Training and DevelopmentThe impact of training and development on

performance and motivationShereen, Menna, Amina & Haitham

Introduction:

“In an era of rapid high-technology changes, all indicators show that the move of technological innovation will continue to accelerate in the future (Adler, 1991; Pulakos et al., 2000; Quin˜ones, 1997). In an environment of rapid change, it is clear that an individual must be able to adapt to meet new challenges; changing technologies continue to alter the nature of work tasks, requiring employees to learn new knowledge and skills to perform their jobs. As modern Business management considers a new trend in which human resources are considered as a part of intangible assets called human capital which is one of the main elements that best explains the improvement in performance as well as creating a competitive advantage. Hence; Training is one of the crucial strategies for organizations to assist employees to gain those necessary knowledge and skills needed to meet the challenges (Goldstein and Gilliam, 1990; Rosow and Zager, 1988). So, it's important to describe the elements of a successful employee training program, Explain the distinction between training and education, along with a discussion of why “soft skills” training initiatives are less effective than skills-based approaches, discuss the critical role of the training manager in implementing a training program, as well as important considerations when developing a strategic training plan. In addition to describe several key factors which determine how employee training programs can best support company profitability. More recent studies indicated that today’s organizations will face two oncoming trends, so training will play a critical role in increasing workers’ adaptability and flexibility which employers have found is becoming increasingly important. Thus, it is important for an organization to maintain a necessary competence in its employees through adequate training.” Wei-Tao Tai said in his article.In this study we analyzed whether training is really the effective instrument that will contribute towards generating human capital to allow companies to improve their results we also focused on the service sector, where perception of service quality depends on who renders this service. The majority of papers that link training to business performance are produced within the framework of the study of the effect of a combination of human resource practices (Arthur, 1994; Pfeffer, 1994; Huselid, 1995; Delaney and Huselid, 1996; Delery and Doty, 1996; Koch and McGrath, 1996; Huselid et al., 1997; Ichniowski et al., 1997), there being few papers that exclusively analyze the influence of personnel training on the results (Saa´ Pe´rez and Garcı´a Falco´n, 2002; Arago´n et al., 2003; Danvila del Valle and Sastre Castillo, 2007). When measuring the training effort as a multidimensional variable; a way must be found to overcome the limitations encountered in those

studies that use only one indicator. These studies usually give a very incomplete idea of the efforts made by each company in staff training matters. By focusing on the training and development as a way to improve the performance, training programs must be developed not only for personnel within the organization, but also for the management as well. Farhad Analoui, proposed in his article that: “Today, organizations, whether private or public, are faced with fierce competition, scarce resources and rapid technological changes. This has meant that organizations ought to be managed in such a way that not only is their immediate survival guaranteed but also their long-term future development is ensured. Management plays an important role in the realization of these goals. It is, therefore, not surprising to see that the search on the part of management educators and trainers for the most effective ways to train and develop managers and officials has gathered such a pace.”

This article asserts that the three main angles of the training and development triangle play an important part in achieving the required development objectives and the range of competencies, knowledge and skills which are necessary to meet effectively the training needs of those trainee managers for whose training they are held responsible.Both management trainers and their institutions ought to be prepared to cope with the constant change in what is demanded of them, should they be interested in the survival and future development of their institution in the competitive environment in which they operate”. Figure (1) shows the main three angles of training and development triangle

First, in order to understand what is nowadays expected from management trainers and educators, it is essential to understand how current perceptions of the manager’s job and responsibilities have developed. Then, it will be argued that the adoption of a simple solely task-related model of training – often used to train managers from developing countries – has proved to be inadequate. Therefore, a realistic management training model ought to include the “task-related” and “people-related” aspects of the manager’s job as well as the trainee’s own development, in its design and content.

Content

Trainer Learner

As training has become more prevalent today; almost all companies provide some type of training for their employees. For some companies, training is a very formal process; in which Entire departments are devoted to conducting both initial and ongoing employee training program. While some other companies bring in outside consultants to conduct employee training sessions. Taking Vodafone as example; although well-established as a successful multinational telecommunication provider, in 2008 Vodafone recognized the need for radical structural reform of its business practices company-wide. Employee surveys highlighted the need to improve the company’s information technology, as staff wanted to interact more effectively with customers and collaborate with other parts of the Vodafone business.

Training and development:

In simplistic terms training can be defined as an activity that changes people’s behavior. According to Flippo (1984), training is the act of increasing the skills of an employee for doing a particular job. Goldstein (1993) defines training as a systematic acquisition of skills, rules, concepts or attitudes that results in improved performance in another environment. Chiaburu and Tekleab (2005) have defined training ‘‘as the planned intervention that is designed to enhance the determinants of individual job performance’’. Training is the area where organizational, industrial, and individual development can match, and where human resource and organization growth get blended together (Sundarajan, 2007). It refers to a planned effort by a company to facilitate employees’ learning of job-related competencies; these competencies include knowledge, skills, or behaviors that are critical for successful job performance (Noe, 2009).Training and development help an organization in optimizing the utilization of human resources, which further helps employees to achieve organizational goals, as well as their individual goals. Guzzo et al. (1985) expressed the view that training program is the most powerful activity among many organizational interventions. The goal of training is to enable employees to master the knowledge, skills and behaviors emphasized in training programs and to apply them to their day-to-day activities. Training serves to improve the performance of employees, which, in turn, provides a competitive edge to the organization (Schraeder, 2009).

