strategic alignment of training, transfer

7/31/2019 Strategic ALignment of Training, Transfer

1/21

Strategic Alignment of Training,Transfer-Enhancing Behaviors,and Training Usage:A Posttraining StudyMax U. Montesino

This survey explored the alignment of an organization's specific trainingprogram with its strategLC direction and its practices to support usage ojtraining on the job. The subjects, trainees and their imm ediate supervisors ,were participants in a targeted sales training program of a Fortune 200pharmaceutical company headquartered in the Midwest. This study founda low to moderate positive correlation between the perceived alignment oftraining with the strategic direction of the organization and the presenceof practices to support usage of training. The group of trainees that self-reported very high usage of training perceived a significantly higheralignment of the training program with the strategic direction of theorganization as compared to the group of trainees that self-reported low tohigh usage of training; field managers did not differ significantly in thatregard. Trainees who self-reported very high usage of training also reporteda significantly higher presence of practices to support usage of trainingthroughout the program than thegroup of trainees that self-reported low tohigh usage of training; field managers did not differ significantly in thatregard either. The study found a positive correlation between awareness ofand commitment to the strate^c direction of the organization.

Statement of the ProblemAs the high level of corporate investment in training and development activi-


2/21

90 MontesinoM cM urrer, Van Buren, and W oodwell, 2 000). H owever, estimates suggest a lowreturn on the investment in training overall. Baldwin and Ford (1988)estimated that no more than 10 percent of these expenditures typically resultin transfer to the job, HRD professionals at the company where the currentstudy took place were concerned about the issue of low return on traininginvestment in their company as are many researchers and practitioners in thefield of HRD, and decided to study the phenom enon. O ne of the projects inthat context was the survey whose results are presented here.Some scholars and practitioners believe that HRD professionals haveemphasized much more state-of-the-art training delivery devices at the expenseof the critical connection between training site and work environment thatenhances transfer of training. This disconnection seems also to permeate thelink between training and organizational strategy in many organizations. Prac-titioners in the training department where this survey was conducted wantedto explore these issues in a flagship sales training program the organization hadbeen using for several years. The survey that this article was based on retro-spectively exp lored the perception of key training constituencies (trainees andimmediate supervisors) about the alignment of the training program with thestrategic direction of the organization and its support for training usage.Trainees and immediate supervisors also estimated the training usage that tookplace after training.The support for training usage (as operationalized by concrete transfer-enhancing practices before, during, and after training) was one of the two fociof the current s tudy In a p rior study, Brinkerhoff and M ontesino (1995,p . 265) stated that "several factors are known, or suspected, to affect usage oftraining on the job. These factors are related to the individual learner, the train-ing program, the environment in which the trainee works, and, most ofall, the trainee's immediate supervisor," The influence of the immediate sup er-visor in encouraging or discouraging usage of training has been welldocum ented in several studies (Brinkerhoff and M ontesino, 1995; H uczynskiand L ewis, 1980; M ichalak, 1981; M ontesino, 1995; Rouiller and Goldstein,1993; Tracey, Tannenbaum , and Kavanaugh, 1995; W erner, O 'Leary-Kelly,Baldwin, and Wexley, 1994), For that reason, several scholars and practition-ers (Brinkerhoff and Gill, 1994; Broad and Newstrom, 1992; Georgenson,1982; Gradous, 199 1; M ichalak, 1981; Zemke and Gunkler, 1985) call for amore active role for the key training constituenciestrainers, trainees, andimmediate supervisorsin bridging the gap between training and job perfor-mance by managing the transfer-of-training process (before, during, and aftertraining), beyond the emphasis given thus far to the instructional design and


3/21

Strategic Alignment of Training 91The second focus of this study was the connection of training with thestrategic direction of the organization. According to Woolfe (1993), strategicalignment describes the state in which the goals and activities of the business

are in harmony w ith the systems that sup port them. Two theoretical models ofthe connection between training and corporate strategy are prop osed by Semler(20 00 ) and W ognum (20 00 ). Semler proposes a model of broader organiza-tional alignment, made up of eight com ponents: the environment, vision-value-purposes, strategy, structure and systems, rewards, practices, behavior, andperformance. Semler then developed a questionnaire to measure the degree oforganizational aUgnment. In Semler's model, training is just one of the compo-nents of the organizatior 1 alignment. O n her part, W ognum (200 0) proposesa model that looks at th, HRD functions (policymaking, administration, andimp lementation) and threv levels of organizational problems (strategic, tactical,and op erational). Both Semler and W ognum tested their models emp irically,conducting research in the United States and the Netherlands. The studyreported here exp ands the literature on the measurement of the alignment oftraining with corporate strategy, from an empirical perspective.Few studies have explored quantitatively the critical link between trainingand corporate strategy, in sp ite of the growing concern about this issue in theHRD community. Among the studies that in some way address this issue are

