Training the trainer on training outcomes

Training the trainer on training outcomes 1.1 Overview Organizations are defined as people working together in order to achieve common purpose. They along with working together are also collectively responsible for results. For this reason, the study of human interaction is emphasized. This requires the communication development through which right direction were set hence accomplishing the organizational objectives and goals. The more these goals are clear; the better were the understanding by the employees Grà Ã‚ °tton, Hà Ã‚ °iley, Stiles Truss (1999). But one should remember that the organization comprises of people with different cultures and value diversities. For any HR manager, the main target is to merge all the cultures simultaneously and carefully so that no employee feels left out. The cultural diversity increases the work of HR as the management has to revise their policies in order to develop and formulate rules and regulations which are free of any racial or gender discrimination. Religion, race, sect, sex, ethnic bel ongings are such critical factors which need to be focused upon in order to bring the harmony in organizational structure and employees (Delaney, 1996). The importance of HRM is not only evident with the HRM plan formulation and its coherence with the organizational goals but the HRM policies also form a major portion of the entire human resource management concept. HR policies are required in an organization as the employees are from diverse backgrounds which require limitations in order to harmonize the workplace culture and situation. For this reason, every organization requires a strategy for developing, enforcing and communicating the HRM practices and policies that reflect the acceptable standard behavior (Garavan, Costine Heraty, 1995). 1.2 Problem Stà Ã‚ °tà Ã‚ µmà Ã‚ µnt To study the organizational practice of training the trainer and its effect on training outcome. 1.3 Research Hypotheses H1: There is no relationship between training duration to trainer on the job performance of the employees. H2: There is no relationship between training duration to trainer on employee level of satisfaction with the training program. H3: There is no significant difference between types of training given to the trainer with the job performance of the employee. H4: There is no significant difference between the types of training given to trainer with the level of satisfaction of the employee with the training program. 1.4 Outline of the Study Thà Ã‚ µ scopà Ã‚ µ of rà Ã‚ µsà Ã‚ µÃƒ Ã‚ °rch is rà Ã‚ µlà Ã‚ °tà Ã‚ µd to the effect of training the trainer on training outcomes. The training of the trainer approach has become a promising method to train and develop the trainers and by that training the employee in the organization. When trainers themselves receive training it is usually aimed at familiarizing them with the specifics of a new or revised module or program. The approach appears to be use full in developing the different skills of the employee and improving their job performance and productivity as well. The question here is that what should be the intensity of the training the trainer and the types of training given to them such as on the job off the of the training and by that the training given to the employees what will be the level satisfaction of the employees with the training program and improvement in the job performance. The trainer can use the shared experiences to create positive images of the new model and its potential effectiveness. CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW Human capital is increasingly being seen as an issue of strategic significance in the industry today. It is this aspect of competition that provides most decisive elements of business advantage for a company by way of market responsiveness, process and technology innovation or enhancing customer experience (Ahmad, Schroeder, 2003). In this modernized world where globalization is fast crating an effect, the workplace realities of the ancient organizations no longer exists. It has become past and needs to be revised very carefully before any aspect of it can be implemented nowadays. It has become increasingly important for the organizations to introduce new methods and meet the new training needs of the employees. The reality of workplace, the changing work environment has increased the end for the managers to reconsider the methodologies of developing durable and strong relationship between the employees and organization that ultimately leads to the achievement of the organizations goals and objectives Lado, (1994). A thorough and complete understanding of the employees training need has became important for the management in order to accomplish what employees expect from the organization in order to return what organization expect from them. Therefore it becomes clear from the researches that a Trained work-for ce is an instrument of success for full filling the needs of a rapidly changing work environment for both, the employees and the organization. It also becomes clear that a well- Trained workforce were eventually lead to the organization achieving its goals and objectives in a better an efficient manner. To serve this purpose ob building a strong bond between the management and workforce, the role of the top management is very crucial in this respect. Human capital is capable of playing a pivotal role compared to financial capital, in the effectiveness