International Journal of Selection and Assessment Volume 15 Number 2 June 2007

Effects of Trainee
Characteristics on Training
Effectiveness
Aharon Tziner*, Michal Fisher*, Tami Senior* and
Jacob Weisberg**

*Netanya University College, 16 Kibutz, Galoyot Street, Netanya 42365, Israel. atziner@netanya.ac.il
**Bar-Ilan University, Box 90000, Ramat-Gan, 52900, Israel

Six employee characteristics (conscientiousness, self-efficacy, motivation to learn, learn-

ing goal orientation, performance goal orientation, instrumentality) and one work
environment characteristic (transfer of training climate) were captured for 130 trainees
in a large industrial company in an attempt to predict training effectiveness (training
grade, supervisor evaluation of the application of training). The results strongly support
the predicted links, although not all the predictor variables contributed a statistically
significant share of the explained variance of the training outcomes. Motivation to learn
and learning goal orientation were found to contribute most to predicting training
outcomes. The implications of the results are discussed and the limitations of the study
are noted, along with suggested avenues for future research.

1. Effects of trainee characteristics on researchers are interested in identifying the factors

training effectiveness likely to affect training effectiveness.
Among the factors that have been singled out as

T he constant pressure to maintain superiority in the

marketplace engenders the need to constantly
upgrade employee skills and knowledge and to improve
positive work-related attitudes (Tannenbaum, 1997).
The method most commonly used to attain these goals
is training. In economic terms, training represents a
major outlay for American companies, with estimates of
more than $55 billion spent annually for this purpose by
firms with 100 employees or more (Arthur, Bennett,
Edens, & Bell, 2003). This is thought to be money well
spent. Davis and Yi (2004) report, for example, that
Motorola estimates that every dollar spent on training
generates $30 in productivity gains within 3 years.
Given the paramount importance and substantial cost
of training, it is not surprising that both companies and
predictors of training outcomes are both individual
characteristics, such as self-efficacy, goal orientation,
and motivation to learn, and work environment pro-
perties, such as transfer of training climate (e.g., Gist,
Stevens, & Bavetta, 1991; Mathieu, Tannenbaum,
& Salas, 1992; Towler & Dipboye, 2001). Insufficient
research, however, has been devoted to investigating
the unique and combined effects of these two types
of predictors, particularly in real organizational
settings (Holladay & Quinones, 2003). This study was
therefore designed to build on and extend previous
research by studying the unique and combined effects
of six trainee characteristics and one work environment
variable on training effectiveness in a large industrial
company.

