004, the average annual training expenditure per employee was $955, which is an increase of $135 per employee from the previous year. The number of formal learning hours per employee also rose from 26 hours in 2003, to 32 hours in 2004 (atsd.com, 2005). As the investment in various training programs continue to rise, it becomes even more imperative for employers to understand the impact that training has on their organization.

Training can have a considerable influence of employee turnover, the less likely a company on company finances as there are several will invest in it. A company loses all of its potential training costs that companies may investment should an employee terminate the incur. One type of training related cost is direct relationship upon completion of training. As a cost. This may include instructor salary, result, employers have very important decisions materials, and follow-up supervision. A second to make in regards to the level of investment type of training related cost is indirect cost. they are willing make in training. Training These costs are related to worker output and duration, specificity, relevance, payment productivity during and upon completion of the options, and training location are all things that training. employers must consider while developing a Along these lines, once a training program is training program. completed, worker productivity is expected to Krueger and Rouse (1998) examined the increase. The benefits will be to the company, effect that training and workplace education due to an increase in worker output and programs can have on various organizations. productivity, and to the worker, as the increase The study included an analysis of numerous in output should translate into higher wages and outcome variables that may be achieved through opportunities for career advancement. In training. Variables relating to performance, general, a company will weigh the costs and wages, productivity, satisfaction, motivation, returns to training to determine the amount of and absenteeism were all examined. These investment it will incur (Kaufman & Hotchkiss, variables are analogous too many of those that 2006). are commonly scrutinized in the training and In addition to the direct and indirect costs development literature. This paper seeks to described above, turnover plays a significant move away from the frequently assumed role in the amount of training investment training outcomes and focus more on the companies will assume. The greater the chance relationship of training and employee

© Brum, 2007 Brum – Training and Employee Commitment 2 commitment. The effect of this relationship on significantly and inversely related to employee employee turnover will also be explored. turnover.” Through an analysis of pertinent literature and Along these lines, Jeffrey Arthur (1994) research, this paper will seek to better conducted an empirical study of two steel understand and clarify the impact that training “minimills”; one which incorporated a human has on employee commitment and employee resource commitment strategy and the other a turnover. control strategy. Arthur was able to find many The importance of ensuring employee productivity and business advantages to the retention following training may lie in the company that had a commitment strategy. The strategic approach that is utilized. Companies study found that turnover was twice as high in can seek to achieve organizational goals through the company that used a control strategy (x = a variety of human resource strategies and .07, s.d. = .07) than it was in the company which approaches. One such approach, a commitment fostered a commitment approach (x = .03, s.d = strategy, attempts to develop psychological .03). This exemplifies the impact that human connections between the company and employee resource strategy can have on an organization. as a means of achieving goals (Arthur, 1994; Job search, retention, employee’s desire and Scholl, 2003). In an attempt to ensure that the intent to leave, and attitude toward the employee remains with the company following organization can all be improved with a strategy training, employers may implement a strategy to that seeks to enhance employee commitment. training that fosters commitment. Training that When organizations seek to foster a attempts to increase employee commitment may philosophy of commitment, then the likelihood serve to counter the numerous direct and indirect of an employee searching for employment costs associated with turnover. Although a elsewhere is lowered. In a study of employee commitment strategy can be tied to all company mobility, Green, Felsted, Mayhew, and Pack human resource practices; recruitment, selection, (2000) found that commitment objectives performance evaluation, and so on, the focus of decreased that probability of employees being this paper will be to determine whether training “more likely to search” from 19 to 10 percent, can lead to an increase in employee commitment and increased being in the “less likely to search” and in turn foster employee retention. category from 15 to 26 percent. Much like the other studies identified above, this study shows COMMITMENT AND EMPLOYEE that committed employees are more likely to TURNOVER remain with the organization. A committed employee is one that will Patrick Owens (2006) had a similar finding remain with the organization. Through the years, in his study of training and organizational numerous research studies have been conducted outcomes. Although Owens’ study centered on to determine the accuracy of this statement. In the overall impact of training he was able to find the end many have concluded that committed a correlation between commitment and turnover. employees remain with the organization for The study found that employees that had a longer periods of time than those which are less higher level of commitment also had a higher committed. level of “turnover cognitions”. A higher score in Richard Steers (1977) hypothesized and “turnover cognitions” indicated that the found true that the more committed an employee employee had a more favorable attitude and was is, the less of a desire they have to terminate less likely to consider turnover. By applying the from the organization. These “highly results of his survey to independent t-tests, committed” employees were found to have a Owens was able to determine that trained higher intent to remain with the company, a employees had a mean turnover cognition of stronger desire to attend work, and a more 31.15 and organizational commitment of 83.54. positive attitude about their employment. Steers In comparison, the untrained employees had a (1977: 54) concluded that “commitment was mean of 28.94 for turnover and 75.87 for