Garnevale, Gainer, and Villet (1990); Gasner-Lotto and Associates (1988);Rosow and Zager (1988); and Training Strategies, Inc, (1992). M ore recent pub-lications have shown a certain interest; for exam ple. Lee (1996) focuses on theconcepts of payback and pay-forward from training, Cianni and Bussard (1994)on the relationship between corporate strategy and the focus of managementdevelopm ent p rograms, and Kalata (1999) on the relationship between businessstrategy and HRD in Fortune 500 companies. This interest is also evident in thediversity of papers p resented at the annual meetings of the Academy of H umanResource D evelopm ent in recent years, dealing with several aspects of the con-nection between corporate strategy and training (including Conine, 1997;C onine and C riswell, 1998; Lynham, Provo, and R uona, 1998; M ontesino,1997; M ontesino, 20 0 0; Semler, 1998, 20 00 ; W ognum, 2 00 0; W ognum andBosker, 1998), The current study exp ands our knowledge of that connection byadding more pieces to the growing body of literature in this area.The review of the literature for the study conducted by Training Strategies,Inc, (1992), found two organizational scenarios emerging as recurrent themesin the connection of training and corporate strategy. They are (1) the organi-

zation that integrates training into the strategic business planning and imple-mentation processes and (2) the organization that marginally inserts the


4/21

92 ^^^^ Montesinocontext and by the same p rocess as the business plan and are viewed in directrelationship to it . In this type of organization, trainers create rather than fol-low policy Leadership from the CEO provides tremendous leverage for inte-grating training with strategic goals. The HRD director sits at the strategicplanning table and is an active participant in formulating corporate strategies,directly influencing strategic decisions from the outset. From the involvementof the H R D director, training p lan drivers are derived. These training p lan driv-ers act as links with business activities. They guide both the focus of trainingand the needs analysis process, and they establish parameters to evaluate thevalue added from training and the return on investment. In scenario 1, eachtraining activity connects, through a strategic map, to the strategic businessgoals.Scenario 2 shows less developed l inks between t raining and corporatestrategy. The Training Strategies, Inc. , study (199 2 ) d escribed it in these terms:in scenario 2, a small, select group of top officers formulates corporate strat-egy It then transmits the strategy to lower levels in the organization in dimin-ishing communication that reduces the trainer's ability to translate strategy intotraining needs. The training plan and the business plan do not seem to stemfrom the same process. They are viewed in isolation and usually are short indurat ion and schedule-driven. The resul t is that the t raining plan remainsexclusively at the operational level, without reaching strategic status. HRD staffact as observers of the strategic p lannin g p rocess, without involvemen t in keydecisions. HRD acts as a consulting entity and receives strategic clues indirectly,usually at the implementation stagetoo late to affect these decisions.

Litt le attention has been given to the topic of the two main foci of thisstudy, the practices to support usage of training and the alignment of trainingwith the strategic direction of the organization, considered together. Explo-rations of these two issues usually include best-practice accounts, case stud-ies, and anecdotal accounts, but they seldom approach them quantitatively, asdoes this study. The variables included in this study were (a) the perceivedpresence of practices to support usage of training, (b) the perceived alignmentof training with the strategic direction of the organization, (c) the awareness ofthe strategic direction of the organization, (d) the commitment to the strategicdirection of the organization, and (e) the self-reported usage of training.Research Questions and HypothesesThe purpose of the current study was to answer the fol lowing research


5/21

Strategic Alignment of Training W ere awareness of and c om m itme nt to the strategic direction of the orga-

nization among the subjects in any way related?Hypotheses 1,2, and 3 are derived from the first research question. Theyaddressed the m ain conc ern of this study H yp othesis 4 is derived from the sec-ond research question. It addressed the relationship between awareness of andcommitment to the strategic direction of the organization to test , in the spe-cific case of the training program studied here, what other researchers havesuggested in other organizational settings.The researcher decided that a correlational study and com p arison of mean sprov ided the ap p rop riate statistical design for testing the hyp otheses advance d.Therefore, four statistical models were used: two parametric (Pearson product-m om ent correlation coefficient and t-test for inde p end en t me ans) and two n on -p aram etric (Sp earm an rank -orde r correlation coefficient and M ann-W hitney

U Test). The Statistical Package for Social Science (N orusis, 199 0 b) w as use dfor the statistical analysis.The four null hypotheses advanced were the following:HYPOTHESIS 1. There is no statistically significant relationship hetween the perceived

presence of practices to support usage o f training and the perceptions of traineesand managers of the alignment of the training program with the strategic directionojthe organization. That is, the correlation coefficient would he negative or equalto zero.

HYPOTHESIS 2 . There is no statistically significant relationship hetween the variahle"self-reported usage of training" and the variahle "perceived alignment of trainingwith the strate^c direction oj the organization." That is, there would he no differ-ence in the mean (or mean rank) hetween the suhjects who repo rted low to highusage oj training and those who reported very high usage oj training.

HYPOTHESIS 3 . There is no statistically significant relationship hetween the variahle"selj-reported usage oj training" and the variahle "perceived presence oj practicesto support usage oj training." That is, there would no t he a significant mean dij-jerence hetween the two groups.