& 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation & 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd,
9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main St., Malden, MA, 02148, USA
168
1.1. Training effectiveness
A recent meta-analysis of training effectiveness reveals
that two of the most relevant measures of training
success are learning outcomes and post-training job
performance (Arthur et al., 2003). The authors con-
tend, however, that despite the fact that these measures
are conceptually related, empirical investigations have
only partially succeeded in producing evidence of this
link (Alliger, Tannenbaum, Bennett, Traver, & Shotland,
1997; Colquitt, LePine, & Noe, 2000). It may be that
each of the two criteria captures a different facet of
training effectiveness, or that each is affected by differ-
ent factors. For instance, actual job performance may
be more susceptible to organizational factors than
training performance, or the post-training environment
may not generate appropriate opportunities for the
learned material, skills, or competencies to be demon-
strated. In either of these circumstances, empirical
findings of training effectiveness would differ depending
on the measure used. Consequently, this study incorpo-
rated two effectiveness-of-training measures: (a) train-
ing grade (as a measure of the learning outcome of
training) and (b) supervisor evaluation of post-training
performance (as an estimate of actual on-the-job
performance following completion of the training pro-
gram). This was merely a precautionary step, as there is
no reason to believe that any conceptual difference
exists between the two measures.
1.2. Trainee characteristics
The literature suggests that certain trainee character-
istics, relating either to personality or to motivation,
influence training outcomes to a greater extent than
others. The following attributes, all of which have been
shown to impact training outcomes, were chosen for
this study.
1.2.1. Conscientiousness
Individuals high on conscientiousness are more depend-
able, well-organized, persevering, and motivated to
excel on the job. Moreover, they tend to set themselves
higher standards of performance and to be more
committed to them. Conscientiousness has been found
to be related to overall performance in a wide range of
jobs (Barrick & Mount, 1991; Salgado, Viswesvaran, &
Ones, 2001; Zhas & Seibert, 2006), and trainees high on
conscientiousness tend to attain higher training out-
comes than those low on this personality trait (Barrick,
Stewart, & Piotrowski, 2002; Colquitt & Simmering,
1998).
1.2.2. Self-efficacy
This attribute is defined as the individual’s belief that he/
she can successfully meet training requirements and
International Journal of Selection and Assessment
Volume 15 Number 2 June 2007
Aharon Tziner, Michal Fisher, Tami Senior and Jacob Weisberg
master training-program contents (Gist et al., 1991;
Stevens & Gist, 1997). It has consistently proven to be
positively linked to training performance (Mathieu &
Martineau, 1997; Mathieu, Martineau, & Tannenbaum,
1993), most probably because it plays a motivational
role, affecting the amount of effort applied to task
performance.
1.2.3. Motivation to learn
This term refers to the intention to invest high levels
of consistent effort in a particular training program.
Several studies suggest that acquisition is influenced by
the motivation to learn (Mathieu & Martineau, 1997;
Tziner, Haccoun, & Kadish, 1991), but this contention
has thus far received only limited empirical support,
perhaps because motivation is not easily measurable.
1.2.4. Learning goal orientation
According to Seijts, Latham, Tasa, and Latham (2004)
and Seijts and Latham (2005), those driven by a learning
goal orientation seek challenging tasks that provide
them with the opportunity to acquire and master new
skills and expand competencies. Hence, they can also
be expected to devote more attention to training
programs that enable them to develop their abilities.
1.2.5. Performance goal orientation
Individuals high on performance goal orientation seek
to demonstrate competence and have a strong desire
to impress others. Unlike those high on learning goal
orientation, for whom the learning process itself is the
reward, people scoring high on performance goal
orientation are rewarded by external recognition for
the attainment of goals. This would lead us to expect
the two goal orientation types to be inversely related to
training effectiveness. Although the results are not
unequivocal, various studies do seem to indicate that
learning goal orientation is associated with higher
training scores than performance goal orientation
(VandeWalle, Cron, & Slocum, 2001; Fisher & Ford,
1998). However, research is yet to be conducted on the
link between goal orientation and performance during
and after training.
1.2.6. Instrumentality of training
This term refers to the individual’s perception that
completion of training will lead to valued outcomes,
such as a sense of accomplishment, greater chance of
promotion, or monetary rewards. Campbell and Kuncel
(2001) maintain that there is a reasonable body of
evidence indicating that the magnitude of training
instrumentality affects trainee achievements.
