This chapter contains a review of the available literature on the topic and the proposed research questions. It provides the definitions of the variables and it discusses the relationship that exists among them.
Training and Development Definition of Training and Development
Employee development is a collaborative and consistent effort of employee/employer to enrich employees’ attitudes, knowledge, experiences, skills, and abilities and to improve their overall effectiveness (Rahman & Nas, 2013). Training and development is a planned effort by an organization to facilitate learning in order for the employees to acquire job-related knowledge, skills and attitudes that help employees in daily activities and prepares the employees for future jobs or positions (Noe, 2013). According to Swanson (2001) the main function of training or any human resource development activity is to improve performance therefore training can be defined as a HR practice that can influence attitudes and behaviors, including, job satisfaction, job involvement and organizational commitment. Training from company’s perspective adds to human capital and is a tool to improve organizational commitment (Owoyemi, Oyelere, Elegbede, & Gbajumo-Sheriff, 2011). It is recognized that training provides benefits to both employees and organizations (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009;
Rahman & Nas, 2013). In addition, training has been identified as human resource practice that can serve as a competitive advantage (Dias & Silva, 2016). Training not only improves technical and not-technical skills of employees but it also can be used to increase employees’
commitment to the organization (Owoyemi et al., 2011). Investment in the employees in form of a training later is returned in the form of more productive and effective employees (Rahman & Nas, 2013).
Dimensions of Training and Development
Organizational training is a multidimensional structure that can be divided into:
motivation to learn, perceived availability of training, benefits from training and support for training (Newman et al., 2011).
Motivation to learn.
Previous research has shown that employees that are motivated to learn express greater participation in training activities and are more likely to effectively apply the learned skills in their workplace. Employees that are motivated to learn are more likely to see training as a
positive effort from the organization and it should generate positive feelings towards the company, i.e., the affective commitment increases (Newman et al., 2011). Success of the training will be different for employees willing to learn and employees who are obligated to attend training sessions. Motivation for training can be defined as motivation of employees to attend the training sessions and it is based on the level of effort that employees are willing to do to benefit from the training (Dias & Silva, 2016).
Perceived availability of training.
Perceived availability of training is perception of availability to access training opportunities (Newman et al., 2011). The perceptions of employee to access the training involves: “(1) they have access to the training opportunities required for acquiring the knowledge, skills, and abilities they need for their current position, and that (2) minimal organizational constraints limit their participation in training” (Bartlett, 2001, p. 339).
Previous research on the subject has shown that perception of availability of the training is related to effective participation in training programs and is seen as an opportunity to improve knowledge, skills and attitudes which leads to an impact on organization commitment (Bartlett, 2001; Dias & Silva, 2016).
Benefits from training.
According to Ahmad and Bakar (2003) there are multiple benefits from training to both the employees and the organization. Employees tend to be more confident, open to change, show more support and their performance increases. According to Nordhaug (1989) there are three types of benefits that employees gain from the training activities: personal, career, and job-related benefits. It is believed that employees who acknowledge the training benefits has stronger feelings of commitment towards the organization (Ahmad & Bakar, 2003; Bartlett, 2001).
Perceived supervisor support for training.
There is a large body of research that has demonstrated the importance of the support in the workplace. Previous research has shown that social support in a workplace enhances job satisfaction and commitment, as well the level of turnover and absenteeism in the workplace gets lowered. Previous studies suggest that social support is an important component for organizational effectiveness (Newman et al., 2011). There are three sources of social support:
family and friends, work colleagues and immediate supervisor (Newman et al., 2011).
According to Dias and Silva (2016) support in the workplace can be vertical (support from supervisor) or horizontal (support from co-workers). In addition, employees who feel support
to participate in the training programs feel more connected to the organization (Dias & Silva, 2016; Noe & Wilk, 1993).
Perceived co-worker support for training.
Perceived co-worker support for training refers to the motivation and assistance trainees get from their co-workers. The opinion and reaction other members have towards training will influence other team members affecting their motivation towards the training. A motivated team will transmit this motivation to the other team members, leading that team members will be motivated to actively participate in the training and acquired all the necessary skills and content from the training and apply them in the daily work routine (Blanchard, 2010). It affects the participation rate of employees and it also has an impact on affective commitment (Newman et al., 2011; Noe & Wilk, 1993).
To conclude, the research focused on all five sub-dimensions of the training and development and their relationships with organizational commitment and turnover intention.
Organizational Commitment Definition of Organizational Commitment
The organizational commitment has been a popular research topic because it is usually associated with better performance which leads to an improved performance of the organization as a whole, as well as, there are a number of research that have demonstrated the existing relationship between organizational commitment and turnover intention. Meyer and Allen (1991, p. 67) sees organizational commitment as “the view that commitment is a psychological state, which (1) characterizes the relationship with the organization, and (2) has implication for the decision to continue membership with the organization.” According to Joo and Park (2010) organizational commitment can be defined as an individual’s feelings about the organization as a whole. O‘Reilly and Chatman (1986, p. 493) sees is as “the psychological attachment felt by the person for the organization; it will reflect the degree to which the individual internalizes or adopts characteristics or perceptive of the organization”.
Robbins and Judge (2015, p. 102) sees the organizational commitment as “the degree to which an employee identifies with a particular organization and its goals and wishes to maintain membership in the organization”. Mowday, Steers and Porter (1979) claims that it is a degree of identification and involvement that an individual has with his organization. This theory includes a strong belief and acceptance of organization’s goals and values, willingness of the employee to make an extra effort to benefit the organization and strong desire to
remain in the organization. It also can be characterized as “a bond or linking of the individual to the organization” (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990, p. 171).
According to Meyer and Allen (1991) the lack of consensus of what the concept includes is the reason why it is considered as a multidimensional construct (Lesabe & Nkosi, 2007). There are variances in definitions, conceptualizations and measurements of organizational commitment but they all see the organizational commitment as a bond or linkage of the employee to the organization (Martin & Roodt, 2008) as well as they all define organizational commitment as a stabilizing and obliging force that is linked to behavior (Lesabe & Nkosi, 2007).
Most commitment studies discuss the organizational commitment from either an attitudinal or behavioral perspective (Dunham, Grube, & Castaeda, 1994). When viewed as an attitude it is defined as identification with and involvement in the organization which is characterized by believing in and acceptance of organizational goals and values in and desire to be part of the organization, i.e., it has a focus on identification of the events that develops commitment, but the behavioral perspective has focus on the identification of the conditions where behavior is repeated and the changes it has on attitudes (DeConinck & Bachmann, 2011). Roodt (2004) proposed a motivational approach (as opposed to the attitudinal and behavioral perspectives), which only focuses on the state of commitment (Martin & Roodt, 2008).
Organizational commitment is often viewed in connection with social exchange theory.
It suggests that there is exchange not only of the impersonal resources, e.g., money, but the employer and employee also exchange socio-emotional resources, e.g., approval, respect, recognition and support. It is also often connected with the norm of reciprocity and the concept of perceived organizational support that is further developed into the organizational support theory. The social exchange theory, the norm of reciprocity and the organizational support theory suggest that the HRM practices have a significant influence on employees’
attitudes and behaviors (Lew, 2011).
Dimensions of Organizational Commitment
Meyer and Allen (1991) have developed their three component model of organizational commitment that consists of affective commitment, continuance commitment, and normative commitment. Affective commitment is defined as the psychological (emotional) attachment to the organization, continuance commitment is regarded as the costs associated with leaving
and normative commitment refers to a perceived obligation (personal values) to remain with the organization (Bartlett, 2001). Commitment is a mind-set and multidimensional concept that gives employee a direction of behavior, it is loyalty and attachment to the organization (Khan, Naseem, & Masood, 2016). The distinction between different types of commitment is important because employees can experience various degrees of each type of commitment and because each type of commitment has different antecedents and consequences (Murray, Poole, & Jones, 2006). According to Bartlett (2001) affective, continuance, and normative commitment should be viewed as components instead of as types of the organizational commitment because the employee’s attitude towards the organization may vary across the components.
This research is following a model proposed in the study of Meyer and Allen (1990) which categorizes the organizational commitment into three components: affective, normative and continuance commitments.
Affective commitment.