HYPOTHESIS 4. There is no statistically significant relationship hetween "awarenessojthe strategic direction ojthe organization" and "comm itment to the strategicdirection ojthe organization." The correlation coejfident would he negative or equato zero.


6/21

Montesinoitself was, therefore, the substantive focus of the research; the participantsconstituted the accessible p opulation. The training program was a multifacetedprogram with classroom instruction, field experience, readings, and classroommeetings, all coordinated by the training dep artment at headquarters.The targeted sample size, determined by using Krejcie and Morgan'sapproach (1970), was 152 participants. Krejcie and Morgan's formula estab-lishes the required sample size as a function of X^NPil - P)/d^(N - 1) +X^P(1 - P). In this formula, X^ represents the table value of chi-square for onedegree of freedom at the desired confidence level (3.841); N is the populationsize; P is the population proportion (assumed to be .50 because this wouldprovide the maximum sample size); and d is the degree of accuracy expressedas a proportion (.05). Because Krejcie and Morgan's table is applicable to anydefined population, the researcher entered the table at N = 250 to obtain therequired sample size. The sample size representative of the trainees in thispopulation size was 152.

A pilot test of the questionnaire was conducted prior to the administra-tion of the survey Its validity was established by an expert panel using thequantitative technique developed by Biner (1993). The rehability was estab-lished through the use of C ronbach's alpha coefficient (C ronbach, 1951). Thecomposite indexes that quantitatively defined variables a, b, c, and dobtained standardized alpha reliability coefficients of 0.88, 0.71, 0.88, and0.96, respectively Lack of space in this article precludes the author from dis-playing the tables of each index value, frequency, percentage, and measureof variability Since the internal consistency for this self-reported instrumentis considered adequate (based on the Cronbach alpha coefficients alreadymentioned), the reliability of the measures for the variables was sufficientlyestablished.Two versions of the same questionnaire were used to collect data from

both the sales representatives who participated in the program and their fieldmanagers. The subjects did not have knowledge of any of the questions priorto receiving the questionnaire. The survey was a retrospective look at howmuch was done to encourage training usage and the connection of the train-ing program with the strategic direction of the organization.The questionnaire was mailed by the company using its internal mailingsystem to the 180 accessible trainees working in the United States and to theirrespective fifty field managers. The subjects were told that filling out the ques-tionnaire was optional and were assured that their anonymity would beprotected. To ensure anonymity, no name or code was attached to the cover


7/21

Strategic Alignment oj Training 95The researcher came into contact with the comp any after the training programwas over, as part of the efforts at evaluating the training p rogram. Although thedata collection was concluded in 1995, the author agreed with the com panynot to publish the results of the study within the five years following itsconclusion.The V ariables and M easurementsAs mentioned, the variables investigated were (a) perceived presence of prac-tices to sup port usage of training, (b) perceived alignment of training with thestrategic direction of the organization, (c) awareness of the strategic directionof the organization, (d) com mitment to the strategic direction of the organiza-tion, and (e) self-reported usage of training. Two versions of the samequestionnaire were used to collect data from participants in the trainingprogram and their respective district managers. Variables a, b, c, and d wereoperationahzed by building four composite indexes with several question-naire items (explained in the paragraphs following). These four indexes becameinterval-level variables for the purpose of data analysis. Variable e consisted ofa single-scaled question in the "Participants" and "Field M anagers" versionsof the survey.The index for variable a, perceived presence of practices to sup port usageof training, consisted of a list of well-supported research-and-best-p ractice-based syntheses of forty-one transfer-enhancing practices that were singled outfrom the literature review and suggested by the work of field experts. Theresearcher used the works of Baldwin and Ford (1988), Brinkerhoff andM ontesino (1993), Broad and N ewstrom (1992 ), Georgenson (1982 ), Gradous(1991), H uczynski and Lewis (1980 ), M ichalak (1981), Zemke and Gunkler(1985), and others to derive the list of these transfer-enhancing practicesbefore, during, and after training by trainers, trainees, and immediate super-visors. The subjects were asked to identify retrospectively the extent towhich each practice took place before, during, and after the training programin which they p articipated, on a scale of 1 to 4, where 1 meant "not at all" and4 m eant "a great deal." The scale was devised from 1 to 4 to avoid the cen-tral tendency and to try to counteract the potential for response set. Thequestionnaire included three parts related to the practices to enhance trans-fer in each of the training phases (before, during, and after training). Eachphase consisted of a series of practices that, if implemented by trainers(sixteen practices), trainees (thirteen practices), and immediate supervisors


8/21

9 6 ^ ^ ^ Montesinoavoid the central tendency and to try to counteract the potential for responseset. This index showed an alpha coefficient of 0 . 7 1 . The five questions werethe following: (1) How much do you know about the strategic direction [busi-ness goals] of the com p any? (2) H ow well defined is that strategic direction?(3) To what extent is the training program in which you [or your employee]participated aligned with the strategic direction of the company? (4) To whatextent do you agree that the strategic direction of your company is the rightone? (5) To what extent are you committed to that strategic direction? As thequest ionnaire was being developed, i t became evident that the researcherneeded to ask about respondents ' knowledge of , agreement with, and com-mitment to the strategic direction of the organization in order for the index tomake sense. The quest ion that addressed the commitment of the subjectsto the strategic direction of the organization was also included in the index thatdefined variable d.

