Supervisory practices and training transfer: lessons from Malaysia

Abstract

Extant training transfer literature has paid little attention to supervisory practices, especially in the context of developing countries. This study investigates the influence of supervisory practices on training transfer via motivation to learn in the Malaysian public sector context. This study is one of the first to explore the impact of supervisor assignment decisions on training transfer through the mediating effect of motivation to learn. Quantitative data was collected from 306 employees working in a large government agency. The findings have demonstrated that supervisor support, communication, and assignment decisions are valid predictors of motivation to learn, leading to training transfer. Such findings have important implications for theory development by elucidating factors within supervisory practices which are critical for motivation to learn and training transfer. Implications for human resource management include the need for practitioners to expand supervisors' role and competency in promoting motivation to learn and training transfer.

A Study on the Motivation to Transfer Training in the Banking Industry of Bangladesh

“…As the theoretical underpinnings of support are unclear, this relationship requires further investigation. Supervisors are usually involved with the planning and execution of training programmes at the organization (Ng, 2015). Sometimes, supervisors attend external training programmes and impart training knowledge to their subordinates through formal and informal in-house training sessions (Ghosh, Chauhan, & Rai, 2015).…”

A Supervisors' Perspective on Their Role in Transfer of Training

“…Nijman and Gelissen () did start from a multidimensional conception of supervisor support and reported that the trainees in their sample perceived that they received little support from their supervisors, but they did not further differentiate between different types of supervisor support. In a recent study, Ng () examined two of the less explored supervisor practices in the training context, namely, supervisor communication and supervisor assignment decisions. The findings pointed out that if assignment decisions originated from the supervisors and if supervisors discuss the training objectives, provide feedback on the application of training, and inform employees of the value of the training program for their job, this will raise the employees’ motivation to learn, which in turn will enhance transfer of training.…”

“…An indirect HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT QUARTERLY • DOI: 10.1002/hrdq relationship has been reported most commonly when trainee characteristics are introduced as mediators (Ghosh, Chauhan, & Rai, 2015 ). Supervisor support has been found to positively relate to motivation to transfer (e.g., Bhatti, Battour, Sundram, & Othman, 2013 ;Chauhan, Ghosh, Rai, & Shukla, 2016 ;Chiaburu et al, 2010 ;Massenberg, Schulte, & Kauffeld, 2016 ;Massenberg, Spurk, & Kauffeld, 2015 ;Ng, 2015 ;Nijman et al, 2006 ) and motivation to learn (e.g., Al-Eisa et al, 2009 ;Facteau, Dobbins, Russell, Ladd, & Kudisch, 1995 ), which in turn were positively related to transfer outcomes. Correspondingly, supervisor support is indirectly related to transfer of training by influencing the trainees' belief that they are able to complete tasks and reach goals (i.e., self-efficacy; e.g., Al-Eisa et al, 2009 ) and by inducing a learning goal orientation in trainees (i.e., orientation toward acquiring competences and seeing learning opportunities; e.g., Chiaburu et al, 2010 ).…”

Measuring transfer of training: Review and implications for future research

“…It should be noted that the studies reported more use of scales with an odd number of response choices (49 instruments; 70%) than those with an even number (eight instruments; 11%). Results also show that the majority of the instruments used statements with general references to transfer (e.g., “I have changed my work behaviour in order to be consistent with the materials taught in training programs,” Ng, 2015, p. 229). This observation is representative of 40 instruments (57%), compared with 26 instruments (37%) with specific referents (e.g., “The staff shared relevant client information that was obtained while performing the audit with team members,” Sookhai & Budworth, 2010, p. 266).…”