of the organization. In modern times people are believed to me a source of competitive advantage and carry more importance in leading a company towards success, rather than finance (Bordia, Hobman, Jones, Elizabeth Callan, 2004). A business employs factors of production to carry out its business activity. It is very important for a business to be sure that all its resources are allocated efficiently in order to be profitable. The most important, vital and significant resource of a company is the people it employs. Due to increasing globalization and competition, the productivity of labour has become increasingly important for the companies in determining its efficiency. Businesses, like those in service sector, whose staff deal directly with its consumers need to be very conscious about the training level of their employees. Training has become important for the business to gain competitive edge by attracting the best recruits. They must be aware that to win completion, it is important for them to attract and retain the best labour possible (Desveaux, 1994). A milestone in a success of an organization is fulfilling the continually changing needs of employees and the organization. A heavy responsibility rests on the shoulder of the management to develop durable and strong relationships between them. Companies expect workers to follow the rules according to the terms and conditions set for them. Employees in return expect fir pay, good working conditions, secure career, fair treatment, involvement in decisions and power. These expectations of both groups vary from company to company. For any business to deal with these expectations successfully a complete understanding of the employee training becomes necessary (Glick, Huber, Miller, Doty Sutcliffe, 1990). It is usually that it is the organization and not managers that fail to hold managers responsible for creating training among the people. They fail to understand the role of training and its connection to job performance. One of the biggest challenges for Human Resource is to persuade line managers to develop and manage people. These line managers should be able to build string and personal relationship with the employees through effective communication. There is a need for the line mangers to understand the nature of the employee and his subordinates and should be able to deal with the problems of workers effectively. A thorough understanding of the needs of the subordinates were eventually let the managers know what the employee aims for and what are their goals and objectives Goodman, Rousseau Church (2004). They can then decide how to develop and implement strategies that were achieve the objectives of the company while letting the employees achieve their personal goals. Staff t hat is untrained were reluctant to do their jobs quickly and efficiently and were only provide the minimal of what is required of them from the organization. It is important to know how well trained staff were alter the levels of productivity and performance within a company, thus affecting the competitiveness of the business. A well Trained staff is not only able to increase productivity and performance but is also prepared to accept responsibility, willingly and happily. There is low labor turnover which reduces the business cost of hiring and training new labor. With a highly motivate staff, a business also benefits from low absenteeism rate and employees participate on making suggestions for improvements (Hui Lee, 2000). Herzberg identified five main factors that resulted in job satisfaction. These factors can easily be identified in an organization and can be used for evaluation. The five main factors include achievement, recognition for achievement, responsibility, nature of work itself and advancement. These are the factors which can easily be identified if they exist in an organization. Similarly Herzberg gave five main factors that resulted in job dissatisfaction. These are termed as companys administration and policy, salary, supervision working conditions and relationships. This factor can easily be searched for in an organization to determine the effects of training. Improving the work performance has always been and were continue to be the major concern of all businesses Jimmieson Terry (1999). It is the performance of work that creates satisfied managers and/or dissatisfied managers. The work performance has always been an important issue for the businesses as their success and failure depends upon the performance displays by their workforce. A manager when pays the employee, expects to return the worth of what is paid to him. In case of failure to do so, many workplace issues are created that managers then need to deal with. It is not always possible for managers to repay the accurately the input employee has put into work. This is because there exist no method to measure the input against the output which the employee receives or perceives. Failure to come up to the expectation results in detraining. Is also seen, as described by the expectancy theory that workers expect according to what they see around. Now it becomes difficult for manager s to know how they perceive their work output and it is compared to whose job (Klein, 1996). The performance at work is not only dependent upon the skills and abilities the worker possesses but there are many factors that exist which creates and leave an impact upon the performance of the employee. A well-Trained employee results in well performed