Variables c and d were defined by two survey questions each. The indexfor variable c, awareness of the strategic direction of the organization,included the following two survey questions: (1) How much do you knowabout the strategic direction of the company? (2) How comfortable are youwith your current knowledge of the strategic direction of the company? Thisindex showed an alpha coefficient of 0.88. The index for variable d, com-mitment to the strategic direction of the organization, was built with the fol-lowing two survey questions: (1) To what extent do you agree that thestrategic direction of your company is the right one? (2) To what extent areyou committed to that strategic direction? This composite index showed analpha coefficient of 0.96.Variable e, self-reported usage of training, consisted of a scaled questionused in Brinkerhoff an d M ontesino's 19 93 stu dy The subjects rep orted theirestimations of the usage of training that took place after the completion ofthe t raining program. For the t rainees, the quest ion was this: How muchhave you actually used what you learned in the course? For the field man-agers, the question was this: O n the average, how m uc h do you think you remployee(s) have actually used in the field what they learned in the course?Again, the scale was from 1 (nothing at all) to 4 (a lot) to avoid central ten-dency and to try to counteract the possibility of response set. The data fromthis question were used as a categorical variable to test hypotheses 2 and 3.Details of the data analysis are provided in the section devoted to hypothesistesting.


9/21

Strategic Alignment oj TrainingTable 1. Selected Survey

Survey Question

ItemsValidCases

asM

Reported by TraineesPercent Low Percent

SD (1 +2) (3 +

97

High4)

147

147147147

3.29

3.632.892.91

0.65

0.560.740.62

8

22919

.1

.7

.2

.7

91

977080

.9

.3

.8

.3

H ow much do you know about 147 2.94 0.61 19.0 81.0the strategic direction of thecompany?H ow well defined is that 147 2.9 1 0.7 3 25.9 74.1strategic direction?To what extent is the training program 146 2.77 0.76 34.9 65.1aligned with the strategic directionof the company?To what extent do you agree thatthe strategic direction of yourcompany is the right one?To what ex tent are you com mittedto that strategic direction?How well is the strategic direction ofthe company communicated to you?How comfortable are you withyour current knowledge of thestrategic direction of the company?

Table 2. Selec ted Survey Items as Reported by Field ManagersValid Percent Low Percent High

Survey Question Cases M SD (1 + 2) (3 + 4)H ow much do you know about the 36 3.08 0.69 19.4 80.6strategic direction of the com pany?H ow well defined is that strategic 36 2. 80 0 .66 33 .3 66.7direction?To what extent is the training 35 2.7 4 0. 61 34. 3 65.7program aligned with the strategicdirection of the company?To what extent do you agree that 36 3.33 0.67 11.1 88.9the strategic direction of yourcompany is the right one?To what extent are you comm itted 36 3.66 0.5 3 2.8 97.2to that strategic direction?


10/21

98

ReasonTable 3 . Trainees' Reasons for Attending Training

No. of Individuals

Montesino

Percent1 attende d the training program for my individual 92 62 .8professional development.I attended the course because I wanted to contribute 31 2 1.8to the attainm ent of the comp any's strategic goal.I attende d the course because I was requested to do so. 19 13.4

Table 4. Field Managers' Rea sons for Sendin g Em ploye es to TrainingReason No. of Individuals Percent1 sent my emp loyee(s) to the course for their 2 3 65. 7individual professional development.I sent my employee(s) because I wanted to 8 22 .9contribute to the attainment of the company'sstrategic goal.I sent my emp loyee(s) because I was requested 4 11.4to do so.

Hypothesis TestingTo test null hyp othesis 1, the researcher com p uted a one-tailed Sp earma n rank-order correlation coefficient (Healey, 1990) for trainees' data and a Pearsonproduct-moment correlation coefficient (Kachigan, 1986) for field managers,both at 0 .05 level . The rat ionale for using Spearman rank-order correlat ioncoefficient with data from trainees was that index a, perceived alignment oftraining with the strategic direction of the organization, from the trainees' dataseemed to depart significantly from normality. The index showed a skewnessof 1.05. Given that level of dep artu re from normality, the researcher con sid-ered that instead of the parametric Pearson product-moment correlation coef-f icient , i ts counterpart , the nonparametr ic Spearman rank-order correlat ioncoefficient, w ou ld yield a stronge r com p ariso n and stronger con clusio ns(the non p aram etr ic Sp earm an rank -order co rrelation coefficient does no trequire assum p tion of norm ality and equality of variance in the sam p le data).In the case of field managers' data, the two indexes did not show significant


11/21

Strategic Alignment oj Training 99Table 5. Cor relation Coefficient be tw ee n the Variables "Perceived