Schmidt Labor Research Center Seminar Research Series 3 commitment. These statistics are relevant as they in varying degrees. As a result, the more are representative of the inverse relationship of prevalent each element becomes the more likely commitment and turnover. By separating the commitment will grow. trained and untrained employees, Owens was Investments. An employee that is invested able to show that the more committed employees in the organization is an employee that is going are, the less likely they will consider turnover. to remain with the organization. Howard Becker The aforementioned studies are (1960) argued just this in his paper that analyzed representative of much of the research available the various concepts of commitment. Becker relating to commitment and turnover. stated that employees can invest in a multitude Commitment has a significant and positive of practices that can be perceived as “side bets”. impact on job performance and on workforce Examples of “side bets” may include attending retention. The underlying belief is that a more training outside of work time, participation in an committed employee will perform better at their apprenticeship program, or attaining a high job (Walton, 1985). The likely outcome of degree of seniority. “Side bets” can be centered employees performing better and being more on time, effort, pay, benefits, and so on. The productive is an overall improvement in greater the investment in any of these “side workforce stability. Whether employee bets”, the more likely the employee will remain commitment is enhanced through training, with an organization. Due to the perceived cost compensation, evaluation, or any other of leaving being too high, side bets can serve to combination of human resource practices, actually increase the employee’s intent to remain research typically finds that a committed (Liou & Nyhan, 1994). individual is one that remains with the company. Becker states that in order for commitment to be achieved through a “side bet” several Determinants of Employee Commitment? elements must exist. One such element is that There is a great deal of literature which the individual is aware that a “side bet” was seeks to define and identify the specific made. Another is that the choices that were characteristics of commitment. Scholars have made regarding a particular decision have an offered many differing views and theories effect on other potential decisions. The “side regarding employee commitment. Even with bet” philosophy states that an investment is these differing views it is possible to find some made today with the expectation that the benefit consistent themes. In general there is significant will be achieved at some future point. Some can supporting research that indicates that view this as an employee “paying their dues” commitment is made up of investments, today in order to achieve success in the future reciprocity, social identity (identification), and (Scholl, 1981). lack of alternatives. Investment states that it is Becker (1960) provides an example of his an employee’s “investment” and anticipation of “side bet” theory which relates to lower-class a future “pay off” that serves to tie them closer school teachers. The teachers “side bet” was that to the company. Reciprocity, in contrast, of time. When the time arose in which these indicates that it is the employee’s obligation to lower-class teachers were eligible for transfer to “pay off” their debt to the company that will a more affluent school, many denied the transfer. lead to greater commitment. Identification The denial was because the teachers adjusted specifies that commitment can grow as a result their approach and teaching style to that of the of an employee’s social identity becoming lower-class. Discipline techniques, addressing increasingly embedded in their employment. issues with parents, as well as many other issues, Finally, the lack of alternatives element states would have resulted in the teachers having to that the more specific an employee’s skills drastically change their styles and approaches. become to a particular organization the less These changes were found to be overly time likely they will leave (Scholl, 1981). Although consuming and radical. As a result, the transfers each of the four mechanisms may serve to were denied. Due to the “side bet” of time, the enhance employee commitment they may do so teachers became invested and committed to