job and an unsatisfied employee who is untrained towards his job naturally results in a poor job performance. But the question what motivates man to perform better has many answers. There are many training factors as discussed above that leaves an impact upon the training of the employees (Liden Graen, 1980). Training and development is always been an issue for the organizations and there HRD According to Mintzberg, Henry Westley Frances (1992) HRD as a profession is deeply concerned about issues of individual and organizational learning, change and success , and how, through its professional roles and activities, it Can benefit people and organizations as they pursue various goals and interests. According to Jick (1993) Training and development of employees is viewed as an important factor in Ensuring that employers Have a capable, skilled and knowledgeable workforce. As Miller, Johnson Grau (1994) reported that From the company perspective Training and development of the company Employees are essential for organizational operation and organizational advisement. To have positive results training must tie closely to appropriate effective training method and training delivery mechanism (Goodman, Rousseau Church, 2004). The first training decision that a company has to make is not necessarily concerned with whom to train. Instead, the company needs to start by considering whether to buy the new skills they require in the labor market by hiring properly skilled labor, or whether it is preferable to acquire the new skills by Training the companys present staff. If the company decides to invest in its current personnel, then it is faced with a multitude of highly interrelated questions: Who are to be trained (Glick, Huber, Miller, Doty Sutcliffe, 1990). The training of the trainer approach has become a promising method to train and develop the trainers and by that training the employee in the organization. When trainers themselves receive training it is usually aimed at familiarizing them with the specifics of a new or revised module or program. The approach appears to be use full in developing the different skills of the employee and improving their job performance and productivity as well. The question here is that what should be the intensity of the training the trainer and the types of training given to them such as on the job off the of the training and by that the training given to the employees what were the level satisfaction of the employees with the training program and improvement in the job performance. The trainer can use the shared experiences to create positive images of the new model and its potential effectiveness. But Despite heavy investment in the training program , organizations can frequently fail to evaluate t he success of their training program Therefore, it is important for organizations to incorporate into their training programs strategies to improve the transfer of training (Desveaux, 1994). As Bordia, Hobman, Jones, Elizabeth Callan (2004) reported after the training investment has been made, logically the focus turns to the effects of the training. Few attempts have been made in connection with organizing measurements to determine the level of training effectiveness involving trained individuals. The lack of reliable, valid measurements of Learning, reaction (satisfaction with training) and training impact at work may be one of the factors that have been hindering research progress in the training evaluation area (Lado, 1994). HRM is itself involved in the measurement of the employee efficiency but the process of HRM itself needs to be assessed and monitored in order to leave no room for loopholes. Measuring HR performance were include every aspect like HR departments, HR functions and HR operations. In HRM monitoring in order to check its effectiveness, every aspect pertaining to HRM were taken under consideration. However it is not very easy to assess and quantify the effectiveness of HRM as there are no strict parameters and metrics that are used as base for evaluation. In comparison to this, financial assessment is easy as there are metrics and parameters in terms of budget etc. So overall, HRM effectiveness is the hardest aspect of organizational assessment (Ahmad Schroeder, 2003). CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHOD 3.1 Method of Data collection Personal survey method was used to collect the data. The researcher was personally visit different organizations belonging to different sectors and though a questionnaire primary data was collected from H.R managers and employees . 3.2 Sample Size and Sampling Technique A sample size of 220 respondents was used for carrying out the research and the technique used for sampling is convenience based sampling. 3.3 Instrument of Data Collection In this research, Questionnaire was used as an instrument of data collection and the instrument is in the form of closed ended questionnaire was filled by the H.R managers and employee who receive training. The source of questionnaire was measured by using likert scale. 3.4 Statistical tool In this research ANOVA and Correlation was used for the analysis of the results. 