Presence of Practices to Support Usage of Training" and"Perceived Alignm ent of Training with the Strategic Dire ction

of the. Organization" as Reported by Trainees and Field ManagersSample Valid Cases Value O ne-Tailed SigriificanceTrainees 144 .29 (Spearman rp


12/21

100 Montesino

Table 6 shows the resul ts of the M ann-W hitney U test for trainees. Theresults of this test support the hypothesis that there is a relationship betweenvariable e, self-reported usage of training, and variable b, perceived alignm entof training with the strategic direction of the organization, as reported bytrainees.Table 7 show s the results of the M ann -W hitney U test for null hypothe-sis 2 in regard to field m ana gers . To estab lish the significance of the differencebetween the mean ranks of the two groups, the two-tailed probability providedby the test (0.24) was found to be higher than the previously established alphalevel of 0.05. The results of this test indicated that the difference observed inthe mean ranks of the two groups is not significant. The difference could be

due to factors other than perceived alignment of the training program with thestrategic direction of the organization, or it could be due to chance alone.To test null hypothesis 3, a t-test for independent means (Glass andH op kins, 1984) at 0 .0 5 level was performed for trainees and a M ann-W hitney

U test for field managers. The response to the question "How much have youused what you learned in the training program?" was recoded to form twogroup s ( low to h igh = 1 + 2 + 3; very h igh = 4) . The index of variable a,perceived presence of practices to support usage of training, was used as theinterval level variable. The assumptions of the t-test were satisfied. Table 8shows the results of this test for trainees; these results allowed the researcherto reject the null hypothesis.

Table 6. Com parison of the Groups of Trainees That ReportedLow to High and Very High Usage of the Training Programin the Mean-Rank "Perceived Alignment of Trainingwith the Strategic Direction of the Organization" Scores

CroupLow to h ighVery high

Cases7 76 9

Mean Rank63.2384.96

U Value1866.0

Z Value3.1374

Two-TailedPwbability

< . O O 1

Table 7. Com parison of the Group s of Field Managers That ReportedLow to High and Very High Usage of the Training Programin the Mean-Rank "Perceived Alignment of Training withthe Strategic Direction of the Organization" Scores


13/21

Strategic Alignment of Training 101In the case of field man agers, a M ann-W hitney U test was com p uted to testnull hyp othesis 3 . Table 9 shows that the two-tailed probabili ty was 0 .85 . Toestablish the significance of the difference between the mean ranks of the twogroups, the two-tailed probability provided by the test (0.85) was higher thanthe previously established alpha level of 0.05. The results of this test indicatethat the difference observed in the mea n ran ks of the two grou p s is not signif-icant . Consequently, the researcher concluded that the results of this test donot provide evidence of the relationship hypothesized for Held managers.Null hypothesis 4 was tested with a one-tai led Spearman rank-ordercorrelation coefficient for trainees' data and a Pearson product-moment correla-tion coefficient for field managers, both at 0.05 level. The trainees' version of

nul l hypothesis 4 was tested through the Spearman rank-order correlat ioncoefficient b ecause the index of variable d, com m itm en t to the strategic direc-tion of the organization, was too skewed (1.29) to be handled with a para-m etric technique . The field ma nagers' version, on the contrary did not dep artsignificantly from normality in both indices and \vas tested through Pearsonproduct-moment correlation coefficient. Table 10 shows the results of the twocorrelation coefficients for trainees' and field managers' data. Based on theseresults, the researcher decided to reject the null hypothesis of no relationship.This test also revealed that this is a low positive relationship regarding traineesand mo derate p ositive relationship regarding field m anagers.

Table 8. Com parison of the G roups of Trainees That Reported L owto High and Very High Usage of the Training Program in the Mean

"Perceived Presence of Practices to Support Usage of Training" ScoresTwo-Tailed

Group Cases Two-Ta iled F t Value ProbabilityLow to high 76 0.56 3.99


14/21

102 MontesinoTahle 10. Correlation Coefficient be tw ee n the Variables "Aw areness

of the Strategic Direction of the Organization" and "Commitmentto the Strategic Direction of the Organization" as Reported

hy Trainees and Field ManagersSample Valid Cases Value O ne-Tailed SignificanceTrainees 147 .26 (Spearman rp


15/21

Strategic Alignment of Training 103organization than did the group of trainees that self-reported low to high usageof training. Field managers did not differ significantly in this variable. Thisfinding suggests that apparently those trainees who saw more clearly the con-nection of the training p rogram with the strategic direction of the organizationwere able to apply on the job the skills they learned in the training programin greater proportion than were the trainees who did not see that connectionclearly. This is a very relevant finding in the field of training and development.It suggests that HRD professionals should look at the strategic link of trainingas a means to encourage the application of skills learned in training. Furtherstudies in this area will help to clarify the way in which that strategic link canenhance transfer of training.