Brum – Training and Employee Commitment 4 working with the lower-class population. The identify themselves to the organization, the more expenditure of time by the teachers actually tied likely they will be committed. The stronger the them to the lower-class students even though identification to an organization and its goals, more desirable teaching positions were the stronger the commitment will be. The available. In spite of the lowered expectations, relative strength of identification, the belief in the teacher’s tenure resulted in them becoming goals and values, and the willingness to work on “invested” to a particular organization (Scholl, behalf of the company are all factors that tie 1981). social identity to commitment (Blau & Boal, 1987; Steers, 1977). Hypothesis 1: Training that leads to an On an informal level, social identity can be increase in perceived employee investment observed when two long lost friends meet. The will increase employee commitment. first question that typically arises is “where do Reciprocity. Barrett and O’Connell (2001) you work?” Within this commonly asked argue that employees may view some human question one is able to determine that people resource practices as a “gift”. Training is one derive a great deal of their identity from such practice that employees may view as a employment. The answer to the question carries “gift”. The result of this “gift” is that employees with it a great deal regarding ones status. As a exert more effort, become more productive, and result, the more employment becomes connected have a greater sense of debt to the organization. and enmeshed in their social identity, the more The “gift” also has the potential to make committed the employee becomes. When a employees feel like “insiders” into the person’s social identity and employment begins organization. An “insider” is likely to be more to become embedded with one another, change committed and devoted to the company. The is much more difficult (Scholl, 1981). idea of “gift” and “insider” parallels closely to Hypothesis 3: Training that seeks to the concept of reciprocity. increase an employee’s identification with The premise behind reciprocity is that an the company is likely to increase employee will help the organization, because the commitment. organization helped to employee. The saying “don’t bite the hand that feeds you” seems to Lack of Alternatives. This element of correlate to reciprocity. This holds that employee commitment can be best described by employees should not only help the company but the earlier school teacher example. The should also not hurt it because it was the investment of time was a deciding factor in the company that helped the employee (Scholl, school teacher’s decision to remain with the 1981). As a result, the “gift” that an employee lower-class students even though more desirable receives may actually serve to commit them to positions became available. In addition to the the organization. Employees in the workforce “side bet” of time that developed, the experience have specific desires and expectations. When an of the teachers also served to limit their organization seeks to meet and exceed these alternative employment options. The teacher’s desires and expectations through reciprocity, knowledge led to the development of strategies then the likelihood of improving commitment is and skills that would have been objectionable to enhanced (Steers, 1977). middle class parents. As a result, the teachers conformed to a low level teaching standard that Hypothesis 2: Training that builds a sense of would be below that of the middle class students debt to the organization will lead to an (Becker, 1960). The years of teaching the lower increase in commitment. class students actually served to limit future employment options. Social Identity. In terms of commitment, social identity and identification are analogous Whether it is through training, job to one another. The more an employee is able to evaluation, job design, or any other human resource practice, it is generally argued that the

Schmidt Labor Research Center Seminar Research Series 5 more specific an employee’s skills the less likely employer, but also at other firms throughout the they will leave the organization. This is labor market. Some examples of general training exemplified in the above school teacher programs are apprenticeship trainings, general example. Although there may be several computer training, and learning surgical alternative employment options available to an techniques that could be used in other hospitals. employee, “there may be no better than the Educational reimbursement is also an example present one, producing the perception that there of general training, as the skills acquired can be are no alternative opportunities” (Scholl, 1981: of use to many different employers (Kaufman 595). As a result the lack of alternatives will and Hotchkiss, 2006). likely lead to the development of a more Gary Becker’s model suggests that because committed employee. general training provides skill development that can be used at other companies, the employer Hypothesis 4: Training that serves to limit will not invest in it. The underlying premise is alternative employment options will lead to that within a competitive labor market, an increase in commitment. employees are typically paid for their level of production. With that, a company that provides THE IMPACT OF TRAINING THE FOUR general training will have to pay the employee a ELEMENTS OF EMPLOYEE wage that coincides with their newly learned COMMITMENT? skills and their higher level of production. There is a significant body of scholarly Companies that continue paying employees the literature relating to the impact of training on pre-training rate of pay, risk losing the employee organizational outcomes. The following sections to a firm that will provide the higher wage. As a will attempt to add to this literature by result, turnover would increase. By paying the examining the effect that training has on higher wage, as well as paying for the general employee commitment. This will be achieved by training, the current employer would be unable analyzing the four hypotheses discussed above to recoup its overall investment. As a result, in relation to the various empirical research and companies have no incentive to pay for general literature that is available. By providing an training and it is the workers themselves that analysis of the empirical literature as it relates to will need to bear this cost (Frazis and Spletzer, the four hypotheses, one will be able to gain 2005). greater insight into the impact that training has In contrast, specific on-the-job training is on employee commitment. training that increases the workers productivity and output only at the company that provides it. Training and Employee Investment The training is “specific” to that particular company only. Examples of specific training As discussed earlier in this paper, an may include learning to drive a tank or operating investment is a contribution that an employee machinery that is company specific. makes today in anticipation that the benefit and Specific on-the-job training also differs from “pay off” will be achieved in the future. Howard general training in that it is typically the Becker (1960) identified these investments as company and not the individual worker that “side bets”. In many aspects, training is one such bears the cost of the training. The thought is that “side bet” that may increase employee because training is specific to the individual investment and commitment. The question is company and nontransferable, the productivity how does training achieve this? of the worker increases for that particular Gary Becker (1993) sought to better company, but would remain the same for any understand the relationship between the costs other organization within the labor market. As a and returns to training by identifying two result, it is unlikely that specific training would mutually exclusive forms of training – general result in turnover. training and specific training. General training is Gary Becker’s argument essentially states training that provides the worker with skill that the more specific the training the less likely development not only applicable at the present