& 2007 The Authors
Journal compilation & 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Effects of Trainee Characteristics
1.3. Work environment characteristic: transfer of
training climate
Work environment characteristics have also been found
to influence the effectiveness of the learning process in
training, and the extent to which the capabilities
acquired in training are applied in the actual job setting.
One of the primary environmental factors is transfer
of training climate, defined as the trainee’s perception
of the degree to which there will be support for
using on the job what has been acquired in training.
Research clearly supports the proposition that a favor-
able transfer climate enhances training attainment
and subsequent job performance (Tracey, Tannenbaum,
& Kavangh, 1995; Tziner et al., 1991).
Although each of these variables has been studied
individually, no previous comprehensive investigation
has examined their combined and relative contribution
to training effectiveness in a real setting. This study sought
to fill this gap. On the basis of the above definitions and
previous findings, it was hypothesized that the trainee
personality characteristics of conscientiousness and
self-efficacy, the motivational characteristics of motiva-
tion to learn, learning goal orientation, performance
goal orientation, and instrumentality, and the environ-
mental characteristic of transfer of training climate,
would all be linked to training scores and to post-
training evaluated job performance. All the employee
and work environment variables were expected
to produce positive correlations with the outcome
variables, except for performance goal orientation,
which would yield a negative correlation.
2. Method
2.1. Participants
Data were collected from 130 male employees of a
large industrial power company who held a variety of
technical and operational jobs. All of them attended a
two-month in-house training program aimed at main-
taining and upgrading technical–professional knowl-
edge. Mean age of the participants was 37.48
(SD ¼ 7.54) and mean tenure with the company was
10.45 years (SD ¼ 6.35). In terms of education, 46.2%
had completed high school, 43.8% had some academic
training, and 10% held a university degree.
2.2. Procedure
A questionnaire designed to measure the trainee and
environmental variables was administered to the parti-
cipants about a week after commencement of the
training program. In addition, they were asked to note
their full date of birth and the name of their immediate
& 2007 The Authors
Journal compilation & 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
169
supervisor. This information was used as a code to
match each questionnaire with the grade obtained by
the respondent at the end of the course, thereby
maintaining anonymity for purposes of the study. (No
two respondents shared the same date of birth and the
same supervisor.) The final grade was as an objective
numerical score on a scale from 1 to 100 reflecting the
level of mastery of the course contents.
About 3 weeks after completion of the program, the
supervisors were asked to assess the degree to which
each trainee made use of the skills developed during
training. The same code was used to match these evalua-
tions with the participants’ final grades and questionnaires.
3. Instruments
3.1. Dependent variables
3.1.1. Training grade
The participant’s mark out of 100 on the final training
course examination, which assessed the knowledge he
had acquired in the program (M ¼ 85.45; SD ¼ 9.75).
3.1.2. Supervisor evaluation of post-training job performance
Ten items designed to obtain the supervisor’s assess-
ment of the extent to which the employee applied the
knowledge and skills he acquired during the training
program. The items related to issues such as the degree
to which the trainee tried to improve his performance,
to use new work techniques and knowledge, to change
existing work procedures, to persuade colleagues and
superiors at work to modify customary work proce-
dures, etc. Scores were marked on a six–point scale
ranging from 6 (to a large degree) to 1 (to a small degree),
with high scores indicative of greater use of the knowl-
edge and skills acquired in training, in the assessment
of the supervisor. This measure yielded an internal
consistency of a ¼ .88 (M ¼ 4.3; SD ¼.80).
3.2. Independent variables
Conscientiousness was assessed using nine items drawn
from the first items in this construct in the NEO Five-
Factors Inventory (Costa & McCrae, 1992). A high
score on this scale reflects a high degree of conscien-
tiousness. In this study, internal consistency was a ¼ .86
(M ¼ 5.14; SD ¼.57).
Self-efficacy was gauged by means of nine items
designed to assess the extent to which the trainee beli-
eved he had the necessary competencies to successfully
meet the training requirements, for example: ‘I believe I
am capable of absorbing the material taught in this
program,’ ‘I feel confident I can succeed in this program,’
‘I am capable of performing the training assignments.’ A
high score indicates a high level of perceived self-
International Journal of Selection and Assessment
Volume 15 Number 2 June 2007
170 Aharon Tziner, Michal Fisher, Tami Senior and Jacob Weisberg

