international journal of management (ijm) ijm © i a e … · development of managers in state bank...
TRANSCRIPT
578
Dr. G. S. David Sam Jayakumar and G. Rafick, “Modelling Training Effectiveness and Its Impact on
Development of Managers In State Bank of India” - (ICAM 2016)
MODELLING TRAINING EFFECTIVENESS AND ITS IMPACT ON
DEVELOPMENT OF MANAGERS IN STATE BANK OF INDIA
Dr. G. S. David Sam Jayakumar
Assistant professor,
Jamal Institute of Management, Jamal Mohammed College, Trichy
G. Rafick
M.Phil Scholar,
Jamal Institute of Management, Jamal Mohammed College, Trichy
ABSTRACT
The study made attempt to evaluate the effectiveness of training provided and its impact
in the manager’s development. The banking employees designated as managers, branch
managers, asst. Branch managers are consider for this study. A draft Questioner was consists
of 6 different set of question. They are personal and demographic profile (6), Training session
(6), training content (5), and training aspects (5), transfer of learning (6), manager’s
development (8). The conceptual questions are anchored with 7 point linker scale and the
Questionnaire was issued to the managers randomly to collect a primarily information as the
results were good. Finally, the data analysis with statistical namely IBM SPSS 22 and IBM
SPSS AMOS 22. At first frequency table was tabulated for personal and demographic profile.
Secondly structure equation model was applied to evaluate the impact of training effectiveness
in manager development.
Key words: Training Session, Training Content, Trainer Aspects, Transfer of Learning,
Managers Development.
Cite this Article: Dr. G. S. David Sam Jayakumar and G. Rafick. Modelling Training
Effectiveness and Its Impact on Development of Managers in State Bank of India.
International Journal of Management, 7(2), 2016, pp. 578-592.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp
INTRODUCTION AND RELATED WORKS
Training is a process through which the people enhances and develops his efficiency, capacity and
effectiveness at work by improving and updating my knowledge and understanding the skills relevant
to his or her job. Training also helps a person cultivate appropriate and desired behaviours and attitude
towards work and people. Development is the related process. It covers not only those activities which
improve job performance but also those which bring about growth of the personality; help individuals
in the progress towards maturity and actualization of their potential capacities. So, that they become not
only good employees but better man and women. Considering this study was made to know the impact
of training in the development of managers working in State Bank of India bank. The most popular and
widely known approach to the evaluation of training is Kirkpatrick’s framework. The model has served
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT (IJM)
ISSN 0976-6502 (Print)
ISSN 0976-6510 (Online)
Volume 7, Issue 2, February (2016), pp. 578-592
http://www.iaeme.com/ijm/index.asp
Journal Impact Factor (2016): 8.1920 (Calculated by GISI)
www.jifactor.com
IJM
© I A E M E
International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 -
6510(Online), Volume 7, Issue 2, February (2016), pp. 578-592 © IAEME Publication
579
Dr. G. S. David Sam Jayakumar and G. Rafick, “Modelling Training Effectiveness and Its Impact on
Development of Managers In State Bank of India” - (ICAM 2016)
as the primary organizing design for training evaluations in organizations for over 30 years. Kirkpatrick
identifies four categories of measures namely 1) Reaction, 2) Behavior,3)Learning 4)Results
(Kirkpatrick, 1979).Level one includes assessment of training participants’ reaction to the training
program, especially assessment of affective responses to the quality or the relevance of training. This
has been incorporated by most organizations into the frequently used training evaluation questionnaire
or ‘‘happy sheet’’. Level two, learning measures, is defined as quantifiable indicators of the learning
that has taken place during the course of the training. Level three, behaviour outcomes, addresses either
the extent to which knowledge and skills gained in training are applied on the job or result in
exceptional job-related performance. Finally level four, outcomes are intended to provide some
measure of the impact that training has had on broader organizational goals and objectives (Alliger and
Janak, 1989; Bates, 2004). Critics have highlighted a series of criticisms of the Kirkpatrick’s model
(Bates, 2004). Guerci and colleagues have suggesting that the four levels of evaluation that it proposes
lead to an excessively simplified vision regarding the effectiveness of training, particularly because it
does not consider the influences of the organizational context (Guerci et al., 2010). A second criticism
is based on the causal relations between the levels of evaluation. According to the model it is not
possible to achieve positive results at top levels if this does not occur at lower levels (Alliger and
Janak, 1989). There is limited published evidence to support this. A third criticism of the hierarchical
model is the unitary perspective. The model assumes the point of view of the organization and it
neglects the evaluation needs of all the other stakeholders involved in the training process (Guerci et
al., 2010). Kaufman and Keller (1994) have suggested that Kirkpatrick’s four levels are also
incomplete and lead to a too narrowly focus on the evaluation of training alone (Watkins et al., 1998).
