The Relationship Between Satisfaction With On-The-Job Training And Overall Job Satisfaction

This study examined the relationship between satisfaction with employer-provided workplace training and overall job satisfaction. Survey completion data were obtained from 301 customer and technical service employees in nine different organizations. Job duties for employees in these positions are employer specific. As such, these employees rely on their employers for initial and ongoing job training. Organizations represented included those in manufacturing, technology, service, and government. A significant relationship was found between job training satisfaction and overall job satisfaction. Time spent in training, training methodologies, and type of training were determined to be significant in their relationships to job training satisfaction. The methodology used in training made a significant difference in job training satisfaction. Most preferred by respondents were methodologies that involved face-to-face interaction provided by an instructor or job coach. Also found were significant interactions between job tenure and employment type (customer service representative or technical service representative) when examined with job training satisfaction. Based on these findings, recommendations were made for practitioners in the fields of training and human resource development, as well as for managers of employees working in customer and technical service occupations. Introduction and Purpose Opportunities for training and development are major factors in decisions regarding peoples’ careers. They are factors evaluated in the job hunting process by prospective employees, are cited in surveys as to why workers accept jobs with certain employers, and are noted as reasons why employees stay with an employer and why they leave one employer for another. Despite the importance of workplace training, many research studies on job satisfaction do not address satisfaction with workplace training as an element of overall job satisfaction, and many job satisfaction survey instruments do not include a “satisfaction with workplace training” component. They include Wood’s (1986) Job Satisfaction measure, which examines satisfaction with information, variety and freedom, the ability to complete tasks, and pay and security. The Job Descriptive Index (JDI), an index described by Buckley and Carraher (1992) as “. instrumental in advancing knowledge about the job satisfaction construct” (p. 534) defines overall job satisfaction using six subscales: satisfaction with the work itself, supervision, coworkers, pay, and promotions. Should satisfaction with job training in relation to overall job satisfaction be studied? Should it be included as a construct of overall job satisfaction? Bartlett (2001) found a positive relationship between workplace training and organizational commitment, and concluded that his study “. suggests that human resource development professionals can . adapt new research methods to demonstrate to organizational decision makers that training and development contributes to desired workplace attitudes.which may in turn influence behaviors such as absenteeism and turnover” (p. 349). Other researchers have come to similar conclusions, and several have noted the importance of future research on workplace attitudes in relation to training (Bartlett, 2001; Tannenbaum, 1991). In his study of new employee training, Tannenbaum (1991) noted that “. training can induce positive or negative impressions and attitudes (which) trainees carry with them into the workplace” (p. 767). So important are workplace attitudes, Bartlett (2001) argued, that they could even be considered as outcomes of training. Nordhaug (1989) studied reward functions that are inherent in training (from the employee perspective), and found that “The extent to which training actually contributes to generating individual rewards has, however, been virtually absent on the research agenda” (p. 374). Tansky and Cohen (2001) noted that while considerable research has been conducted on organizational commitment, satisfaction, coaching, and employee development as individual or organizational outcomes, “. very little research has been done on the relationship between organizational commitment, employee development, satisfaction with employee development and coaching “(p. 287). “Future research could focus on the construct validity of satisfaction with employee development as a new job satisfaction facet” (p. 296). This research study added to the body of research on job training and job satisfaction by examining the following issues: • What is the relationship between job training satisfaction and overall job satisfaction for employees who learn their jobs while on the job. • What is the relationship between time spent in training, type of training, training methodology and satisfaction with workplace training. • What are the relationships between a variety of demographic variables, including employment status, specific job type, job tenure, age, race/ethnicity, and gender and satisfaction with job training. Research Methods and Procedures To answer the research questions, a convenience sample of 552 customer and technical service employees in nine major organizations in the United States and Canada were given the Job Training and Job Satisfaction Survey, a 55-item, nine facet scale to assess employee attitudes about aspects of the job and aspects of job training. The job satisfaction aspects of this survey originate, in part, from Paul Spector’s (1997) Job Satisfaction Survey. Additional questions measure employee satisfaction with on-the-job training. Nine demographic questions are also included. Organizations chosen for this study employ customer service and technical service representatives who provide service and support to either end (retail) customers or wholesale customers who both purchase and/or service the products or services provided by these organizations. All these employees learned their jobs on-the-job rather than in their preparatory education before employment. The Job Training and Job Satisfaction Survey was posted on the Internet. Respondents with Internet access were asked to complete the survey online. Those without were given paper copies of the survey. A total of 301 customer/technical service employees completed the survey, for a response rate of 55 percent (Schmidt, 2004). Findings and Conclusions A major research finding in this study was the high degree of relationship between job training satisfaction and overall job satisfaction among employees in customer/technical service positions. What does this result mean to employees, to organizations, and to researchers? From an employee standpoint, it means that training received is related to a significant portion of the satisfaction experienced on the job. It means that employees value training, and deem it a necessary part of the job. Examined on another level, those employed in customer contact positions are often motivated by the ability to please their customers. Satisfaction with job training may allow them to be better able to do exactly that, which ties into both job satisfaction, and ultimately, customer satisfaction. From an organizational standpoint, this strong relationship clearly demonstrates the value that customer contact employees place on job training, and the importance of the powerful tool that is job training. Organizations can take advantage of this tool, and the results will be better trained, more satisfied employees, as well as employees who are more valuable to the organization. Job training ultimately benefits both the employee and the organization. For researchers, this study adds to the body of research on job training satisfaction and overall job satisfaction, but the type of employee studied puts a slight twist on the two topics. The study confirms that job training satisfaction is related to job satisfaction among employees in a wider variety of employment situations than previously studied. Training methodology was found to be an important factor in the job training satisfaction equation. Respondents whose preferred training methodology was used most often were more satisfied with the training they received than respondents who preferred a methodology other than the one used most often in their job training. Although respondents had participated in all five methodologies noted in the survey (instructor-led training; one-on-one training; computerbased training; job shadowing, and self-study or video-based training), the methodology preferred predominantly by employees in this study was instructor-led training. This was the methodology most often received by these employees as well. Is instructor-led training the most preferred because it is the most received and people are most familiar with it? There are several reasons why this may not be the case. In further categorizing the training methodologies noted above, one could argue that instructor-led training, one-on-one training, and job shadowing are fairly similar in that they involve an instructor teaching a single student (in the case of one-onone training) or students (in the case of formal, instructor-led classroom training), or in the case of job shadowing, an employee learns by observing and questioning an experienced employee or coach. All have similar characteristics, and all involve a higher degree of human interaction involving a learner and an employee with experience (an experienced employee, coach or instructor, for example) than computer-based training, job shadowing, or self-study (including video-based training). It was found that the methodologies involving an instructor or coach were preferred significantly more than the more solitary type methodologies (computer-based training, or self study including video-based training). One survey category of commonly-used methodologies, those of self-study or video-based training, was even found to negatively relate to job training satis