Brum – Training and Employee Commitment 6 turnover will occur. As the skills obtained are investing in general training while assuming the non-portable and non-transferable to other skills being taught are company specific. From organizations, this type of specific training is an investment perspective, commitment can be paid for by the employer. In turn, employees obtained due to the investment in time and typically receive less pay during the specific energy involved in the training process. training period in anticipation of future wage Regardless of the specificity of the training, the increases. By contrasting Becker’s model with a time and effort that an employee puts forth in commitment approach one can see that the any training program can lead to a more employee’s investment of time and the committed worker. Along these lines, Krueger anticipation of higher wages as potentially and Rouse (1998) found that general training leading to an increase in commitment. Training and specific skills are many times embedded in in this context becomes a “side bet”. The one another. They found that employees that investment of time and effort expended during attended training, regardless of its specificity, the training process is one such factor that may became more invested employees. These enhance an employee’s commitment to the employees were shown to seek more job organization. upgrades, receive more performance awards, and Another example that expands upon have better job attendance than those that did not Becker’s model is the blending of general and attend training. The “general skills” training specific skills. Becker’s model argues that program which was paid completely by the general training would lead to an increase in employer essentially led to less employee turnover and that companies have little reason to turnover. It can be argued that the expenditure of invest in it. Several studies have proven that effort and time led these employees to become companies do invest in a blended form of more committed to the organization. general-specific training, many times without In contrast to Becker’s belief that companies even realizing it. Acemoglu and Pischke (1999) have little reason to invest in general training, argue that general and specific skills are from a commitment perspective one is able to complementary to one another. They indicate ascertain several benefits to doing so. As stated that organizations indirectly invest in general throughout this section, the time, energy, and skills while providing skills that are presumed to effort, that employees display in any type of be “firm-specific”. By researching the data from training can result in a more invested and the Employer Opportunity Pilot Project and the committed employee. Training, whether it is National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, general or specific, can be viewed by the Lowenstein and Speltzer (1999) found that 63 employee as a current investment that may offer percent of employees that received training a greater “pay off” at a later date. This increased reported that the majority of the skills obtained investment on the part of the employee ties them were transferable to other organizations. A third closer to the organization (Scholl, 1981). Should study determined that the majority of training the investment achieved from training become programs result in generating skills that are linked to part of a more global human resource transferable to other organizations. Over 90% of strategy within the organization, then the employees believed that the skills obtained commitment will grow even more (Bartlett, were portable outside the company. In addition, 2001). employers paid for some piece of the training in In addition, general training that is unable to over 84% of the cases (Green et al., 2000). The increase commitment through investment, may studies provide affirmation that most training be able to accomplish it through reciprocity. As entails a greater general component than many will be discussed in the next section, an believe. employee may desire to remain with the These results can be tied to employee organization in order to repay the employer for commitment in a variety of ways. As indicated providing general training. Although not above, there are many organizations that are achieved through investment, reciprocity may