3.4.1 Reliability test The instrument was pre-tested where 4 to 5 sample questionnaire were filled to the different respondents just to identify whether it was easy to understand. Through pretesting it was found that all respondents felt comfortable in responding and found the instrument interesting as well. Reliability analysis allows studying the properties of scales of measurement and the things that build them up. The Reliability Analysis procedure calculates a number of frequently used procedures of level reliability and also gives information about the associations between individual items mentioned in the scale. Reliability Statistics Cronbachs Alpha N of Items .692 18 3.4 Research Model used PRATICES OF TRAINING THE TRAINER TRAINING OUT COMES Improvement in job performance of the employee Level Of Satisfaction of the employees with the training program Training frequency Types of Training (Self Developed Model) CHAPTER 4 RESULTS 4.1 Findings and Interpretation of the Results For finding the results the research used correlation and Post Hoc tests. Rejection region: P-value H1: There is no relationship between training duration to trainer on the job performance of the employees. H2: There is no relationship between training duration to trainer on employee level of satisfaction with the training program. Table 4.1 Correlations Length Of Training Employee Satisfaction Job Performance Length Of Training Pearson Correlation 1 -.103 .039 Sig. (2-tailed) .666 .870 N 20 20 20 EmployeeSatisfaction Pearson Correlation -.103 1 .776** Sig. (2-tailed) .666 .000 N 20 20 20 JobPerformance Pearson Correlation .039 .776** 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .870 .000 N 20 20 20 **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). The coefficient of correlation can vary from positive one (indicating a perfect positive relationship), through zero (indicating the absence of a relationship), to negative one (indicating a perfect negative relationship). As a rule of thumb, correlation coefficients between .00 and .30 are considered weak, those between .30 and .70 are moderate and coefficients between .70 and 1.00 are considered high. However, this rule should be always qualified by the circumstances.   From table 4.1 the coefficient of correlation between Length of Training and Employee Satisfaction is -0.103 which shows the perfect negative relation between Training duration and Employee Satisfaction. The coefficient of correlation between Length of Training and Job Performance is 0.039 which shows the weak relation between Training duration and Job Performance and it concludes that training duration does not made positive impact on Employee Satisfaction and Job Performance. The significant value of Pearson correlation between Length of Training and Employee Satisfaction is greater than 0.05 i.e. 0.666, and the significant value of Pearson correlation between Length of Training and Job Performance is also greater than 0.05 i.e. 0.870, so P-value >0.05 Accept Ho. Hence H1 and H2 are Accepted, there is no relationship between training duration to trainer on the job performance of the employees and on employee level of satisfaction with the training program. It is concluded that trai ning hours does not made an impact, the quality of training made the change. H3: There is no significant difference between types of training given to the trainer with the job performance of the employee. H4: There is no significant difference between the types of training given to trainer with the level of satisfaction of the employee with the training program. Table 4.2 ANOVA Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. JobPerformance Between Groups .000 2 .000 .001 .999 Within Groups 1.482 16 .093 Total 1.482 18 EmployeeSatisfaction Between Groups .007 2 .003 .020 .980 Within Groups 2.734 16 .171 Total 2.741 18 Research tests the impact of training given to trainer on job performance and level of satisfaction of the employee. The Anova Table 4.2 shows that the significant level are greater than 0.05. The significant value of training Between Groups within Groups given to the trainer with the job performance of the employee is 0.999 and the significant value of training Between Groups within Groups given to trainer with the level of satisfaction of the employee with the training program is also 0.980 i.e. P-values >0.05 which means that our both hypothesis are true. Hence H3 and H4 accepted and it is confirmed that there is no significant difference between types of training given to the trainer with the job performance of the employee and with the level of satisfaction of the employee with the training program. Table 4.3 Multiple Comparisons Bonferroni Dependent Variable (I) Type Of Training (J) Type Of Training Mean Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig. 95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound JobPerformance Not applicable Custamised .00000 .16975 1.000 -.4537 .4537 Both -.00800 .19248 1.000 -.5225 .5065 Custamised Not applicable .00000 .16975 1.000 -.4537 .4537 Both -.00800 .16975 1.000 -.4617 .4457 Both Not applicable .00800 .19248 1.000 -.5065 .5225 Custamised .00800 .16975 1.000 -.4457 .4617 EmployeeSatisfaction Not applicable Custamised -.03222 .23059 1.000 -.6486 .5841 Both -.05200 .26146 1.000 -.7509 .6469 Custamised Not applicable .03222 .23059 1.000 -.5841 .6486 Both -.01978 .23059 1.000 -.6361 .5966 Both Not applicable .05200 .26146 1.000 -.6469 .7509 Custamised .01978 .23059 1.000 -.5966 .6361 In Table 4.5, the low standard error shows the accuracy and fitness of variables in the model. The mean difference between type of training I and type of training J in both cases Job performance and Employee satisfaction are very low, it satisfies that the means of type of training I and type of training J in both cases are equal or all means are near to equal. The right most column shows the confidence interval, the maximum value of upper bound at 95% CI is 0.7509 and all the significant values are greater than 0.7509 i.e. 1.000. It concludes that the statements; there is no significant difference between types of training given to the trainer with the job performance of the employee and with the level of satisfaction of the employee with the training program, satisfies. Hence H3 and H4 Accepted. 