Rationale of the present study:

Employees of the organization under consideration are categorized broadly as ‘‘management’’ and ‘‘non-management’’; people with professional qualifications (namely engineering, business management and accounting) are hired in the

management category, whereas people with Industrial Training Institute (ITI) qualifications are hired in the non-management category. Both categories of employees have significantly different levels of responsibilities, deliverables, scope of communication, and interaction patterns within and outside the organization. Since they possess different educational, social, cultural and geographical backgrounds, such differences impact an employee’s integration process and his/her general understanding in the workplace.In the past there were different programs for both categories for their integration, orientation towards work practices, quality systems, safety, and organizational values.Based on this, it was decided to design a single program for both categories, covering content that is essential for new employees, with the purpose of integrating them effectively and developing the desired attitude, which is essential for both organizational and individual success.

Objectives of the study:

This study has the following objectives:1. To find the reaction of employees regarding effectiveness of the ‘‘Excellence Way’’ program; ‘‘Training and development help an organization in optimizing the utilization of human resources, which further helps employees to achieve organizational goals, as well as their individual goals.’’2. To identify the areas in which improvements are necessary, such that the program gains popularity across the unit.3. To ascertain whether there is any significant difference in the reaction of managerial and non-managerial employees.

Training and Development:

Inappropriately acquired amount of task-related knowledge and skills have been physically transferred back to the actual workplace, no amount of positive socialization and motivation in the workplace can result in the transfer of the knowledge and skills which had not been learned effectively in the first place. Today’s management trainers are facing an even greater challenge than that which was faced by their predecessors. They ought to ensure that in addition to the actual learning, the potential for the transfer of the materials learned and skills is also considered when training courses and activities are designed and delivered.

The Varied Roles for Trainers:

The role of trainers has been the subject of many academic debates and discussions. Each classification, by its very nature, tends to throw light on some aspects of the trainer’s job and naturally ignores others. In most cases, however,

the emphasis has been placed on the role of the trainer in an organizational context, thus assessing their relationship, whether political, social, or power based, with other members of the immediate work-setting or the workplace at large.The author’s own observations, within industry and public sector organizations in both developed and developing countries points to the presence of a broad two-category role classification for management trainers and educators.

"These roles, essentially, constitute the extreme positions on a continuous basis."

(1) Trainer as maintainer:Wellens has identified two major roles. Namely; training “administrators” and training “practitioners”. The “maintainer” is concerned primarily with here and now. Maintainers gradually develop a reactive orientation to their work and trainees. For them the maintenance of the present standards and status quo is of prime importance. The traditional values which the maintainer holds have been shown to have become the basis for their task-related knowledge and skills. Such individuals show a preference for being in the position of “passive providers” towards their trainees, and for adopting a responsive attitude towards their clients and superiors. Jones asserts that the knowledge which is provided is that “which is known and stored in the books and the heads of teachers. Such knowledge is essential but not sufficient”. Maintainers generally prefer to be told what to do rather than taking the initiative or breaking new ground.

(2) Trainer as change agent:The trainer in the position of change agent is one who has a totally different approach to training, trainees and the organization, for or with which, he or she works. The trainer is more concerned with the process of development than with being involved in the mechanics of the learning process. Such a trainer views his or her role as that of preparing the management trainees to initiate change and to develop the organization so that it is able to cope with internal as well as external change. He or she benefits from a dynamic approach to people and situations and is best characterized as proactive, worrying about the future rather than here and now. The change agent, is therefore, well aware of the historical development of the subject which he or she provides, but feels the need for the design and development of new approaches and ways of getting the job done. Experience shows that trainers, in their capacity as change agents, are concerned with the wellbeing and progress of the trainees and their organization. The change agent, in the extreme sense of the word, is more concerned with people and people-related knowledge, skills and values, than with task-related aspects. He or she is competent in interpersonal communication and uses skills, energy and enthusiasm with the aim of integrating the individual trainees and organizational change. The

“maintainer” and “change agent” provide the two extremes on the identified continuum of the approaches that trainers generally adopt towards their work, organization and people as a whole.

These roles are congruent with the task-related (technical), people-related (social) and socio-technical orientation to training identified earlier. The author’s work with managers from developing countries both abroad and at the Centre has revealed that neither of the roles is complete in its entirety. A socio-technical approach to the management development and training of managers is needed. This represents the midway position between the “maintainer” and purely “change agent” extremes. This balanced position will be referred to here as the “active trainer”.

The active trainer is one who shows more or less equal concern for, on the one hand, the maintenance of the trainee’s role within the organization and, on the other hand, the need for adapting to or bringing about change. The author sees the adoption of this twin-roled attitude by management trainers as necessary for the future development of individual trainees as well as the development of their organization as a whole. Unfortunately, and this is probably one of the main reasons for ineffective training, most management trainers show a tendency towards being a “maintainer” with a high concern for task-related knowledge and skills.