efficacy. The internal consistency of the measure was
found to be a ¼ .90 (M ¼ 5.06; SD ¼.59).
Motivation to learn was assessed by means of 10
items, such as: ‘I am exerting considerable effort to
obtain a high grade in this program,’ ‘I am devoting a
considerable amount of time to my training assign-
ments,’ and ‘I have set high achievement goals for myself
in this program.’ A high score indicates a strong
motivation to learn. An internal consistency of a ¼ .93
(M ¼ 4.48; SD ¼.91) was found for this measure.
Learning goal orientation was measured by means of
nine items, for example: ‘The opportunity to learn new
things is important to me,’ ‘I like doing challenging
work,’ ‘It is important to me to make the most of my
skills.’ A high score indicates a high level of learning goal
orientation. The internal consistency of the measure
was found to be a ¼ .83 (M ¼ 5.29; SD ¼.46).
Performance goal orientation was measured by 10
items, including: ‘The things I enjoy the most are the
things I do best,’ ‘I enjoy performing tasks which I know I
will do well,’ and ‘I feel smart when I do things without
making mistakes.’ A high score is indicative of a high level
of performance goal orientation. This measure yielded
an internal consistency of a ¼ .87 (M ¼ 4.36; SD ¼.78).
Instrumentality of training was tapped by means of 10
items, for example: ‘I feel that successful completion of
the training program will help me to get higher monetary
rewards,’ ‘I trust and believe that succeeding in this
training program will enhance my chances of promotion.’
A high score indicates that the training course has a
high instrumentality value for the trainee. The internal
consistency found here was a ¼ .88 (M ¼ 3.96; SD ¼.87).
Transfer of training climate was assessed by means of
10 items, such as: ‘I can count on the support I will get
at work when I try to apply the skills acquired in
training,’ ‘In my work unit, the utilization of newly
acquired skills is valued highly,’ and ‘Back at work I
anticipate being assigned tasks which require that I
apply the knowledge I acquired in the training program.’
A high score on this measure is indicative of a work
environment supportive of the transfer of training. This
measure yielded an internal consistency of a ¼ .85
(M ¼ 4.62; SD ¼.76).
The final questionnaire measuring the independent
variables of trainee and work environment character-
istics therefore consisted of 57 statements. Participants
indicated their response to each statement on a six-
point scale ranging from 6 (strongly agree) to 1 (strongly
disagree). Each participant was assigned a score for each
of the seven variables equal to his total score on all the
items relating to that variable.
4. Results
Pearson’s correlations were performed among all the
study variables. The results of this analysis appear in
Table 1.
The correlation coefficients in Table 1 reveal that all
our hypotheses were confirmed. In addition, a strong
correlation was found between training grade and
supervisor evaluation. Studies typically report a corre-
lation around .45 between training scores and post-
training job performance ratings, often attributing the
relatively moderate magnitude of this association to
deficiencies in the training program. Our investigation,
however, found a correlation of .705 between the two
measures of training effectiveness, perhaps indicating
that a better job was carried out here in attuning the
training program to actual job requirements.
The trainee’s personality characteristics yielded sig-
nificant correlations with both success on the final