The variables studied here are related in many ways. For example, thetrainees who self-reported very high usage of training reported a significantlyhigher presence of practices to support usage of training throughout the train-ing program than did the trainees who self-reported low to high usage oftraining. Field managers did not differ significantly in this variable either. Thissuggests that the models proposed by Baldwin and Ford (1988), Broad andNewstrom (1992), and Gradous (1991) make not only theoret ical sense but ,in the specific case of the training program investigated, practical sense. Thethree models for enhancing transfer of training developed by these scholarsproposed that key t raining const i tuencies (managers, t rainees, and t rainers)must actively engage in managing the transfer-of-training process by buildingstrong partnerships before, during, and after training to enhance skill applica-tion. Although the study reported here did not test their models in any way, itsupports their general propositions.

An issue seldom investigated in the field of HRD is the connectionbetween awareness of and commitment to the strategic direction in a givenwork organization. Scholars in the field of organizational behavior have doc-umented their connect ion in many organizat ional set t ings. As the authorexpected, a positive correlation was found between awareness of and com-mitment to the strategic direction of the organization among the subjects inthis survey This finding reveals that those trainees and their managers whoself-reported higher awareness of the strategic direction of the organizationalso reported stronger commitment to that strategic direction than did thosetrainees and managers who reported lower levels of awareness. Furthermore,descriptive data revealed that 91.9 percent of trainees and 88.9 percent offield managers agreed with the corporate strategy, and the majority of traineesand field managers (97.3 percent and 97.2 percent, respectively) expressedhigh commitment to that strategy This is a tendency suggested by researchers


16/21

104 MontesinoPart of the inferential tests and descriptive data from selected survey itemsalso suggest important trends, useful to the organization vi'here the study wasconducted and to HRD practit ioners in general . For instance, the rejection of

the field managers' version of hypotheses 2 and 3 prompted the author to spec-ulate that some field managers received a low level of exposure to the contenttaught in the training program in which their employees participated. Amongthe many reasons that might explain this lack of exposure are (1) that fieldmanagers did not participate in designing the training program from the out-set, (2) that they were not well informed about the content by the trainingplanners and instructors, (3) that they did not seek to be informed, (4) thatthey did not participate in evaluating the training program, (5) that they didnot have ways to know w hether their emp loyees were using the skills learnedin training, etc. Any of these probable explanations suggest a disconnectionbetween trainers and managers that is not useful to encourage the applicationof skills learned in training once the trainees go back to their respective fieldposts. The literature on enhancing the transfer of training suggests that man-agers should be made aware of training content in order for them to supporttraining usage on the job (Broad and Newstrom, 1992; Brinkerhoff and Gill ,1994; Brinkerhoff and M ontesino, 1995 ; M ager, 1999 ) . The com p any couldbenefit from using this information to actively engage managers and supervi-sors in de terminin g em p loyees' training need s, deriving skills to be taugh t, anddesigning and evaluating the training programs in partnership with those plan-ning and implementing the programs.

Although the focus of this survey was not to investigate the processthroug h w hich the strategic direction of the organization was defined and com -municated downward, some descriptive data stress the need for the organiza-tion to make more efforts at familiarizing employees with the corporatestrategic direction . Tables 1 an d 2 sho w that 19 p erce nt of the trainees a nd19.4 percent of the managers reported knowing little about the strategic direc-tion of the company. One-quarter (25.9 percent) of the trainees and one-third(33.3 percent) of the field managers said that this strategic direction was notwell defined, according to what they self-reported. Top management could usethis descriptive data to evaluate the process of defining and communicatingstrategy in a way that could benefit the organization a great deal. HRD profes-sionals in general can benefit from assessing the connection of their trainingp rogram s with corp orate strategy by surveying training constituencies as in thecase described here and by making that type of assessment part of theirongoing training evaluation efforts.


17/21

Strategic Alignment of Trainingthe training program as a deliberate act to contribute to the attainment of thecompany's strategic goals. By the same token, the m ajority of them (62 .8 p er-cent of trainees and 65.7 percent of the field managers) thought of it primar-ily as an individual professional development activity; additionally, 13.4percent of the trainees and 11.4 percent of the managers said that they eitherattended the training program or sent their employees because they wererequested to do so by their immediate supervisors. The literature suggests thatthe best scenario is the one in which the training program gives equal attentionto both expected job and career utility for the individual and organizationalgoals (Clark, 1992). HRD practitioners in general seem to benefit frommap ping out the clear connection of each training activity with the strategicdirection of the organization.The level of employee exp osure to the strategic arena was another impor-tant issue that emerged from the descriptive analysis of several surveyquestions. As Tables 1 and 2 show, 36.1 percent of thefieldmanagers and 29.2percent of the trainees in this study believed that the strategic direction of thecompany was not well communicated to them. By the same token, 25 percentof the managers and 19.7 percent of the trainees reported they did not feelcomfortable with their current knowledge of that strategy The literature sug-gests that in some organizational scenarios, corporate strategy is transmittedto lower levels in diminishing communication that reduces the trainer's abil-ity to translate strategy into training needs (Rosow and Zager, 1988). Theexphcit discomfort regarding their current knowledge of the corporate strat-egy reported by one-quarter of the field managers raises a systemwide ques-tion related to the process by which the organization defines corporate strategyand communicates it to employees. Uncovering the causes of that disconnec-tion is beyond the scope of this study but offers a great op portunity for futureresearch.