The evaluation framework proposed by Kaufman and Keller (1994) incorporates aspects of program
evaluation, keeps the distinctive four-level features and suggests a five-level evaluation framework.
That is, the application of the four levels of training evaluation is expanded in order to consider the
internal and external consequences of all interventions related to performance and organizational
improvement. According to these authors, Kirkpatrick’s four-level evaluation framework devalues the
evaluation of societal impact or the usefulness and availability of organizational resources. They
offered four additional aspects (Stoking, 1998, p. 172):
1. Consumer satisfaction and societal contribution as additional evaluation criteria.
2. Evaluation as part of the process of needs assessment and planning.
3. Identification of the desired or expected results and consequences as part of the same process.
4. Availability and quality of resources and efficiency of their use as additional criteria.
SELECTED REVIEWS
Stoking (1998), is equally critical of the Kaufman and Keller model. Stokking suggests the model lacks
clarity in some aspects, such as the distinction between the desired chronology of activities and the
aspects of level and importance, or regarding implementation. Implementation and achievement of the
learning objectives both integrate Acquisition (Level 2), which should indicate the success of training
implementation. An alternative and widely quoted model is the CIRO (contents/contexts, inputs,
reactions and outcomes) model proposed by War et al. (1970). The model measures learning/training
effectiveness by CIRO elements, both before and after training. The strength of the CIRO model is the
measurement of managerial training program and also the effectiveness consideration of objectives
(contexts) and training equipment (inputs). Tzeng and colleagues have suggested that this model does
not indicate how measurement takes place and, for this reason, the model does not provide important
information regarding the current training situation, which could, certainly, lead to improvements
(Tzeng et al., 2007).The CIPP model (context, input, process and product) proposed by Stufflebeam
shares many of the features of CIRO model (Roark et al., 2006). However with CIPP, the context
provides situational data in order to determine program objectives, input determines the strategies used
to achieve the outcomes, product involves program implementation and product involves evaluation of
outcomes worth and effectiveness (Khalid et al., 2012).Bennett (1997) has suggested that the model
assumes rationality by decision making and ignores the diversity of interests and multiple
interpretations of these agents. While Kirkpatrick has been the dominant model for organizational
evaluation for three decades Phillips’ ROI (return-on-investment) framework has emerged in the past
decade and has entered the organization evaluation lexicon with its focus on return on investment – a
popular phrase for those conducting investment decisions. The model combines the four levels of
International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 -
6510(Online), Volume 7, Issue 2, February (2016), pp. 578-592 © IAEME Publication
580
Dr. G. S. David Sam Jayakumar and G. Rafick, “Modelling Training Effectiveness and Its Impact on
Development of Managers In State Bank of India” - (ICAM 2016)
evaluation developed by Kirkpatrick and adds a fifth level to measure success in areas of Human
Resources function, that is, the ROI measurement compares the monetary benefits from the program
with the program costs (Chmielewski and Phillips, 2002).This evaluation model suggests that while the
four factors are useful, without a consideration of the monetary value of specific training initiatives,
such as training or coaching, investments should not be considered. The model however has serious
limitations, which have largely been ignored in the overt focus on business ROI. One major weakness
is the complexity in determining returns on soft aspects of business such as training. In fact, it might
suggest such efforts are impossible in non-controlled environments. This is because it is difficult in
reality to isolate the effects of the specific intervention, for example training, from other organizational
factors, which can lead to improvements in performance (Hogan, 2007). These organizational factors