Table 1. Descriptive statistics and Pearson’s correlations among study variables (N ¼ 130)
Transfer of Performance Learning
Conscien- Self- training goal goal Motivation Instru- Training
Mean SD tiousness efficacy climate orientation orientation to learn mentality grade

Conscientiousness 5.135 .574

Self-efficacy 5.064 .593 .331**
Transfer of training 4.616 .757 .467** .547**
climate
Performance goal 4.356 .783 .093 (NS)
.407**
.218**
orientation
Learning goal 5.287 .463 .473** .627** .465**
.210**
orientation
Motivation to learn 4.481 .910 .324** .689** .642**
.358** .487**
Instrumentality 3.969 .872 .072 (NS) .453** .514**
.245** .272** .689**
Training grade 85.45 9.753 .292** .661** .530**
.411** .530** .758** .576**
(0–100)
Supervisor 4.320 .799 .395** .509** .503**
.330** .539** .609** .433** .705**
evaluation
Note: **po.01. NS, not significant.

International Journal of Selection and Assessment & 2007 The Authors

Volume 15 Number 2 June 2007 Journal compilation & 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Effects of Trainee Characteristics 171

exam and supervisor’s evaluation of his successful Table 2. Hierarchical regression results for training grade and
application of what he had learned. The higher the supervisor’s evaluation
trainee’s conscientiousness, the higher his final training Model 1: Model 2: super-
grade (r ¼.292, p ¼ .001) and the higher his rating on training grade visor evaluation
the supervisor evaluation (r ¼.395, p ¼ .000). Similarly,
b DR2 b DR2
higher self-efficacy was associated with higher training
grade (r ¼.661, p ¼ .000) and higher supervisor evalua- Block 1
tion (r ¼.509, p ¼ .000). Personality
Four variables were used to examine motivational 2. Self-efficacy .661** .437 .424** .259
1. Conscientiousness .254** .057
features of the trainee: motivation to learn, learning Block 2
goal orientation, performance goal orientation, and Personality
instrumentality. These variables also produced signifi- 2. Self-efficacy .53** .437 .315** .259
cant correlations in the expected directions with the 1. Conscientiousness .174 .057
two measures of training effectiveness. Higher motiva- Organization
3. Transfer of training .241** .041 .249** .038
tion to learn, learning goal orientation, and instrumen- climate
tality were all associated with higher training grades Block 3
(r ¼.758, p ¼ .000; r ¼.530, p ¼ .000; r ¼.576, p ¼ .000, Personality
respectively), as well as with higher supervisor evalua- 1. Conscientiousness .157 (NS)
tion (r ¼.609, p ¼ .000; r ¼.539, p ¼ .000; r ¼.433, 2. Self-efficacy .259** .437
.072 (NS)
Organization
p ¼ .000, respectively). On the other hand, higher 3. Transfer of training .028 (NS) .070 (NS)
performance goal orientation yielded negative correla- climate
tions with training grade (r ¼
.441, p ¼ .000) and Motivation for training
supervisor evaluation (r ¼
.330, p ¼ .000). 6. Motivation to learn .561** .134 .376** .073
To ensure that no multi-colinearity effect existed 5. Learning goal .259** .037
orientation
among these four motivational characteristics, a 4. Performance goal
.170* .022
Cronbach’s a test was performed and displayed the orientation
very low a ¼ .308. Moreover, while the correlation 7. Instrumentality
coefficients between the four variables are significant, Note: *po.05, **po.01. NS, not significant.
they are not high, further reconfirming the lack of a
multi-colinearity bias.
Finally, the work environment characteristic of transfer
of training climate was also found to correlate positively Model 2 tested the multivariate effect on supervisor
with the two measures of training effectiveness. The evaluation. Here, both conscientiousness and self-effi-
higher the trainee perceived the transfer of training cacy were significant in the first steps of the regression,
climate, the higher his training grade (r ¼.530, p ¼ .000) but lost their significance when additional variables
and the higher the supervisor evaluation of his on-the-job were entered. In the final step of the regression, self-
application of the training program (r ¼.503, p ¼ .000). efficacy showed no significant direct relationship to
To investigate the unique and combined contributions supervisor evaluation (b ¼
.072; p ¼ .490), but contrib-
of the independent variables on training effectiveness, uted very highly to the explained variance (DR2 ¼ 25.9%
two hierarchical regression models were examined. The out of R2 ¼ 48.5%). Moreover, it had a positive indirect
results of this analysis are presented in Table 2. effect via motivation to learn (b ¼ .740; p ¼ .000). Con-
Model 1 tested the multivariate effect on the trai- scientiousness displayed borderline significance (b ¼ .157;
nee’s final grade, and revealed that the personality p ¼ .054) and contributed the minor proportion to the
characteristic of self-efficacy had a significant direct explained variance (DR2 ¼ out of R2 ¼ 48.5%).
effect on grade (b ¼ .259; p ¼ .001) and contributed With respect to motivation, motivation to learn
most to the total explained variance (DR2 ¼ 43.7% out (b ¼ .376; p ¼ .001), learning goal orientation (b ¼ .259;
of R2 ¼ 61.2%). Surprisingly, conscientiousness was not p ¼ .004), and performance goal orientation (b ¼
.170;
found to have a significant effect on grade. Of the p ¼ .024) all displayed a significant effect on supervisor
motivational variables, only motivation to learn pro- evaluation, contributing to the explained variance
duced a significant effect (b ¼ .561; p ¼ .001), contribut- (DR2 ¼ 7.3%; DR2 ¼ 3.7%; DR2 ¼ 2.2%, respectively, out
ing the minor proportion to the explained variance of R2 ¼ 48.5%). No significant effect was found for
(DR2 ¼ 13.4% out of R2 ¼ 61.2%). The organizational instrumentality. Nor did the environmental character-
characteristic of the transfer of training climate did not istic of the transfer of training climate produce a
show a significant direct effect on grade, although an significant direct effect on supervisor evaluation,
indirect relationship was found via motivation to learn although it had a significant indirect effect via motiva-
(b ¼ .642; p ¼ .000). tion to learn (b ¼ .454; p ¼ .000).