In summary, despite the moderate correlation coefficients the researcherfound, a significant portion of the subjects in this study reported more usageof training on the job and engaging in more transfer-enhancing behaviors asthey saw more ahgnment of the training program with the strategic directionof the organization. This study confirmed the findingsand suggestions of sev-eral scholars (Brinkerhoff and M ontesino, 1993; Broad and N ewstrom, 1992 ;Gradous, 199 1; H uczynski and L ewis, 1980; M ichalak, 198 1; W erner,O'Leary-Kelly Baldwin, and Wexley, 1994) who stressed the need for buildingpartnerships among trainers, trainees, and managers to support training usage.As expected, the subjects of this study expressed more commitment to thestrategic direction of the company as they reported being more informed about


18/21

MontesinoFinally this study demonstrates that the issues of alignment of organiza-tional strategy and training can be studied quantitatively and that someconclusions can be drawn using the survey m ethod.

Limitations of the Study and Directionsfor Future ResearchBecause of the limited generalizability of this study beyond the organizationwhere it was conducted, the author highly recommends further research indifferent training settings and incorporating several other variables. This studywas limited to the target population within the organization where it was con-ducted (sales representatives who participated in the training program andtheir respective field managers, in a Fortune 200 pharmaceutical companyheadquartered in the M idwest). Although the researcher was able to general-ize from the sample to the population studied, the findings of this study referto the participants in that specific training program, not necessarily to allcorporations in this industry or others.

This survey was conducted in a real-life training program, under theconstraints imposed by the company that generously allowed the researcherto conduct the study The author is grateful to the organization for thatopportunity Several issues affected the researcher's ability to control elementsof the study For instance, its reliance on perceptions of respondents isan important limitation. Trainees and their managers were asked to remem-ber the extent to which some practices to support usage of training were usedin the training program they went through and to express their perceptionsof the connection of the training program with the strategic direction ofthe organization. To avoid the central tendency and to try to counteract thepotential for response set, the scales used throughout the questionnaireranged from 1 to 4. Another aspect that the researcher overlooked wasthe length of employment of the respondents, which could have affected theirunderstanding and knowledge of the corporate strategy The researcher didnot have access to data regarding other organizational activities that mighthave interfered with or reinforced the use of the skills that employees learnedin the training program.

Because of the exploratory nature of this study the author highly recom-mends further research in different training settings. Any follow-up researchshould address several issues to overcome the limitations of the p resent study


19/21

Strategic Alignment of Training 107ReferencesAnthony, P, & N orton, L. A. (1991). L ink HR to coqjorate strategy. Personnel Journal, 7 (4) , 75-86.Baldw in, T. T., & F ord , J. K. (1 98 8) . Transfer of train ing: A review an d d irec tion s for future

research. Personnel Psychology, 43 , 6 3 - 1 0 5 .Bassi, L. J., & Van Buren, M. E. (1999). The 1999 ASTD state of the industry report. Training andDevelopm ent Journal, 53 (1), 1-27.

Biner , E M. (1993) . The development of an ins t rument to measure s tudent a t t i tudes towardtelevised cou rses. American Journal ojDistance Education, 7 (1) , 6 2 - 7 3 .

Brinkerhoff, R. O ., & Gill, S. J. (1 99 4). The learning alliance. San F rancisco: Jossey-Bass.Brinkerhoff, R. O ., cSt M ontesin o, M . U. ( 1 9 9 3 , O c t o b e r 1 4 - 1 6 ) . Adult learning in a corporate

setting: Impact of line management support interventions on transfer of training. Paper presented atthe 1993 fall symposium of the Project for the Study of Adult Learning, Illinois State Univer-sity, Schaumburg, IL.

Brinkerhoff, R. O . , 6a: M ontes ino, M . U. (199 5). Partner ship s for training transfer: Lessons froma corpo rate s tudy. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 6 (3), 263274.Broad, M. L. , & Newstrom, J . (1992). Transfer of training: Action-packed strategies to ensure payoff

from training investments. R eading, M A: Addison-W esleyCarnevale, A., Gainer, L., & Villet, J. (1990). Training in America. San F rancisco: Jossey-Bass.Casner-Lotto, J., & Associates (1988). Successful training strategies. San F rancisco: Jossey-Bass.Cianni , M. , & Bussard, D . (1994) . CFO's be l iefs , management development , and corpora te

strategy: An exp loratory stu dy Group & O rganizational Management, 19 (1 ) , 51-56 .Clark, R. E. (1992). New techniques for effective training management. Journal of European

Industrial Training, 16 (6) , 3-6 .C onine , C . T . (199 7, M arch) . The integration of human resource development into the strategicplanning process: A com parative case study of three corporations. Paper presented a t the annual

conference of the Academy of Human Resource Development, Atlanta, GA.C onine, C. T, & C riswell , B. P (1 998 , M arch). The GEICO challenge session: A model for integrat-

ing human resource development and strategic planning. Paper presented at the annual conferenceof the Academy of H um an R esource D evelopm ent, C hicago, IL.