Schmidt Labor Research Center Seminar Research Series 7 provide an additional reason for an organization could argue that training was able to enhance the to invest in general training. employee’s sense of debt towards the organization. The result is a more committed Training and Reciprocity employee that has a greater desire to remain. In this example, reciprocity holds that the Reciprocity essentially states that an employee received a “benefit” of training from employee will help the company because the the company and will attempt to repay it in the company helped them. This parallels the notion future. In essence, the employee will need to of the employee having a “sense of debt” toward remain committed to the organization until the the organization. Research on this element of “benefit” is paid off (Scholl, 1981). commitment indicates that training can play an integral role in building a sense of debt to the Barrett and O’Connell (2001) clearly company. Training that achieves reciprocity in portrayed the idea of reciprocity in their the employee will foster an individual’s empirical research of organizations in Ireland. commitment to the organization. The researchers found that because of the transferability of skills that general training Many scholars agree that organizations that offers, employees devoted greater effort and train their employees consistently have better energy to general training. Barrett and outcomes than those that do not. When business O’Connell found that the outcome of training environments change quickly and abruptly, it is depends on the effort that the participants put typically the companies with the best trained into it. The greater the sense of debt incurred employees that adapt and adjust most efficiently. with the training program, the more of a return Glance, Hogg, and Huberman (1997) determined on the investment that organizations will secure these statements to be accurate in their study that from the employee. From an employee looked at training and turnover from the perspective general training was found to be perspective of evolving organizations. The more valuable to employees than specific. Since researchers affirmed that training encourages a great deal of research indicates that general “spontaneous cooperation” in many large and specific training are many times enmeshed companies. Even in fast moving and ever and intertwined in each other, it may best serve evolving industries, the cooperation that can be organizations to promote and encourage achieved through training could lessen the need participation in general training programs. for complicated company policies. From a reciprocity perspective, one can ascertain that Employees many times view general this “spontaneous cooperation” which results training as a “gift”. The employers disregard for from training is due to the training participant’s the portability of the general skills being taught, sense of debt to the company. These fast paced, signals to the employee that the organization is ever-changing industries need to retain committed to them. In line with reciprocity, employees in order to achieve company goals Barrett and O’Connell (2001) view this “gift” as and gain a competitive advantage. As the study being a type of self-fulfilling prophecy. found, organizational training can offer these Organizations that invest in and provide general employees an opportunity they may have not training make the participants feel like been able to achieve elsewhere. This translates “insiders”. The sense of being an “insider” is to the employee feeling a sense of debt to the displayed in the employee’s exertion of more company and desiring to “spontaneously effort, improved work ethic, and increased cooperate” as a means of repaying the reward productivity. The “gift” led to the development that they received. of a sense of debt to the company. In order to repay this debt, the employee became more Ronald Burke (1995) found that employees committed and devoted to the organization. that participated in the most number of training programs and rated the trainings they attended as most relevant, viewed the organization as being Training and Social Identity more supportive, looked at the company more There is a significant body of literature that favorably, and had less of an intent to quit. One suggests that an individual’s identity is closely

Brum – Training and Employee Commitment 8 related to their employment. In turn, training that to building commitment. Social support for serve’s to increase an employee’s identification training is a major factor in ensuring its with the organization is likely to produce a more successful integration. Support from upper committed worker. Upon hire, training is management, middle managers, and colleagues typically one of the first human resource can significantly impact the level of investment practices that organizations offer to their new an employee will make. Cues from these people employees. Training plays an integral role in the and from company policies can send a message socialization process for many employees. to employees regarding the importance of Employees enter the employment relationship training. The more positive the cues, the more with many expectations and desires. When these likely training will enhance an employee’s expectations and desires are fulfilled, then the identification with the company. As a result, employee is able to better identify with the employee commitment is enhanced due to the company. The result is an employee that perceived support that one receives from becomes more committed. In turn, when a colleagues and managers. training program fails to meet these Fostering an environment where expectations, then there is usually a negative participation in training programs are attitude change. These unmet expectations can encouraged and linked to an overall human lead to a decrease in commitment and a greater resource strategy can have a significant impact likelihood of turnover (Tannenbaum, Mathieu, on an employee’s level of commitment. In these Salas, and Cannon-Bowers, 1991). The decrease organizations, commitment is likely to be in commitment can be directly related to the higher, as employees are better able to identify employee being unable to identify with the with the organization (Bartlett, 2001). Training organization. In contrast, when employee can be utilized as a tool that serves to entrench expectations and desires are achieved through the employee deeper into a particular social training the worker is able to feel a greater identity. Doing so will make it more difficult for connection. the employee to change and more committed A study of several British companies found overall (Scholl, 1981). that when training sought to enhance and develop a “culture of identification” between the Training and Lack of Alternatives organization and the employee, the intention to Training that serves to limit alternative search for another job decreased substantially employment options can be best described by (Green et al., 2000). This can also be seen when the work of Gary Becker. Becker’s study of one looks at the companies in Japan. Japanese human capital in relation to general and specific companies prefer to train employees internally training was discussed in earlier sections of this in the form of on-the-job training programs. A paper. Becker’s model and ideas related to main reason for this is that outside schooling is training has been widely researched and debated thought to reduce commitment. Internal on-the- among scholars. Becker (1993) argues that job training in Japan has a “commitment- general training, due to the portability of skills maximizing” logic as it promotes a greater level acquired leads to an increase in turnover; while of socialization. This company specific specific training, due to the non-transferability socialization encourages employees to identify of skills acquired leads to less of an impact on solely with the organization. The internal turnover. Holding aside the argument of the training provided in Japan is said to increase blending of general and specific training identification and boost attachment. The result is discussed previously, Becker’s theory appears to an employee that is more committed to the directly apply to the role of training in limiting organization (Lincoln and Kalleberg, 1996). alternative employment options. Training that attempts to increase There are many scholarly journals that have identification with the organization is greatly defended Becker’s position that specific training enhanced when used within a strategic approach leads to a decrease in turnover. Lisa Lynch