& 2007 The Authors International Journal of Selection and Assessment

Journal compilation & 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd Volume 15 Number 2 June 2007
172
5. Discussion
This investigation examined the direct influence of six
employee characteristics (conscientiousness, self-efficacy,
motivation to learn, learning goal orientation, perfor-
mance goal orientation, instrumentality) and a work
environment characteristic (transfer of training climate)
on two training outcomes (training grade, supervisor
evaluation of post-training performance) in a real
organizational setting. Having previously been investi-
gated individually, the seven independent variables are
all assumed to impact on the value of employee training.
Our aim here was to discover the relative contribution
of these diverse dimensions by examining their unique
and combined effects on training effectiveness.
Conscientiousness was found to have a direct effect
on supervisor evaluation, a finding consistent with the
claim that conscientious people tend to be organized
and systematic and to accurately assess the demands of
a task. They therefore have confidence in their abilities,
enabling them to perform better than people low on
conscientiousness (Barrick & Mount, 1991; Salgado,
1997). Contrary to expectations, however, no signifi-
cant effect for conscientiousness on the final training
grade was found, despite the familiar contention that
conscientious individuals, who display traits such as per-
severance and diligence, invest greater efforts in train-
ing programs and therefore achieve greater success
(McCrae & Costa, 1987). However important con-
scientiousness may be, it is possible that in the context
of training it has less effect on performance than other
personal qualities or than motivation.
Revealing the opposite pattern, the second person-
ality characteristic, self-efficacy, yielded a significant
effect on training grade but not on supervisor evalua-
tion. The effect on training grade is consistent with an
earlier study, which reported that trainees high on self-
efficacy displayed high performance levels that were
reflected in the final grade (Maurer & Pierce, 1998). The
fact that this characteristic did not show a direct
significant effect on supervisor evaluation is surprising,
as it has previously been found to have positive direct
links to work performance (Stajkovic & Luthans, 1998).
In our study, the effect of self-efficacy on performance
was mediated by motivation to learn. It is possible that
self-efficacy enhances the motivation to learn, which in
turn leads the trainee to acquire more knowledge,
skills, and competencies and to develop superior
work strategies. If this is the case, then motivation to
learn would exert a closer impact on performance than
on self-efficacy.
Indeed, this study found a significant positive effect
for motivation to learn on both training grade and
supervisor evaluation. It is reasonable to assume that
trainees with a high motivation to learn (as part of the
effect of other personality and situational variables)
International Journal of Selection and Assessment
Volume 15 Number 2 June 2007
Aharon Tziner, Michal Fisher, Tami Senior and Jacob Weisberg
invest greater efforts in the course and therefore are
more successful in acquiring new skills and work meth-
ods than trainees low on motivation. These employees
may logically be expected to bring their improved work
competencies back with them to the workplace, allowing
them to perform better and thereby achieve higher
supervisor evaluations than trainees low on motivation.
Goal orientation also produced the expected pattern
of results in Model 2 (supervisor evaluation), with a
significant positive effect found for learning goal orien-
tation and a significant negative effect for performance
goal orientation. The effect of learning goal orientation
on performance could be accounted for by the desire of
people high on this trait to master new skills and
discover better performance strategies that will ulti-
mately result in better performance attainments. On
the other hand, trainees high on performance goal
orientation would focus attention on how to impress
others, that is, on the outcome of performance rather
than on its actual level. As supervisor evaluations relate
to the quality of attainments, those who have invested
efforts in developing the competencies needed to per-
form better (i.e., learning goal orientation) would be
expected to rate higher than employees driven by the
needs of impression management (i.e., performance
goal orientation), and the two goal orientations should
correlate inversely with performance ratings (Seijts &
Latham, 2005; Seijts et al., 2004).
Although studies relying on the Expectancy Theory
(Lawler & Suttle, 1973; Vroom, 1964) have demon-
strated that the perception of the value of training is
related to success, this was not borne out this study.
Instrumentality did not produce a significant effect
either on the training grade or on supervisor evaluation
of the application of training on the job.
Nor was a significant direct effect found for transfer
of training climate on either of the measures of training
effectiveness, although previous studies have shown
that employees in organizations with a climate that
encourages the application of training invest greater
efforts in applying their newly acquired knowledge and
skills in the workplace (Ford, Quinones, Sego, & Sorra,
1992; Tziner et al., 1991). This study, however, did find
an indirect significant effect for this variable, mediated
by a motivation to learn, on both training grade and
supervisor evaluation. This rather surprising result
might be explained by the fact that variables such as
motivation to learn and goal orientation were not
included in the investigations that reported a positive
effect for transfer of training climate. These variables