C osgrove, G., cSt Sp eed, R. (199 5). W hat's viTong with co rpo rate training? Training, 32 (1 ), 53 -58 .Cronbach, L. J. (19 51) . Coefficient alph a and the internal structur e of tests. Psychometrica, 16 (3),

2 9 7 - 3 3 4 .Georgenson, D. L. (1982). The problem of transfer calls for partnership. Training and D evelop-

ment Journal, 36 ( 1 0 ) , 7 5 - 7 8 .Glass, G. V, & Hopkins, K. D. (1984). Statistical methods in education and psychology. Englewood

Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Gradous , B . D . (1991) . The development and validation of a transfer-of-training system. St. Paul:

University of M innesota.H ealey, J. F (19 90 ). Statistics: A tool for social research. Belmont, CA: W adsworth .H uczyn ski, A. A., & L ewis, J. W (19 80 ). An emp irical stud y into the learning transfer proce ss in

management training. Journal of Management Studies, 17 (3), 227240.Kachigan, S. K. (1986). Statistical analysis; An introduction to univariate and m ultivariate method s.

New York: Radius Press.Kalata, E. D. (1999). The relationship between business strategy and human resource development in

Eortune 500 companies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of I l l inois at Urbana-Champa ign .


20/21

108 MontesinoMager, R. E. (1999). What every manager should know about training. Atlanta, GA: Center for Effec-

tive Performance.M cM urrer , D . P, Van Buren, M. E . , & W oodwell , W H . (2 0 0 0 ) . The ASTD sta te o/the industry

report. Alexand ria, VA: Am erican Society for Training and D evelop me nt.M ichalak, D . E (1981 ). The neglected half of training. Training and D evelopment Journal, 35 (5),2 2 - 2 8 .

M ontes ino , M . U . (1995) . A study of support for transfer and the alignment of training with thestrategic direction of the organization. Un p ubl ishe d doctora l d isser ta t ion . W estern M ichiganUniversity, Kalamazoo.

M ontes ino, M. U. (19 97, M arch) . The alignment of corporate strategy and training: A survey oftrainees and managers. Pap er p resented at the annual conference of the Academ y of H um anResource Development, Atlanta, GA.

M ontes ino , M . U . (20 00 , M arch). Speculating about the connection of management development andorganizational goals: A post-data collection interpretation. Paper presented at the annual confer-ence of the Academy of Hum an Resource D evelopment , Rale igh-D urham, N C .

N orusi s , M . J . (1990a ) . SPSS introductory statistics student guide. Chicago: SPSS.N orus is , M . J . (1990 b) . SPSS/PC + statistics 4.0 for the IBM PC/XT/AT and PS/2. Chicago: SPSS.Pop ham , J . W , & Sirotnik, K. A. (1992 ). l /nderstanding statistics in education. Itasca, IL: Peacock

Publishers .Rosow, J., & Zager, R. (1988). Training: The competitive edge. San F rancisco: Jossey-Bass.R ouiller, J. Z., & Goldstein, I . L. (1993 ). The relationship between organizational transfer climate

and positive transfer of training. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 4 ( 4 ), 3 7 7 - 3 9 0 .Semler, S. W (19 98 , M arch). Strategic ali^ment and performance. Paper presented at the annual

conference of the Academy of Human Resource Development, Chicago, IL.Semler , S. W (2 0 0 0 , M arch) . Exploring alignment: A comparative case study of alignment in two

organizations. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Academy of Human ResourceDevelopment , Rale igh-Durham, NC.

Tracey, J . B. , Tann enbau m, S. L, & Kavanaugh, M .J . (199 5). Ap plying training skills on the job:The importance of the work environment. Journal o f Applied Psychology, 80 ( 2 ) , 2 3 9 - 2 5 2 .

Training Strategies, Inc. (1992). Linking training to corporate strategy. Kalamazoo, MI: Author.W erner, J. M ., O'Leary-Kelly, A. M ., Baldwin, T. T , & W exley K. N . (199 4). Aug me nting b ehavior

modeling training: Testing the effects of pre- and post-training interventions. Human ResourceDevelopment Quarterly, 5 ( 2 ) , 1 6 9 - 1 8 3 .

W o g n u m , I .A .M . ( 2 0 0 0 , M a rc h ). Vertical integration of HRD policy within companies. Pape rpre sented at the annual conference of the Academy of H um an R esource D evelop ment, R aleigh-D u rh a m , N C .

W ognu m, I .A.M . , & Bosker , R . J . (199 8, M arch) . Strategic HRD and HRD effectiveness. Pape rpresented a t the annual conference of the Academy of H um an R esource D evelop men t ,C hicago, IL.

W oolfe, R. (199 3). T he path to strategic alignment. Information-Strategy: The Executive's Journal,9 (2) , 1 3 - 2 3 .

Zem ke, R ., & G unkler , J . (1985 ) . 28 techniqu es for t ransforming t ra ining into perform ance .Training, 22 (4), 4 8 - 6 3 .


21/21

strategic alignment of training, transfer

Documents