This is typical of those management trainers and developers who subscribe to what we can term classical management principles. Here, it seems apt to borrow the analogy used by Bennett and Oliver when discussing the danger of believing that everyone is a good communicator; “like sex and driving, everyone believes they are good at it [training]”. Both in industry and academia it has been observed frequently that the possession of technical skills has often been interpreted by the holder as a proof of ability to become an effective trainer. This is particularly evident in developing countries. All too often; it has been observed that such trainers, with their mainly mechanistic attitudes towards knowledge, learning, training and most important of all to the trainees fail to see their role as agents for facilitating effective training, thus remaining in their non-negotiable positions as “providers” of “good stuff”. As Trost aptly notes, trainers serve as role models and need to demonstrate the skills they are teaching. It is amazing how often communication trainers do not practice good communication skills. They cut off participant’s questions, move on to other topics before the group is ready to do so and fail to use listening (an interpersonal skill) responses. In situations where the complexity of the task involved, or the lack of suitable trainers or learning environment compels employers to use outside training, the importance of the socio-technical competence of the trainers in the training institution chosen gains even more importance. The inability to create a facilitating learning environment on the part of the trainers involved undoubtedly leads to ineffective learning. Once the trainees with

little or an inappropriately acquired amount of task-related knowledge and skills have been physically transferred back to the actual workplace, no amount of positive socialization and motivation in the workplace can result in the transfer of the knowledge and skills which had not been learned effectively in the first place.

Today’s management trainers are facing an even greater challenge than that which was faced by their predecessors. They ought to ensure that in addition to the actual learning, the potential for the transfer of the materials learned and skills is also considered when training courses and activities are designed and delivered

What Skills and Competences? The list of skills and expertise which it is said are required is inexhaustible. Boydell, for example, outlines three types of competence that a trainer requires in various combinations: ● Practitioner competences ● Leadership competences ● Organizational competences.

However, since most management training is inevitably off-the-job, the main issue that should concern management trainers is that of the positive transfer of the learning to the actual work organization.

The implication of the above model for trainers is that they should possess sufficient knowledge about the trainees’ culture and organization, as well as of the behavioral and technical skills required, to ensure that management learning is taking place and that the transfer of the knowledge and skills learned to the actual workplace environment is facilitated. Effective transfer of knowledge and skills of management to organizations in developing countries can be achieved “if the processes that influence and determine its effective occurrence are understood and hence incorporated into the design and implementation of the training programs”.

To sum up, a comprehensive list of skills and competences for trainers involved in the effective training of managers and officials will have to add five more areas of expertise to those suggested by Boydell.

(1) Up-to-date knowledge and skills of technical (task-related) and social (people-related) aspects of managerial theories, practices and methods of training for on and off-the-job training situations.

(2) Adequate knowledge about the trainees’ learning capabilities, style and attitudes, as well as knowledge of the use of relevant learning aids.

(3) Sufficient knowledge of trainees’ tasks, roles, organizational culture and socio-economic, political and cultural environment.

(4) Knowledge of the trainees’ unique cultural background and the influence which political, socio-economic and educational factors will have on their organization and the trainees themselves."This aspect of knowledge required on the part of the trainer may be extended to the relationship between the trainees’ organization and the international agencies whose support is needed to implement the changes required by the trainees."

(5) Awareness of the issues which affect the quantity and the quality of the learnt material to be transferred to the trainees’ organization. It is also important for trainers to adopt a socio-technical approach in the design and implementation of training programs negotiations, to enable managers to deal with both the people and task aspects of their jobs. Since both research and the feedback obtained from the management trainees indicated the need for self-development on their part, adequate time is allocated to the task of investigation and research into the topics of their choice by each of the participants.

In this way the trainee is provided with an opportunity to take charge of his or her learning and development while he or she benefits from the coaching and support of the specialized trainer in the role of facilitator.

Because the topics chosen are often those which are felt by the individual trainees to be of importance for the continued development of their organization, their involvement in such individual learning program activities will also enhance the positive transfer of the material learned to their organization.

To ensure that the trainees are capable both of acting as change agent for the organization concerned, and of facilitating the process by supporting others, they are familiarized with the processes of change, and with socio-psychological aspects of transition, to equip them to deal with training and development of themselves, their peers and subordinates. Task-related skills such as computing, detailed project programming, monitoring, and implementation techniques, as well as operational and administrative aspects of the manager’s job, are also taught to ensure a balanced approach. The traditional structured styles of learning characterized by the use of mainly “chalk and talk” methods are replaced by encouraging participative and experience-based learning in which the trainee plays an equally important part. The trainees are taught not only to take charge of their own long-term learning and development, but also to enable others in their organizations to benefit from “learning to learn principles” Implications for Training and Development Institutions:

Training institutions, schools and international funding agencies are becoming increasingly aware of the importance of the transferability of material learned from the learning situation in a Western institute into the workplace environment in a developing country. It is being accepted increasingly that training and development institutions require a more dynamic and “task-oriented culture”, which is capable of responding to change quickly and easily. It is being realized that management trainers need not have benefited from specialization in only one or two areas of management-related subjects; they should also have sufficient skills related to learning design, training methods, communication and interpersonal skills and the transfer of training. Management development institutions ought to be involved seriously in management research. It has been argued that those management development institutions which ignore the importance of research and development reduce the impact of the institution on the socio-economic environment and impair its reputation, which results in its becoming a second-rate institution. Management training centers ought to become more sensitive to the clients’ needs and strive consciously towards the creation of task as well as “service culture”. This means that trainers should be supported through the provision of adequate resources and training, so that they can assume the responsibilities of the modern management educator. Only in this way can it be assured that trainers themselves continuously develop and evolve to meet the ever increasing needs of their trainees and their organizations. In short to achieve a more effective management training the training centers ought to ensure that: ● Trainers and educators are made aware of the importance of the socio-technical principles of effective learning, training and transfer. ● Trainers are assisted to identify their personal need and understanding of people-related knowledge, information and “know how” skills in subject areas, such as perception, communication, motivation, leadership and the like. ● Trainers are enabled to design course content in such a way that ample opportunity is provided for supervised and unstructured “primary socialization” among the group members. ● Trainers are encouraged to adopt participatory styles of training to facilitate learning both at the social and technical levels. ● Trainers are made aware of the need for ensuring that trainees have become aware of the socialization and transition process for when they re-enter their actual workplace. ● Trainers are assisted to become familiar with various “operating cultures” within the public and private sectors in which the trainees work and are aware of cultural differences and their effect on learning among their participants. ● Trainers should become aware of the importance of evaluating and assessing the training program, based on socio-technically learnt and acquired knowledge

and skills, where cultural differences among trainees are so great that they cannot be bridged easily, self-directed learning should be used.The influence of training framing on general self-efficacy and training motivation:

A number of training literatures have suggested that trainee ability and motivation combines multiplicatively to determine training effectiveness (Colquitt et al., 2000; Noe and Wilk, 1993; Facteau et al., 1995; Mathieu et al., 1992). That is, training performance will only be strengthened when trainees have both the capability and the motivation to learn. Recent studies have focused on the pre-training antecedents of training outcomes. For instance, Colquitt et al. noted that situational variables (e.g. climate, manager support) would enhance trainees’ self-efficacy and training motivation. Quin ˜ones (1995) posited that pre-training contextual factors such as framing would enhance trainees’ abilities to be trained (e.g. self-efficacy, training motivation). Some empirical studies have also showed that pre-information brings trainees more self-efficacy and training motivation. Hicks and Klimoski (1987) found that trainees’ motivation was higher when they attended training programs, armed with realistic information from their superiors. That is, realistic information about training was helpful for trainees’ pre-training preparations and in turn for increasing trainees’ motivations to learn. Baldwin and Magjuka (1991) also showed that trainees who obtained pre-information before attending training programs were more motivated than those who did not. Bandura (1986) suggested that self-efficacy is influenced by four information cues: enactive mastery, vicarious experience, verbal persuasion, and emotional arousal. That is, trainees’ self-efficacy will be increased through managers’ verbal persuasion which is aimed at encouraging them to attend training programs (Gist, 1987). Bandura (1984) noted that a supervisor’s expectations might be viewed as persuasive input to the subordinate’s efficacy perceptions, while the strength of the persuasion could be influenced by the supervisor’s credibility. Brown et al. (2001) also showed that supervisory consideration (e.g. supervisors support and friendliness) is positively associated with self-efficacy. Thus, we hypothesized that:

1. Trainees who receive more positive training framing from their supervisors will have more self-efficacy and training motivation when they attend a training program. That is, if supervisors frame a specific training program, it will be useful to trainees before they attend the training program. Trainees who have positive training information will form a higher self-efficacy and training motivation than those who have not received it.The influence of general self-efficacy on training motivation and training effectiveness Self-efficacy is one of the important concepts that are based on social learning theory. According to the theory, people learn by observing other persons (models) whom they believe are credible and knowledgeable (Bandura, 1986).The theory relates to a belief in one’s capabilities to organize and perform the courses of action needed to achieve given attainments (Bandura, 1997). In general, self-efficacy has two similar but distinct constructs: general self-efficacy and task self-efficacy. General self-efficacy refers to one’s estimate of one’s fundamental ability to complete general job requirements successfully; while task self-efficacy refers to one’s estimate of one’s specific ability to achieve task requirements successfully (Stajkovic and Luthans, 1998). Previous research suggests that both general and task self-efficacy are related to job performance (Judge and Bono, 2001; Hysong and Quin ˜ones, 1997; Stajkovic and Luthans, 1998). Training motivation also is impacted by an individual’s self-efficacy, in regard to whether one can make judgments concerning the ability to successfully learn Knowledge and skills.

Individuals with substantial self-efficacy will have more training motivation to attend a training program and to learn more. In recent studies, self-efficacy was shown to be positively associated with training motivation (Carlson et al., 2000; Tracey et al., 2001). For instance, in the training model of Colquitt et al. (2000) indicated that self-efficacy positively influenced motivation to learn. Quin ˜ones (1995) also showed that trainees’ self-efficacy significantly increased their training motivation. Self-efficacy was also shown to be positively associated with training performance (Cheng, 2000; Ford et al., 1992; Gist et al., 1989; Martocchio and Webster, 1992). That is, trainees with high self-efficacy will increase training motivation, and in turn will generate training effectiveness. In the present study, we postulated that self-efficacy would mediate the relationship between framing and training motivation. Thus, we hypothesized that: Self-efficacy will be a mediator of the relationship between training framing and training motivation. That is, if supervisors frame the training that is useful to trainees before they attend the training program, trainees who get the training framing will form higher self-efficacy than those who do not, which in turn will increase the trainees’ training motivation.Trainees who are with higher self-efficacy will demonstrate more training effectiveness (i.e. reactions, learning, and transfer motivation) than those who are with lower self-efficacy.

The influence of training motivation on training effectiveness:

Motivation is typically defined as “variability in behavior not attributable to stable individual differences (e.g. cognitive ability) or strong situational coercion” (Quin ˜ones, 1997, pp. 182-3). That means, motivation is a characteristic of an individual willing to expend efforts toward a particular set of behavior. In a training context, motivation can influence the willingness of an employee to attend the training program (Maurer and Tarulli, 1994; Noe and Wilk, 1993), to exert energy toward the program (Ryman and Biersner, 1975), and to transfer what they learn in the program onto the job (Baldwin and Ford, 1988). Thus, it is likely that trainees cannot reap the full benefits of training without considering training motivation. In fact, studies have been showing an association between training motivation and training effectiveness (Noe and Wilk, 1993; Facteau et al., 1995; Mathieu et al., 1992; Quin ˜ones, 1997). Some studies also suggested that motivation played a more determinant role than other individual factors in regard to training performance. Colquitt et al. (2000) suggested that even if trainees possess the ability to learn the content of a course, they might fail to benefit from training because of low motivation. This implies that the “g-centric” approach to trainability is not sufficient and should be accompanied by a trainee’s training motivation. Other researchers also suggested that the characteristics of trainees such as motivation and attitudes are more important to the training effectiveness than are course-content variables (Fleishman and Mumford, 1989; Quin ˜ones, 1997).

Baldwin and Magjuka (1991) further posited that training motivation is a mediator between the pre-information and training outcomes. Therefore, this study hypothesized that:Trainees who possess higher training motivation will demonstrate more training effectiveness (i.e. reactions, learning, and transfer motivation) than those who have low motivation.The evaluation of training outcomes; the primary goal of any training program is to impart to employees a new set of KSAs, behavior, or attitudes. Training effectiveness refers to the extent to which the training objectives are achieved. In general, training effectiveness is evaluated by measuring a number of training and transfer outcomes. Kirkpatrick (1976) suggested that reactions, learning, behavior, and results are four measures that are relevant for the evaluation of training outcomes. In Kirkpatrick’s model, reactions refer to the extent to which trainees like and feel about training.

Learning refers to the knowledge and skills acquired by trainees. Behavior refers to the transfer of knowledge to the work situation by

trainees. Results refer to the attainment of organizational objectives such as absenteeism, personnel turnover, productivity gains and cost reduction.

Although Alliger and Janak (1989) criticized that the appropriate relationships among these four measures, the measures are still a useful and valuable heuristic for evaluating training outcomes (Colquitt et al., 2000; Kraiger et al., 1993; Gagne and Medsker, 1996; Quin ˜ones, 1997). For instance, Alliger et al. (1997) augmented Kirkpatrick’s training criteria: They divided training reactions into affective and utility reactions, and learning into immediate post-training knowledge, knowledge retention, and behavior/skill demonstration. Alliger et al. also found that utility reactions were more strongly related to transfer than affective reactions. Kraiger et al. extended Kirkpatrick’s work and presented a comprehensive classification scheme of learning outcomes. They classified learning outcomes into three major categories: skill-based or behaviorally based learning, cognitive learning, and affective learning. Also, Gagne and Medsker classified learning outcomes into five types such as verbal information, intellectual skills, motor skills, attitudes, and cognitive strategies.

In Colquitt et al.’s training motivation model, learning outcomes (i.e. declarative knowledge, skill acquisition, and reactions etc.) are considered as immediate training effectiveness, and transfer and job performance are considered as post-training effectiveness. Axtell et al. (1997) found that trainees’ transfer motivation was positively associated with short-term transfer and long-term transfer after returning to their work sites. That is, transfer was measured by trainees themselves or by managers after periods of one month and one year. Baldwin and Magjuka (1991) also emphasized that learning and transfer will only occur when trainees have both the capability and the intention to transfer the learned skills on the job. As indicated before, this study used training learning and utility reactions as measures for evaluating immediate training effectiveness; and it also used transfer motivation as criterion variable which is generally considered to be associated with transfer effectiveness.

Limitations and future research Limitations of this study and suggestions for future research should be addressed. First, the sample of this study consisted of more young employees (the oldest was 35 years old); the subjects chosen for this study yielded greater internal validity. While field studies are traditionally thought to provide more external validity, this study was enabled to control for various threats to internal validity such as maturation and mortality. It yet still utilized a real training and learning environment that produced objective consequences such as the grade of the two tests. The style of the training class was offered with computer-aided training. It may not be generalizable in lecture and classroom fashion that are non computer-aided. Nonetheless, it encourages future researchers to extend this study into more traditional organizational settings and different types of training programs.

Second, while this study found that supervisors’ training framing (i.e. training is a good way to improve employee job-related skills) impacted trainees’ attitudes and in turn further influenced their training outcomes, other contextual determinants of trainees’ motivation, such as another type of training framing (e.g. training is a necessity of employee survivals) and post-training accountability (e.g. training performance is tied to job performance vs. training performance is tied to rewards) and organizational climate (e.g. emotional social support; perceived organizational support), remained unexplored. Last, future research should examine the interactive effects of these variables on training. The idea of examining the interactive effect on a person (e.g. anxiety or conscientiousness), and context (e.g. computer-based training or lecture and classroom fashion training) on learning (e.g. Howell et al., 1986) can be further explored. This line of research suggests a “fit” approach to modeling training outcomes and posits that a good match between individual differences and contextual settings better explains levels of training outcomes than any single predictor. Driving from the idea of this current study, future research may investigate the interactive effects of training framing and personality (e.g. conscientiousness, neuroticism) or training framing and organizational climate (e.g. emotional social support; perceived organizational support) on employees’ training outcomes.

Managers’ Jobs and Their Training Needs:

Since the beginning of the century, what managers are for and what managers do have constituted an interesting, often controversial, debate to which many theorists, practitioners and researchers have made valuable contributions. For Vodafone; not only individuals were looking to improve their work-life balance, but also Vodafone saw the need to introduce greater flexibility into the working culture if it was to attract and retain the highest-caliber staff, especially in technical and senior-management roles.

The Task ManagersThe traditional approach to management is typically characterized by the over emphasis which is placed on the task-related aspects of the manager’s job. As organizations were viewed as rational logical entities with a hierarchy, role authority and offices, there was a need for the standardization of work practices, a hierarchy of authority and command structure, and a formal system of rules and regulations of communication between managers and those who were managed. In this way, the concept of the rational manager was conceived with a profound influence on the ways in which organizations are generally structured and the ways in which issues such as managerial prerogatives and authority have been dealt with.Even today managers are expected to deal rationally with issues which emerge at work, as though the world of organization was structured mechanistically and was managed and controlled like machines.

The followers of the school of scientific management assert that the process of management requires managers to learn to perform eight basic functions. The “functional manager”, therefore, was charged with determining, forecasting, planning, organizing, directing, co-ordinating, controlling and communicating with their employees, peers, clients and those who were in some way related to the organization.In order to be a successful manager it was necessary not only to be technically competent but also to recognize that the managers had to get the job done through people, which required the development of the eight categories of skills. So, managers, especially those in industry, have to be able to deal effectively with information and communication systems. The manager was regarded as a specialist in effectively handling and processing data, whose prime function was to be sensitive to information available and to use it as a basis for decision making, this function became the main theme for operations research or management science. Management trainers and educators who were familiar with the scientific management philosophy therefore saw their role as enabling managers to be able to recognize, control and design work, tasks and activities so that the workers could perform more effectively.Later, with the progressive use of computers in organizations, management information system (MIS) advocates saw the role of information and the ability of managers to manage information as the most important aspect of their job. MIS training packages still remain a popular aspect of the typical management training course.

The Human ManagersIt was argued that managers should treat employees as people and, therefore, they had to be trained to become aware of “the motives for their own behavior and the effects of that behavior on other people”. This change of attitude has had a profound effect on the role and the nature of management trainers and on how they view their work. Researchers such as Likert, Maslow, Whyte, Walker and Guest, and Hertzberg concerned themselves with the welfare of employees in both a social and psychological context, relating it to proper leadership and supervision, and effective means of motivating people at work. “The attempt to identify and define what constitutes job satisfaction has carried with it a need to understand the process of motivation at work”Transformation improves performance of employees and organization as a whole.Although well-established as a successful multinational telecommunication provider, in 2008 Vodafone recognized the need for radical structural reform of its business practices company-wide. Some of the most important drivers for change had emerged from Vodafone’s own 80,000-strong global workforce. Employee surveys highlighted the need to improve the company’s information technology, as staff wanted to interact more effectively with customers and collaborate with other parts of the Vodafone business.Polls also showed that individuals were looking to improve their work-life balance and Vodafone saw the need to introduce greater flexibility into the working culture

if it was to attract and retain the highest-caliber staff, especially in technical and senior-management roles.Externally too, the company was not immune from the broader economic downturn putting pressure on budgets. In addition, the emergence of the cloud and the rapid growth of mobility – highlighted by mainstream growth of smart-phones, soon to be followed by tablet technology – were seen as potentially game-changing for businesses of all sizes.As these and other drivers for change converged, one thing was clear: as a global provider of mobile services to other businesses, Vodafone had to lead by example in putting mobility at the heart of a leaner, more flexible and employee-friendly working environment.

Step-by-step approach:

Despite undertaking what would be a process of radical business transformation, the company saw that this would best be achieved in a controlled, evolutionary way. The change-management team identified that; senior-management involvement was essential to success, if employees were to avoid seeing the project as just another back-office project.At the same time, the company recognized the need to involve staff directly from day one, help them to understand the depth of change required and excite them. As part of this, the program started with a series of discussions throughout the organization addressing a single question: ‘‘what will the world look like, three to five years from now?’’Like most businesses, the company had historically been built around a traditional, desk-bound, office-based environment. It soon became clear, however, that the workplace of the future – and so the company’s vision – would look very different based on the ability to perform any function, from any location, on any device, seamlessly.The common vision that emerged was more than just a wireless future; it saw mobility as business as usual – something that was inherent in the way the business worked rather than simply bolted on to existing processes.

This would be underpinned by adopting flexible working across the company, which meant that managers and staff were empowered between them; to set the parameters of when, where and how work would be delivered. In other words, individuals would be measured on productivity, rather than the numbers of hours spent in the office.This would be achieved by ensuring that all change adhered to four guiding principles:1. Mobility will be at the heart of the transformation;2. Users can choose the devices they wish to use;3. The point of convergence will be in the cloud; and4. The cloud will provide the opportunity for businesses to streamline operations and introduce efficiencies throughout the organization.

The role of training:

Change would involve evolving with the technology, adapting business processes and cultural change. This had a number of implications. Having established that its vision of an interconnected and integrated mobile future would best be realized through a unified-communications platform hosted in-house within a private cloud, end-users would need training at every stage of the process.

This was essential for everyone to understand and take full advantage of the latest devices, mobile, broadband access, instant-messaging programs, video conferencing and online collaboration tools like WebEx, file sharing and shared workspace.Employees needed to learn how to get the most out of this new flexibility and, in particular, to cast off the old habit of treating telephones as devices only to make and receive calls.This is easier to say than to do. Change would have to be gradual, fully supported by training. The change team recognized that switching from a desk-bound to a more open environment would not be an easy transition for all staff.In order for everyone to ‘‘get it’’, individuals would have to be shown and taught how to use the new functionality and adopt new processes in a way that would identifiably benefit both them and the business.The ideal training regime would be little and often, focusing on individual aspects of change. Rather than long sessions heavy on detail that were likely to result in poor levels of performance.‘‘The commitment to this new, more flexible way of working was exemplified early on by the UK chief executive, who moved from a private office to hot-desking in an open-plan area. This immediately made him more open and approachable, setting the tone for all the other senior managers across the business.’’Knowledge retention, short, repeated training bursts were introduced at the start of other meetings, especially those involving senior or middle managers.

The tools and techniques learned were then put into practice immediately following each session. This was found to be much more successful, both in cementing new ideas in the minds of the people attending and in spreading new ways of working virally throughout the business.Since unified communications were adopted throughout the organization, employees are able to pick up messages and no longer need miss any call.

This seamless service has improved the speed and quality of customer service, slashing decision times and enabling smarter, more informed working. Pricing changes that could take up to 90 days to execute now take only four days. Customer complaints have also dropped by 57 percent in two years.Throughout this period, Vodafone made regular checks to confirm that change really was bringing improvements. Staff surveys measured how the change

program was being received and the change team worked closely with HR to identify where technology could meet identified needs.The result of this was that, at the end of the program, net job-satisfaction scores rose from just over 6 out of 10 to 9.

Cultural change:

Making a cultural shift is the biggest challenge for any change program. The Vodafone team learned quickly that outlining technical benefits alone was an insufficient inducement to drive change. People needed strong reasons to change, including a clear view of where this would take them, explicit illustration of the benefits to individuals and clarity on what not changing would mean for the business.They also needed help to break long-held habits and so the change team had to evolve tactics and techniques to make cultural change happen.

One example was that middle managers in particular were slow to adopt video-conferencing, as they were unable to continue e-mailing without being seen and appearing distracted. At the same time, while many staff understood the basic features, they were unsure of how to use advanced functions such as sharing documents in conference mode.

The little and often training approach successfully solved this problem. A series of 10-minute tutorials was run at the start of management meetings, which quickly overcame any initial resistance.As senior staff learned how to use the full functionality of video-conferencing, this quickly cascaded down to their direct reports, who were encouraged to find out more for themselves. Ultimately, video-conferencing usage increased by 500 percent.

Lessons learned:

Vodafone learned many lessons along the way, including the importance of reinvesting early savings back into the change program rather than pushing them straight to the bottom line. Similarly, it quickly became apparent that there must be sufficient investment in training, in particular finding the right way to train at the right times. It was also imperative that senior‘‘Individuals would be measured on productivity, rather than the numbers of hours spent in the office.’’ management provide unequivocal support for the change team, in order to build irresistible momentum from the start.Another key lesson was the importance of preserving teams, in order to ensure that individuals do not feel isolated or left behind. To achieve this, Vodafone saw that each team would need to make a collective commitment to come together regularly.

This could be virtually as well as in person but the goal was the same; for both managers and team members to maintain team relationships and their connection to each other in supporting and encouraging collective change.For the business, productivity has increased by 15 percent. For staff, work-life balance has improved, as the reduction in commuting has freed time that can be deployed for other purpose. Flexible working has meant that people can design work around their everyday lives to a much greater extent.Flexibility and openness to change have now become embedded in the culture of the organization. The program to realize its vision may have taken three years for the company and its 80,000 employees to complete. However, both the company and its staff agree that the journey has been well worth taking.Throughout the journey, perhaps the most important universal truth reinforced, rather than lesson learned, has been the important role each employee played in making change happen. From the outset the whole project was fundamentally people-orientated and the new organization, just as the old, would only be as successful as its staff.The real key to success therefore has been to keep employees informed and involved at every stage. This has helped them to respond positively to the benefits to the individual in terms of a more appealing way of working as well as greater productivity and customer responsiveness to the business.

Conclusion:

For the training program & training effectiveness:Developing and conducting an effective training program becomes a need for almost each company nowadays, which depends on 2 factors mainly the training content and context. Training content factors would include communication of the trainer, clarity of the trainer, and practical application, while the context factors would include venue of the program, food served, and recreation facilities provided. The training programs must be developed in the excellence way that suits the needs of management and non-managerial employees; so that a greater percentage of such employees feel that the program is worthwhile in terms of costs. The communication skills development component of the program also needs to be enlarged. Length of the training program should be increased so that training schedule may not be hectic for the trainees and they are able to grasp the contents of the program in a more effective manner. Also the pace of the training program should be right, neither too fast nor too slow; so that the trainees grasp the content and don't get bored. Effective training methods should be added like games, role play, case studies, group games, etc. in order to maintain balanced session. Planning a common orientation program for managers and non-managers as a tool for their healthy integration using the findings of the study to bridge the gap between the satisfaction levels of the two groups would be a workable proposition.On the other hand; when measuring the trainees' attitudes and training effectiveness, the results suggests that both individual and contextual factors

impacted training outcomes. General self-efficacy partially mediated the relationship between training framing and training motivation and subsequently influenced training outcomes. Thus, to raise employees’ general self-efficacy, learning self-efficacy and training motivation, managers should clearly address the importance of training before they attend the training. Finally, more research should be conducted to investigate the form in which individual attributes and situational constraints are associated with training outcomes.

For designing effective training program and its effect on performance:A well-designed training program has built-in reinforcement. It is not necessary to reinforce learning if the skills and competences emphasized during the training really assist employees in the performance of their job duties and responsibilities; i.e. if the employees are able to actually use what they have learned. However, external reinforcement becomes necessary only if, the skills acquired are not instrumental in enhancing job completion. It requires thoughtful, serious planning as well as paying great attention to details and desired outcomes in order to develop a successful training program. Difficulties arise when there is a lack of a coherent foresight regarding what training is expected to accomplish and how those accomplishments will be measured and rewarded. If training outcomes are not fulfilling initial expectations, it may be time to rethink how it was conceived, implemented and managed. So, engaging managers in employee training are legitimate and responsive to actual company and employee needs. Management training plays a crucial role in achieving development, whether in the case of an individual manager, an organization or at a national level. Yet, realization of this objective requires conscious attempts on the part of training institutions and of management trainers and educators to meet both the maintenance as well as change-agent requirement of the trainees and their organizations. For the clients, effective development requires suitable planned change and management training, and trainers can play a decisive role in realizing this goal.As the generation of human capital through training has been considered a source of competitive advantage that gives rise to better results by means of extraordinary income, the profits obtained should be greater than the costs deriving from imparting training programs. There are previous papers that only found slight indications of the relationship between training and performance. We believe that in works such as those of Huselid (1995), Koch and McGrath (1996) or Huselid et al. (1997), it was due to the use of an inadequate indicator of the training performed by the company. A more generic indicator of human resource development practices was used, as well. In the last of the cited works, its technical measurements of human resource management do not explain the results obtained. We do not agree with their interpretation of this fact, insofar as they assume that said practices are more institutionalized in large companies, and as such, have ceased to be an adequate means of differentiation from their competitors, meaning that they are not useful tools to obtain a competitive advantage. In our opinion, large companies do, in fact, differentiate themselves in orientation and effort in their human resource policies. We also believe that the results obtained from our work as far as training is concerned are a good demonstration of this. In Delaney

and Huselid’s (1996) work, it is suggested that high performance practices in human resource management, which include selectivity in hiring, training and incentives, are positively related with measurements of perception of the organization’s role. We are also given to understand that the authors put greater effort into measuring training, since they use an index constructed from an average of three items. However, in the cited work, subjective valuations of the results of the organization with regard to the competitors of the sector were employed. Although some investigations have found that the subjective role measurements are correlated with objective measurements (Powell, 1992), other authors such as Boselie et al. (2005) are critical of this, since they introduce a response social bias error, and as a consequence, we believe that the use of objective measurement in our work has permitted us to reduce possible measurement error. We also find that it is interesting to highlight the results found in Arago´n et al. (2003) work, since they found training activities a positive influence on company results, although they did not totally accept their hypothesis. In their work, the small companies dominated the study’s sample, and their human resource management systems, and specific training systems, were not very developed. This explains why there was little relationship between training and performance. This size bias problem was resolved, in our work, by establishing a size filter. Despite the results obtained we consider it important to point out some of the study’s limitations that we are aware of. The first limitation stems from the nature of the study. Training generates human capital, an intangible asset that is very difficult to evaluate. That's why it's easy to measure investment and effort spent on the training, while it's difficult to know about the degree of transfer from what is learnt to service provided. This study does not take into consideration the effects on smaller-sized Companies, as only companies with over than 50 employees were included in the sample. On the other hand, we must consider the possibility that a reverse causality effect may occur, in other words, that companies have made a greater training effort because their good results have allowed them to do so. Last, an objective indicator of results has been used, but only based on countable results. It would be desirable to observe if the results found are maintained in the same meaningful way with other kinds of results indicators, working with either market or productivity indicators. These last two limitations indicate some of the future lines of work that our investigation suggests, relative to the general nature of the obtained results. It would be desirable to extend the posited research to other sectors in which it would be possible to apply other result indicators.

Practically we can conclude that:

If the same study were to be conducted in other units of the organization and the results compared, then the findings would be enriched. And the company can also get further valuable suggestions for making not only the Excellence Way but also other training programs popular across the organization.companies are beginning to recognize that learning truly is a lifelong endeavor and developmental activities such as employee training have a profoundly positive impact on job satisfaction, productivity and, ultimately, overall profitability.