may very well capture most of the unique significant
contribution of a positive climate. On the other hand, a
high learning goal orientation and motivation to learn
might shield trainees from an unfavorable, non-suppor-
tive transfer climate, giving them the strength to over-
come the obstacles it places in their path. In both cases,
& 2007 The Authors
Journal compilation & 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Effects of Trainee Characteristics
the transfer of training climate would exert its effect
on the two measures of training effectiveness through
the mediation of motivation to learn.
In addition to advancing research in the field, the
results of this study may prove useful for improving both
the internal outcomes of training courses (measured by
final grade) and their application in the workplace
(measured by supervisor evaluation). The consistent
findings of the investigation highlight the importance of
promoting learning goal orientation and motivation to
learn in order to attain better training outcomes. This
lends credence to the results of previous studies that
suffered from a restricted framework, as they were
conducted on students and employed fewer variables
(Colquitt & Simmering, 1998; VandeWalle et al., 2001). It
is also worth noting that our findings support Arthur et
al.’s (2003) contention that the estimated effectiveness of
training may vary with the outcome measure used. As
proved to be the case in our study, the variables found
uniquely related to one measure of effectiveness are not
necessarily the same as those uniquely associated with a
different measure of effectiveness (e.g., conscientious-
ness and goal orientation measures predicted supervisor
evaluation but not training grade). Both Alliger et al.
(1997) and Arthur, Tubre, Paul, and Edens (2004) would
attribute this finding to the fact that the training-out-
come measures captured distinct facets of the training-
effectiveness construct.
Certain limitations of this study should be noted, and
might be addressed in future investigations. First, data
regarding the outcome variable of application of training
on the job were obtained from a single source – the
trainee’s immediate supervisor. Research has shown
that such evaluations may be biased in different ways as
a result of a variety of factors associated with the
supervisors themselves, including personality traits,
their personal and professional relationship with the
employee, power struggles in the organization, con-
flicts, differing interests, etc. (Tziner, 2002, pp. 279–
307). Consequently, the supervisor evaluation of the
extent to which the employee applied his newly
acquired knowledge and skills may not have accurately
reflected the true situation in all cases. Future investi-
gations might therefore attempt to include objective
measures of the application of training as well.
Moreover, supervisor evaluations were conducted 3
weeks after completion of training and were captured
only once. It is conceivable that for a short period of
time immediately following the training course, employ-
ees return to work imbued with the motivation to apply
their new skills. Once time has elapsed, however,
circumstances may change: motivation may decline, the
material learned in the course may be forgotten, the
transfer of training climate may become less conducive,
and so on. Indeed, the phenomenon of relapse of training
has been the subject of a considerable number of studies
& 2007 The Authors
Journal compilation & 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
173
(Burke & Baldwin, 1999; Haccoun, 1997). It would
therefore be wise to obtain a repeated measure of the
application of training after a longer period has elapsed.
This study focused on seven trainee and work envir-
onment variables previously found to relate to training
outcomes. Nonetheless, a large number of other vari-
ables have also been reported to affect these outcomes,
such as work involvement, organizational commitment,
achievement orientation, locus of control, etc. Future
research would thus do well to include additional
predictors and training effectiveness measures to study
their unique and combined contribution as well.
Given the economic implications of employee train-
ing in terms of its value and cost to the company,
research that serves to promote training effectiveness
is of the utmost importance. We believe this study
takes us one step closer to that goal by identifying,
in a real organizational setting, two factors that appear
to have a stronger impact than others on training
outcomes.
Acknowledgements
The authors are greatly indebted to Gil Sharoni for his
help with the data analysis.
References
Alliger, G.M., Tannenbaum, S.I., Bennett, W. Jr., Traver, H. and
Shotland, A. (1997) A Meta-Analysis of Relations among
Training Criteria. Personnel Psychology, 50, 41–358.
Arthur, W. Jr., Bennett, W. Jr., Edens, P.S. and Bell, S.T. (2003)
Effectiveness Training in Organizations: A meta-analysis of
design and evaluation features. Journal of Applied Psychology,
88, 234–255.
Arthur, W. Jr., Tubre, T.C., Paul, D.S. and Edens, P.S. (2004)
Teaching Effectiveness: The relationship between reaction
and learning criteria. Education Psychology, 23, 275–285.
Barrick, M.R. and Mount, M.K. (1991) The Big Five Personality
Dimensions and Job Performance: A meta-analysis. Person-
nel Psychology, 44, 1–26.
Barrick, M.R., Stewart, G.L. and Piotrowski, M. (2002) Per-
sonality and Job Performance: Test of the mediating effects
of motivation among sales representatives. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 87, 243–245.
Burke, L.A. and Baldwin, T.T. (1999) Workforce Training
Transfer: A Study of the effect of relapse prevention
training and transfer climate. Human Resource Management,
32, 227–242.
Campbell, J.P. and Kuncel, N.R. (2001) Individual and Team
