Linking Motivation to Workplace Learning Transfer

Pigeonholing or learning instrument?

“…It is possible that participants bring emotions into the training room from the outside (Short and Yorks, 2002), but those emotions generated by the course process as well as through the interactions between and among participants and facilitator can equally affect test takers’ reactions. After all, personality testing is a highly personal matter that – when discussed “publicly” in the context of an MD initiative – may cause hope, anger or other emotions that could affect the participants’ motivation to transfer (Gegenfurtner et al , 2009; Bates et al , 2014).…”

“…These studies refer to the domains of fairness, learning and behavioral change, all of which link to the use of personality testing in developmental contexts. Although many different influencing factors to test takers’ reactions are suggested as part of these domains, not all of these are equally important in the MD context where transfer of training (Burke and Hutchins, 2007; Blume et al , 2010; Bates et al , 2014; Choi and Roulston, 2015) and the application of adult learning principles play a role (Chalofsky, 2007; Garavan et al , 2015; Fenwick, 2016). Therefore, only those factors that are closely linked to the MD context were selected for the present study (Table I).…”

“…Test takers’ reactions matter because positive reactions can lead to motivation and learning – two important drivers that contribute to the “transfer of training” (Gegenfurtner et al , 2009). Transfer of training describes the extent to which the learning that results from a training experience is implemented on the job, which in turn leads to significant changes in work performance (Bates et al , 2014; Choi and Roulston, 2015). Without the acquisition of new knowledge, nothing can be transferred from the MD program to the workplace, and without motivation, test takers are not likely to spend the time and energy to transfer new insights into their jobs.…”