Affective commitment (AC), first termed by Meyer and Allen in 1984, refers to the emotional attachment of an individual to the organization, i.e., the employee stays within the organization because he wants to (Mercurio, 2015; Murray et al., 2006). It originates from the employees’ feelings towards the organization, e.g., pleasure and pride to be part of the organization. The employees are attached to the company both materially and spiritually, and employees fully identify themselves with the organization, therefore affective commitment is a strong type of commitment (Bozlagan, Dogan, & Daoudov, 2010). It occurs when individuals fully embrace the goals and values of the organization and they feel personally responsible for the organization's level of success. Affective commitment is generally associated with positives outcomes for the organization, e.g., high levels of performance, positive work attitudes, and a desire to remain with the organization (Murray et al., 2006). It strongly affects individual behaviors and feelings, shapes individual perceptions, and may mediate the individual’s reactions to organizational transactions. In addition, primary antecedents of affective commitment are demographic variables, individual differences, work experiences, and investments, with the strongest correlation with work experiences (Mercurio, 2015).
Normative commitment.
Normative commitment (NC) is employees' compulsory feelings towards management, i.e., employees stay because of an obligation (Khattak & Sethi, 2012). Due to the sense of obligation based on formal and informal rules, regulations, social norms and customs,
employees’ feel moral duty and a responsibility for the relationship to continue (Roxenhall &
Andrésen, 2012). Employees with high normative commitment continue working for their organization because it is the “right and moral” thing to do (Meyer et al., 2002). Normative commitment derives from employees’ conscientious and ethical beliefs. It can originate from favoritism, tenure, previous experience during difficult times, or socially and spiritually important services of the company. Employees consider their work meaningful, they are grateful to the organization and have pride to be part of it, moreover, they can do important sacrifices for their company and have low turnover intentions. Normative commitment is fostered by strong organizational commitment of other colleagues, gratefulness for favors made by the organization, principles and values and the effect of social frame of mind (Bozlagan et al., 2010).
Continuance commitment.
Continuance commitment (CC) are perceived costs of leaving the organization, i.e., the employee stays within the organization because he needs to (Murray et al., 2006). In this type of commitment employee identifies the investment, cost and alternatives associated with leaving the organization, e.g., time, effort, pension, and friendship with co-workers (Khan et al., 2016; Meyer & Allen, 1991). This construct has two sub dimensions: personal sacrifices and lack of alternatives (Dunham et al., 1994). It is negatively correlated with desirable work behavior because the willingness of employees to remain in organization is caused by fear of losing the benefits of the job (Khan et al., 2016). It has negative and positive dimensions that are closely linked to past and present investment and returns (Roxenhall & Andrésen, 2012).
Continuance commitment is unrelated or negatively related to organizational citizenship behavior, absenteeism, job performance, altruism and conscientiousness. It is positively related with performance and quality of work (Khan et al., 2016).
In this type of commitment, the employees have financial or social dependence on the organization, therefore, the continuance commitment is not considered as a strong type of commitment. The employees are unlikely to make sacrifices for their organization and they have high turnover intention rates (Bozlagan et al., 2010; Roxenhall & Andrésen, 2012).
Factors influencing continuance commitment level are: age, tenure, career opportunities, educational background, marital status, alternative job opportunities, gender, and organizational justice perception (Bozlagan et al., 2010).
Turnover Intention Definition of Turnover Intention
Turnover is an employee’s permanent movement beyond the boundary of the organization (Rahman & Nas, 2013). Turnover intention is employee’s desire or deliberateness to leave the organization (Tett & Meyer, 1993). There can be many factors influencing the actual decision of leaving one’s workplace therefore this research focuses on turnover as an intention instead of the actual decision to leave the company.
A number of previous studies have found the connection between turnover intention and the actual behavior of leaving suggesting that turnover intention is the best predictor of quitting and it is a final step before the actual turnover (Joo & Park, 2010; Yamazaki &
Petchdee, 2015). Turnover intention precedes the decision to leave. The actual decision may be influenced by various factors but the turnover intention gives more precise results as well it can be measured along a scale (Cheng & Waldenberger, 2013). There are three stages of the turnover intention process proposed by Falkenburg and Schyns (2007): thinking of leaving the organization, intention to search for a new job and intention to leave (Yamazaki
& Petchdee, 2015). There is an increase in interest about turnover intention connection with other variables and there are multiple researches examining the relationship between training and commitment (Newman et al., 2011). Turnover has a negative effect on the organization and the employee therefore majority of research focus turnover instead of starting the job in an organization (Rahman & Nas, 2013).
There is a variety of factors that may affect employee intention to leave but the most popular reasons are: opportunities for training and career development; a better compensation and benefits package; dissatisfaction with the organizational policies; low level of organizational commitment; and organizational learning culture and leadership quality (Rahman & Nas, 2013). In addition, the research by Newman et al. (2001) showed strong negative relationship between organizational commitment and employee turnover intentions.
