The direct and indirect effects of organizational tolerance for sexual harassment on the effectiveness of sexual harassment investigation training for HR managers

Abstract

Using a pretest/post‐test, survey design, we examine whether organizational tolerance for sexual harassment (OTSH) affects HR managers' knowledge and myth‐based attitudes regarding sexual harassment, following training intended to improve HR managers' ability to conduct an internal investigation related to sexual harassment. We also examine the mediating role of motivation to learn in these relationships. Results indicated that OTSH has a direct effect on knowledge about internal investigations, but not on myth‐based sexual harassment attitudes. Furthermore, motivation to learn partially mediates the effect of OTSH on knowledge and fully mediates the effect of OTSH on myth‐based attitudes. This study represents the first empirical investigation of OTSH on sexual harassment training outcomes (e.g., knowledge and attitudes) and the first study to investigate training with a sample of HR managers, who are responsible for investigating and managing sexual harassment claims within organizations. We hope to prompt further research that considers the role of context in sexual harassment training. In addition, as the current study is the first to consider the importance of how harassment investigations are handled, we hope to stimulate additional work in this previously unresearched area.

Beyond demographic identities and motivation to learn: The effect of organizational identification on diversity training outcomes

“…In particular, motivation to learn (i.e., "a specific desire of the trainee to learn the content of the training program"; Noe, 1986, p. 743) and expectancy theory (Vroom, 1964) have been used to explain training success by posing that individuals will be motivated to learn from training when they perceive that training will help them successfully execute a task that will lead to a valued outcome (Bezrukova et al, 2016;Colquitt, LePine, & Noe, 2000). Although meta-analytic evidence suggests that there is a clear relationship between motivation to learn and general training outcomes (Colquitt et al, 2000), past diversity training research has produced mixed results regarding the relationship between motivation to learn and diversity-related training outcomes (Cheung, Goldberg, King, & Magley, 2017;Goldberg, Rawski, & Perry, 2018). Due to the clear connection between motivation to learn and expectancy theory, past mixed findings may be explained by the job-relatedness of a diversity training session.…”

“…Due to the clear connection between motivation to learn and expectancy theory, past mixed findings may be explained by the job-relatedness of a diversity training session. Specifically, diversity training effectiveness appears to be predicted by motivation to learn only when the employee's job role is related to diversity management (e.g., human resource [HR] professionals responsible for investigating harassment claims; Goldberg et al, 2018).…”

“…The motivation to participate in a voluntary training is a distinct motivation from demographic identity motives to support and enhance one's demographic ingroup, which may create an "us-vs.-them" mentality within the organization (Rawski, 2017;Tinkler, 2012) and limit the motivation to participate to only those training programs that are perceived to benefit one's demographic in-group. Likewise, organizational identification's effect on voluntary participation will be unique from the effect of job-related motivations to learn, which will likely motivate participation only for those whose jobs are diversity related (Cheung et al, 2017;Goldberg et al, 2018).…”

“…In addition, organizational identification, due to its relationship with organizational enhancement, will help employees construct a reason to learn in diversity training (e.g., to help support the organization and its members), even when their job performance will not be directly developed by diversity training. This contracts with job-related motivation to learn, which may only predict diversity training knowledge application in diversity management-related jobs (Cheung et al, 2017;Goldberg et al, 2018).…”

“…These items were based on the content of the diversity-related training sessions and were verified to capture the learning objectives of the diversity training program by the training coordinator, a subject matter expert. (Goldberg et al, 2018), the measures for pre-training knowledge represent formative constructs because scores for these measures were calculated by taking the sum of items rather than the mean (Coltman, Devinney, Midgley, & Venaik, 2008). As such, no measure of internal consistency was calculated for the pre-training knowledge measures.…”