4.2 Hypotheses Assessment Summary S.NO. HYPOTHESES SIG. RESULT H1 There is no relationship between training duration to trainer on the job performance of the employees. 0.870 ACCEPTED H2 There is no relationship between training duration to trainer on employee level of satisfaction with the training program. 0.666 ACCEPTED H3 There is no significant difference between types of training given to the trainer with the job performance of the employee. 0.999 ACCEPTED H4 There is no significant difference between the types of training given to trainer with the level of satisfaction of the employee with the training program. 0.980 ACCEPTED CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION, RECOMMENDATIONS AND IMPLICATION, FUTURE RESEARCH AND CONCLUSION 5.1 Discussion Training is very important for any organization. It helps in developing new workforce and motivates employees. The biggest challenge for Human Resource is to persuade line managers to develop and manage people. These line managers should be able to build string and personal relationship with the employees through effective communication. There is a need for the line mangers to understand the nature of the employee and his subordinates and should be able to deal with the problems of workers effectively. The performance at work is not only dependent upon the skills and abilities the worker possesses but there are many factors that exist which creates and leave an impact upon the performance of the employee. A well-Trained employee results in well performed job and an unsatisfied employee who is untrained towards his job naturally results in a poor job performance. But the question what motivates man to perform better has many answers. The first training decision that a company has to m ake is not necessarily concerned with whom to train. Instead, the company needs to start by considering whether to buy the new skills they require in the labor market by hiring properly skilled labor, or whether it is preferable to acquire the new skills by Training the companys present staff. The training of the trainer approach has become a promising method to train and develop the trainers and by that training the employee in the organization. When trainers themselves receive training it is usually aimed at familiarizing them with the specifics of a new or revised module or program. The approach appears to be use full in developing the different skills of the employee and improving their job performance and productivity as well. The question here is that what should be the intensity of the training the trainer and the types of training. What were the level satisfaction of the employees with the training program and improvement in the job performance? The trainer can use the share d experiences to create positive images of the new model and its potential effectiveness. 5.2 Recommendations and implications: Training is a very important tool for any organization. The company while letting the employees achieves their personal goals. Staff that is untrained was reluctant to do their jobs quickly and efficiently and were only providing the minimal of what is required of them from the organization. It is important to know how well trained staff was altering the levels of productivity and performance within a company, thus affecting the competitiveness of the business. A well trained staff is not only able to increase productivity and performance but is also prepared to accept responsibility, willingly and happily. Companies should provide adequate trainings to their trainers and maintain a high level of standards to improve their training skills from which their end customer the employee can benefit from it 5.3 Future Research: Future research can be done on the trainers motivations that how trainer feels motivated after given the training to the employee. As the trainer is motivated then it will be more beneficial for the organization because it gives his best to the employee and in the long run employees become more efficient in their work. 5.4 Conclusion The main purpose of this study was to highlight effects of training the trainer on training outcomes. Training duration to training to the trainer has a no effect on the job performance of the employee and the level of satisfaction of the employees with the training program. It was also seen that there is no relation between the type of training given to the trainer with the level of satisfaction of employee with the training program and job performance. It was observed that there was a bias in the respondents responses. Responses of majority employee of non trained trainer were same as the employee with trained ones. This can be the result of less secure job and unemployment status in Pakistan. In an economy which is going though an economic turmoil as majority of organization looking to cut down cost training is the first thing they abundant. This can be one reason why there is no co-relation between trainings the trainer and performances of the employees.