There are two theories on turnover intention: human capital theory and social exchange theory. The human capital theory in an organizational setting refers to employees as the most valuable commodity and suggests that investment in development of employees will increase productivity of employees benefiting to the organization as well as it will enhance their employability in the market which may result in turnover for better jobs. The social exchange theory claims that investment in development of employees will result in positive attitude toward the organization reducing turnover intentions (Rahman & Nas, 2013).
According to the literature review, the turnover intention is an important element in the workplace and it was included in the present study.
Relationships Among Variables Training and Development and Organizational Commitment
Training and development of employees is considered as an important aspect of human resource management practices. Research suggests that HR practices are perceived as organization’s support and commitment to employees leading to increase of their commitment to the organization. Employees are more likely to be highly involved in the organization and show willingness to accomplish the organization’s goals (Lew, 2011).
Studies have shown that training can lead to improvement in organizational commitment (Newman et al., 2011). As it was stated earlier organizational training can be divided into:
motivation to learn, perceived availability of training, benefits from training and support for training and the given research is examining its relationship with organizational commitment.
Motivation to learn and organizational commitment.
Previous studies of Bartlett (2001), Ahmad and Bakar (2003) confirm that motivation to learn is strongly correlated to affective commitment but no relationship with continuance commitment was found. Newman et al. (2011) did not find relationship between motivation to learn and both types of commitment as well as Khawaja et al (2013) have not found significant relationship between motivation to learn and organizational commitment.
Perceived availability of training and organizational commitment.
Previous research by Bartlett (2001), Ahmad and Bakar (2003) and Chung and McLean (2013), Khawaja, et al. (2013) indicated that perceived availability of training has a strong connection with affective commitment but not continuance commitment, however the research done by Newman et al. (2011) has found a link between perceived availability of training and continuance commitment.
Benefits from training and organizational commitment.
The perceived benefits of training have been found to affect participation and commitment in training (Ahmad & Bakar, 2003). Ahmad and Bakar (2003) and Bartlett (2001) have found that benefits from training are significantly positively related to affective and continuance commitment however the research done by Newman et al. (2011) did not found significant relationship between benefits of training and both types of commitment.
Perceived supervisor support for training and organizational commitment.
Bartlett (2001) have found significant relationship between supervisor support and both affective and continuance commitment. Study of Ahmad and Bakar (2003) also indicated that support is correlated to affective and continuance commitments. Newman et al. (2011) have found strong relationship only with affective organizational commitment.
Perceived co-worker support for training and organizational commitment.
According to the results of research conducted by Newman et al. (2011) co-worker support for training has strong positive relationship with affective organizational commitment.
H1: Training and development has a significantly positive influence on organizational commitment.
Training and Development and Turnover Intention
There is a strong association between employee development perceptions and intention to leave. By providing development opportunities the organization shows care for employees’
careers that generates positive attitudes and behavior towards organization meaning that employee’s turnover intention is predicted by employee development perceptions (Rahman &
Nas, 2013). Training has many positive benefits and it can increase the commitment of the employees (Newman et al., 2011) which would result in the decrease of turnover intention.
A number of researches had shown that development opportunities provided by an organization oblige employees to behave reciprocally, it creates a reputation for valuing and developing the employees that attracts and retains talent, it can serve as a competitive advantage by developing a competent workforce as well as reducing absenteeism and turnover rates and increasing organizational commitment (Rahman & Nas, 2013).
H2: Training and development has a significantly negative influence on turnover intention.
Organizational Commitment and Turnover Intention
Employees’ job satisfaction and organizational commitment are the most critical determinants of turnover intention (Martin & Roodt, 2008; Tett & Meyer, 1993). Organizational commitment is even better predictor of turnover than job satisfaction because it is influenced less by day to day happenings (Murray et al., 2006). Previous research has indicated that turnover intentions are negatively related to both affective and continuance commitment (Joo & Park, 2010; Newman et al., 2011; Yamazaki & Petchdee, 2015) which leads to the following hypothesis:
H3: Organizational commitment has a significantly negative influence on turnover intention.
According to the above mentioned literature review about the relationship between the variables, the hypothesis 4 was formed as follows:
H4: Organizational commitment has a mediating effect on the relationship between the training and development and turnover intention.