Schmidt Labor Research Center Seminar Research Series 9

(1991) found that young workers that specificity of the training leads to an employee participated in formal and specific on-the-job having less employment options. training were much less likely to terminate the Becker’s model also states that many employment relationship than workers that organizations will provide additional wages to received off-the-job generalized training. an employee following training as a means of Several studies examined the “cherry-picking” ensuring their tenure. Employees that phenomenon where companies wait until participated in a formal and specific company employees are trained by other organizations training program were found to have higher and once trained the employees are hired away earnings than employees that were trained at an to other companies. It has been noted that outside school (Eck, 1993). The increase in organizations often prefer to “steal” these newly wages can also tie an employee closer to an trained employees because they will produce at a organization. The higher the wage achieved higher level (Glance et al., 1997). The company from the completion of training the less likely that pays for the training though is the one that other employers would be able to pay a similar loses its entire investment should the employee wage. The increased wage may place further be “stolen”. In the end, it is non-portable limits on an employee’s ability to search for specific training that is much more attractive to alternative employment. The training specificity organizations as it eliminates the chance that the may serve a dual role both in the skills acquired trained employee will be “hired away” (Lynch & and in the enhancement of wages. The result of Black, 1998). This parallels the reasoning this dual role is that it begins to limit the behind Becker’s argument that organizations alternatives available and makes leaving the have little incentive to pay for general training. organization a less desirable option. Numerous other studies also support As described in previous sections, research Becker’s human capital model of training. indicates that receiving training that is purely Jeffrey Groen (2006) states that companies in specific is challenging. A great number of small markets have a greater incentive to invest research studies conclude that general training in training that is company specific. Groen and specific training are enmeshed in one argues that as the market size expands training another. Many times there is a very unclear has a tendency to become more general and the disparity between the two types of training. likelihood of turnover begins to increase. Frazis Although this disparity may appear to contradict and Speltzer (2005) through an analysis of the the research discussed in this section, from the 1979 National Longitudinal Survey of Youth perspective of available employment options, it and various scholarly journals also found is evident that as an employee’s skill set support for Becker’s theory. The researchers becomes more specific the fewer alternatives found that employees that receive specific they will have. The more that training is able to training have a lower probability of quitting than contribute to the development of these purely employees who do not. specific skills, then the more committed The research shows significant support for employees will become. Becker’s theory of human capital. Many of the studies were highlighted above as they lend CONCLUSION credence to the effect that training can have on Commitment within the workplace typically limiting an employee’s alternatives. All the results from the interaction and the relationship studies conclude as Becker did, that the more that an employee has with an organization specific the training the less likely turnover will (Scholl, 2003). Along these lines, Richard occur. Specific training leads to the development Walton (1985) looked at the establishment of of skills that are non-portable and highly specific commitment in an organization within a very to the training organization. As the skills broad framework. “Stretching objectives”, attained become more specific the likelihood providing assurances to employees, encouraging that the employee will terminate the employees to have a “voice”, and compensation employment relationship decreases. The policies are a few of the strategies that