Training. In: Anderson, N., Ones, D.S., Sinangil, H.K. and
Viswesvaran, C. (eds), Handbook of Industrial, Work &
Organizational Psychology, Vol. 2. London: Sage, pp. 278–312.
Colquitt, J.A., LePine, J.A. and Noe, R.A. (2000) Toward an
Integrative Theory of Training Motivation: A meta-analytic
International Journal of Selection and Assessment
Volume 15 Number 2 June 2007
174
path analysis of 20 years of research. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 85, 678–707.
Colquitt, J.A. and Simmering, M.S. (1998) Conscientiousness,
Goal Orientation, and Motivation to Learn during the
Learning Process: A longitudinal study. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 83, 654–665.
Costa, P.T. and McCrae, R.R. (1992). Revised, NEO Personality
Inventory and the NEO Five-Factor Inventory. Psychological
Assessment Resources, Odessa, FL.
Davis, F.D. and Yi, M.Y. (2004) Improving Computer Skill
Training: Behavior modeling, symbolic mental rehearsal, and
the role of knowledge systems. Journal of Applied Psychology,
89, 509–523.
Fisher, S.L. and Ford, J.K. (1998) Differential Effects of Learner
Effect and Goal Orientation in Two Learning Outcomes.
Personnel Psychology, 51, 397–420.
Ford, J.K., Quinones, M.A., Sego, D.J. and Sorra, J.S. (1992)
Factors Affecting the Opportunity to Perform Trained
Tasks on the Job. Personnel Psychology, 45, 511–527.
Gist, M.E., Stevens, C.K. and Bavetta, A.G. (1991) Effects of
Self-Efficacy and Post-Training Intervention on the Acquisi-
tion and Maintenance of Complex Interpersonal Skills.
Personnel Psychology, 44, 837–861.
Haccoun, R.R. (1997) Transfer and Retention: Let’s do both
and avoid dilemmas. Applied Psychology: An International
Review, 46, 340–344.
Holladay, C.L. and Quinones, M.A. (2003) Practice Variability
and Transfer of Training: The role of self-efficacy generality.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 1094–1103.
Lawler, E.E. and Suttle, J.L. (1973) Expectancy Theory and
Job Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 9, 482–503.
Mathieu, J.E. and Martineau, J.W. (1997) Individual and Situa-
tional Influences in Training Motivation. In: Ford, J.K.,
Kozlowski, S.W.J., Kraiger, K., Salas, E. and Geachout, M.S.
(eds), Improving Training Effectiveness in Organizations.
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 193–222.
Mathieu, J.E., Martineau, J.W. and Tannenbaum, S.I. (1993)
Individual and Situational Influences on the Development of
Self-Efficacy: Implications for training effectiveness. Person-
nel Psychology, 46, 125–147.
Mathieu, J.E., Tannenbaum, S.I. and Salas, E. (1992) Influences
of Individual and Situational Characteristics on Measures of
Training Effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 35,
828–847.
Maurer, T.J. and Pierce, H.R. (1998) A Comparison of Likert
Scale and Traditional Measures of Self-Efficacy. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 83, 324–329.
McCrae, R.R. and Costa, P.T. Jr. (1987) Validation of the Five-
Factor Model of Personality Across Instruments and Ob-
International Journal of Selection and Assessment
Volume 15 Number 2 June 2007
Aharon Tziner, Michal Fisher, Tami Senior and Jacob Weisberg
servers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 81–
90.
Salgado, J.F. (1997) The Five-Factor Model of Personality and
Job Performance in the European Community. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 82, 30–43.
Salgado, J.F., Viswesvaran, C. and Ones, D.S. (2001) Predictors
Used for Personnel Selection: An overview of constructs,
methods and techniques. In: Anderson, N., Ones, D.S.,
Simangil, H.K. and Viswesvaran (eds), Handbook of Industrial,
Work and Organizational Psychology, 1. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage, pp. 165–199.
Seijts, G.H. and Latham, G.P. (2005) Learning versus Perfor-
mance Goals: When should each be used? Academy of
Management Executive, 19, 124–131.
Seijts, G.H., Latham, G.P., Tasa, K. and Latham, B.W. (2004)
Goal Setting and Goal Orientation: An integration of two
different yet related literatures. Academy of Management
Journal, 47, 227–240.
Stajkovic, A.D. and Luthans, F. (1998) Self-Efficacy and Work-
Related Performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin,
124, 240–261.
Stevens, C.K. and Gist, M.E. (1997) Effects of Self-Efficacy and
Goal Orientation Training on Negotiation Skill Maintenance:
What are the mechanisms? Personnel Psychology, 50,
955–978.
Tannenbaum, S.I. (1997) Enhancing Continuous Learning:
Diagnostic findings from multiple companies. Human Re-
source Management, 36, 437–452.
Towler, A.J. and Dipboye, R.L. (2001). Effects of Charismatic
Communication Training on Motivation, Behavior, and
Attitudes. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
Society of Industrial/Organizational Psychological, San-
Diego.
Tracey, J.B., Tannenbaum, S.I. and Kavangh, J.J. (1995)
Applying Trained Skills on the Job: The importance of
work environment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80,
239–252.
Tziner, A. (2002) Human Resource Management and Organiza-
tion Behavior: Selected perspectives. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
Tziner, A., Haccoun, R. and Kadish, A. (1991) Personal and
Situational Characteristics Influencing the Effectiveness of
Transfer of Training Improvement Strategies. Journal of
Occupational Psychology, 64, 67–177.
VandeWalle, D., Cron, W. and Slocum, J.W. Jr. (2001) The
Role of Goal Orientation Following Performance Feedback.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 629–640.
Vroom, V.H. (1964) Motivation and Work. New York: Wiley.
Zhas, H. and Seibert, S.E. (2006) The Big Five Personality
Dimensions and Entrepreneurial Status: A meta-analytical
review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 259–271.
& 2007 The Authors
Journal compilation & 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd