Retraining Climate as a Predictor of Retraining Success and as a Moderator of the Relationship between Cross-Job Retraining Time Estimates and Time to Proficiency in the New Job

Abstract

The limited empirical research on lateral cross-job retraining supports the idea that analysis of employee transferability of skills is related to retraining success in the new assignment. The present study extends this line of research by investigating retraining climate as an additional predictor of retraining success and as a moderator of the relationships between cross-job retraining time estimates and time to proficiency in the new assignment. Of the three climate dimensions studied, situational constraints (but not organizational support or supervisory support) exhibited the predicted direct and moderator effects.

The effects of training design, individual characteristics and work environment on transfer of training

“…Chiaburu & Tekleab, 2005; Facteau et al ., 1995; Tesluk et al ., 1995), showing evidence that trainees can accurately self‐report their levels of training transfer. Finally, as mentioned before, the results of this research using self‐report data are in fair agreement with previous transfer of training results using both self‐report and supervisor evaluations of performance (Lance et al ., 2002; Tracey et al ., 1995). This convergence of results using different research paradigms provides evidence that self‐report data, collected anonymously, may be adequate for the evaluation of transfer of training.…”

“…An interesting aspect of the findings of this study is a comparison with previous research using a different methodology (Baldwin & Ford, 1988; Lance et al ., 2002; Rouiller & Goldstein, 1993; Tracey et al ., 1995), as well as using participants from a country other than the United States. Most of the cited transfer of training research has used pre‐post designs using a sample from the United States, whereas this study used a post‐test design with a sample from Portugal.…”

“…One strength of this research was that it allowed us to compare the results of transfer of training research using two different methodologies. One methodology assumes that in order to evaluate transfer of training, one must have evaluations of changes in job performance as measured by persons (sources) other than the trainees (Lance et al ., 2002; Tracey et al ., 1995). These other persons could include supervisors, co‐workers and customers.…”

“…However, a number of studies have shown that environmental factors are important for understanding the transfer of training process (e.g. Baldwin & Ford, 1988; Lance et al ., 2002; Rouiller & Goldstein, 1993; Tracey et al ., 1995).…”

“…Bates et al ., 2000; Brinkerhoff & Montesino, 1995) that indicate that supervisory support is a critical variable in transfer of training. The results regarding the hypothesis in which it was predicted that supervisor support would affect transfer of training could seem puzzling at first because the previous literature has typically supported this relationship (Baldwin & Ford, 1988; Lance et al ., 2002; Rouiller & Goldstein, 1993; Tracey et al ., 1995). However, some gaps persist in the literature regarding the specific supervisory factors that influence transfer.…”