Brum – Training and Employee Commitment 10 organizations must incorporate into a compensation plans, have shown to further commitment-based approach. Training is one of enhance employee commitment (Green et al., several human resource practices that can have a 2000). considerable impact on employee commitment. Social support and access to training can As stated throughout this paper, training that also play a significant role into the level of seeks to improve employee investment, increase commitment that is established. Employees are reciprocity, helps the employee identify with the likely to place greater value on training organization, and serves to limit alternative programs that are highly respected by employment options will enhance the colleagues, supervisors, and managers. employee’s commitment to the company. The Organizations that are able to create an result of this will be an organization that is better environment where training is supported and able to retain its workforce. Patrick Owens’ valued by employees will be able to achieve (2006) study on the relationship between greater commitment outcomes (Bartlett, 2001). training and organizational outcomes found just Management behavior was one of the most that to be true. The Owens study hypothesized notable determinants of successful training that employee’s in training programs will report programs. Employee commitment was found to higher levels of commitment and will be less be higher in organizations where management likely to consider turnover. The research allowed access to and candidly supported affirmed the hypothesis that training has a employee training (Heyes and Stuart, 1996). The positive impact on commitment and turnover underlying philosophy is the need for cognitions. Many other scholars and management to acknowledge and openly accept practitioners in addition to Owens have had the legitimacy of the commitment-based strategy similar research findings. (Walton, 1985). Scholars and practitioners also agree that The relevancy of training also plays a role in although training can positively impact establishing employee commitment. Employees commitment, simply providing training to enter into training programs with specific employees is not enough. The benefits of expectations and needs. The result of training training will be achieved only to the extent that programs that do not meet the expectations and the employees accept it and contribute to it. As a needs of participants may be lower commitment, result, an organization needs to seriously negative attitude change, and an increase in determine what it is looking to achieve within turnover. One study found that training the training program as well as the impact it will participants that received “realistic notices” and have on employee effort, commitment, and accurate training information prior to training turnover (Glance et al., 1997). Within this reported better outcomes than those that did not context, training becomes most effective in receive any information regarding the training enhancing commitment when it is used in process. The participants that were provided conjunction with other commitment-based with pre-training information viewed that human resource policies and strategies. training as more relevant and entered into the Training that coincides with other training with accurate expectations commitment generating human resource policies (Tannenbaum et al, 1991). In addition, the is typically associated with a greater level of employees that viewed training as the “most employee retention. Many scholars have found relevant” to their current jobs were able to attain that regardless of whether companies pay more positive commitment outcomes and had entirely for general or purely specific training, less of an intent to quit (Burke, 1995). In order when other commitment policies are in place to use training as a mechanism to build there tends to be a downward impact on commitment, organizations need to ensure that mobility. A human resource approach that seeks trainings are relevant, are communicated to “bundle” commitment policies, such as effectively, and are able to meet the expectations linking training to employee appraisal and of the employees participating.

Schmidt Labor Research Center Seminar Research Series 11

Organizations also need to strategically and professional. Although training can play a determine who is going to pay for the training. major role in this process, organizations need to Payment made by the employee or by the look at additional work force strategies and organization may lead to two very different practices that can enhance commitment. outcomes. Companies need to be aware of the Training alone may offer many benefits but a consequences of each approach. General much greater impact will be found when using a training, which is transferable to other strategy to human resources that entails many organizations, would likely be paid for by the different organizational commitment practices employee. Company specific training, on the and policies. Organizations need to strategically other hand, would likely be paid for by the and methodically develop human resource company as the skills acquired are non-portable. practices that are designed to fully achieve For organizations that are able to invest in commitment (Heyes et al., 1996). Based on the purely specific training, the specificity of the principles identified throughout this paper, an skills developed may result in limiting effective training program is one such alternative employment options for workers. organizational practice that can lead to greater This will serve to enhance and increase employee commitment and a more stable employee commitment. As a result, companies workforce. may be more open to paying for this type of specific training as they are able to recoup their REFERENCES investment (Becker, 1993). Acemoglu, D., and Pischke, J. 1999. Beyond Along these lines many practitioners have Becker: Training in imperfect labor markets. had significant difficulty distinguishing between The Economic Journal, 109: 112-114. purely specific and purely general training. Much of the research has shown that general and American Society for Training and specific training are often enmeshed in one Development: ATSD State of the Industry another. Understanding this would lend credence Report, Executive Summary to the opinion that organizations invest, http://www.astd.org/astd/research/research_r knowingly or unknowingly, in some level of eports general training. Research has found that when Arthur, J. B. 1994. Effects of human resource organizations invest in general training and systems on manufacturing performance and reciprocity grows there is an increase in turnover. The Academy of Manufacturing employee commitment. Employees view this Performance, 37(3): 670-687. type of investment as a “gift”. As a result of the “gift”, they begin to perceive themselves as Barrett, A., & O’Connell, P. J. 2001. Does “insiders” into the company. In turn a training generally work? The returns to in- company’s investment in general training can company training. Industrial and Labor ultimately increase commitment and decrease Relations Review, 54(3): 647-662. turnover (Barrett and O’Connell, 2001). When Bartlett, K. 2001. The relationship between training is tied into other human resource training and organizational commitment: A commitment practices, company funded general study in the health care field. Human training will lead to an increase in commitment Resource Development Quarterly, 12(4): (Green et al., 2000). 335-352. Training is a tool that can assist Becker, G. S. 1993. Human capital: A organizations in building a more committed and theoretical and empirical analysis with productive workforce. By helping to establish special reference to education (3rd ed.). employee investment, reciprocity, identification, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. and by limiting alternative employment options, an effective training program can lead to greater Becker, H. S. 1960. Notes on the concept of commitment and less employee turnover. The commitment. The American Journal of result is an organization that is more productive Sociology, 66(1): 32-40.

Brum – Training and Employee Commitment 12

Blau, G. J., & Boal, K. B. 1987. Conceptualizing Krueger, A., and Rouse, C. 1998. The effect of how job involvement and organizational workplace education on earnings, turnover, commitment affect turnover and and job performance. Journal of Labor absenteeism. The Academy of Management Economics, 16(1): 61-94. Review, 12(2): 288-300. Lincoln, J. R., & Kalleberg, A. L. 1996. Burke, R. J. 1995. Benefits of formal training Commitment, quits, and work organization courses within a professional services firm. in Japanese and U.S. plants. Industrial and The Journal of Management Development, Labor Relations Review, 50(1): 39-59. 14(3): 3-13. Liou, K. T., & Nyhan, R. C. 1994. Dimensions Colarelli, S. M., & Montei, M. S. 1996. Some of organizational commitment in the public contextual influences on training utilization. sector: An empirical assessment. Public The Journal of Applied Behavioral Administration Quarterly, 18(1): 99-113. Science, 32(3): 306-322. Loewenstein, M. A., & Speltzer, J. R. 1999. Eck, A. 1993. Job-related education and General and specific training: Evidence and training: their impact on earnings. Monthly implication. The Journal of Human Labor Review, 116(10): 21-38. Resources, 34(4): 710-733. Frazis, H., Gittleman, M., Horrigan, M., & Lynch, L. M. 1991. The role of off-the-job vs. Joyce, M. 1998. Results from the 1995 on-the-job training for the mobility of Survey of Employer Provided Training. women workers. American Economic Monthly Labor Review, 121(6): 3-13. Review, 81(2): 151-156. Frazis, H. J., and Speltzer, J. R. 2005. Worker Lynch, L. M., & Black, S. E. 1998. Beyond the training:What we’ve learned from the incidence of employer-provided training. NLSY79. Monthly Labor Review, 128(2): Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 48-58. 52(1): 64-81. Glance, N.S., Hogg, T., and Huberman, B.A. Owan, H. 2004. Promotion, turnover, earnings, 1997. Training and turnover in the evolution and firm-sponsored training. Journal of of organizations. Organization Science, Labor Economics, 22(4): 955-978. 8(1): 84-96. Owens, P. L. 2006. One more reason not to cut Green, F., Felsted, A., Mayhew, K., & Pack, A. your training budget: The relationship 2000. The impact of training on labour between training and organizational mobility: Individual and firm-level evidence outcomes. Public Personnel Management, from Britain. British Journal of Industrial 35(2): 163-171. Relations, 38(2): 261-275. Scholl, R. W. 1981. Differentiating Groen, J. A. 2006. Occupation-specific human organizational commitment from expectancy capital and local labour markets. Oxford as a motivating force. Academy of Economic Papers, 58: 722-741. Management Review, 6(4): 589-599. Heyes, J., & Stuart, M. 1996. Does training Scholl, R.W. (2003) matter? Employee experiences and attitudes. http://www.uri.edu/research/lrc/scholl/Notes Human Resource Management Journal, /Commitment_Control.html accessed 6(3): 7-21. January 2007. Kaufman, B., & Hotchkiss, J. 2006. Economics Steers, R. M. 1977. Antecedents and outcomes of Labor Markets (7th ed.). Mason, OH: of organizational commitment. Thomson South-Western. Administrative Science Quarterly, 22(1): 46-56.

Schmidt Labor Research Center Seminar Research Series 13

Tannenbaum, S. I., Mathieu, J. E., Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J. A. 1991. Meeting trainees’ expectations: The influence of training fulfillment on the development of commitment, self-efficacy, and motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(6): 759- 769. Walton, R. E. 1985. From control to commitment in the workplace. Harvard Business Review, 63(2): 77-84.