can be a change of manager or leadership; to changes to demand for the product or service due to
fashion or economic factors, as well as wider impact of other organizational interventions from a pay
rise to a change in office layout.ROI has been used in several training and coaching evaluations with
enthusiasm (McGovern et al., 2001). In the McGovern study participants were asked to estimate the
value (benefit) of the coaching on key decisions. Brinkerhoff’s (1989) model adds two preliminary
levels to Kirkpatrick’s model, in order to provide formative evaluation of training needs and the
training design (Holton and Naquin, 2005).This model presents some limitations, since it consists of
both formative and summative evaluation, which is only possible in ideal cases where the employer
and the training organizers are closely related, where an evaluation design has already been built during
the training process, or where there are no competing deadlines or reduced budgets (Holton and
Naquin, 2005).Bushnell (1990) described the IPO (Inputs, Process, and Outputs/Outcomes) Model that
interprets the evaluation process as cyclical. This model first examines input factors that may influence
a program’s effectiveness (for example, trainees’ qualifications, program design, instructors’ quality
and qualifications, materials quality, facilities, or equipment). After, it analyses process factors (such as
planning, developing or delivery of the training). Finally, the evaluation of results is organized into
evaluation of outputs (short-term results) and evaluation of outcomes (long-term results). Outputs
include trainees’ reactions, performance or improvement, and outcomes focus on business results
(Russ-Eft et al., 2008).Overall, criticisms of the model are based on its lack of information related to
program functioning, or to the specific components that affect the results. Then, there is no way to
identify at what point the program failed, because no impact is found (Robertson, 2004). Holton (1996)
proposed the HRD Evaluation and Research Model that hypothesized three outcomes levels:
1. Learning;
2. Individual performance; and
3. Organization.
According to Holton (1996) these levels are influenced by primary (such as ability, motivation and
environmental influences) and secondary factors (for example, those that affect motivation to
learn).Later, Holton (2005) recognizes that a full test of initial HRD Evaluation and Research Model is
impossible because the majority of the tools to measure the constructs presented in the model did not
exist. For these reasons, the author proposed an updated version of the model by delineating specific
constructs that should be measured in each of the conceptual categories proposed (Holton, 2005).
Kirwan and Birchall (2006) also pointed out that this model solely ‘‘describes a sequence of influences
on outcomes occurring in a single learning experience and does not demonstrate any feedback loops’’
(p. 257) and it does not indicate any interaction between factors of the same type. Some of the potential
weaknesses of the model are noted by the authors themselves. Designer and Moseley (2006) refer that
‘‘Full-scope evaluation stays around longer than ‘regular’ evaluation and requires long-term support
from the organization and all the stakeholders:’’ (p. 322).
METHODOLOGY
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
1. To know the profile of State Bank of India.
2. To study the theoretical framework of training effectiveness and employees development.
3. To propose the multidimensional and structure model that evaluates the impact of training
effectiveness in the manager development.
International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 -
6510(Online), Volume 7, Issue 2, February (2016), pp. 578-592 © IAEME Publication
581
Dr. G. S. David Sam Jayakumar and G. Rafick, “Modelling Training Effectiveness and Its Impact on
Development of Managers In State Bank of India” - (ICAM 2016)
4. To give suitable suggestion and recommendation to the trainer and State Bank of India.
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The researcher is a simple survey to evaluate the training effectiveness and its impact on managers
development for this the researcher adopted a purposive sampling method which is a non- probabilistic
sampling technique. In this manner, the managers, branch managers, asst, branch managers were
considered a sample for this study.
DETERMINATION OF SAMPLE SIZE
In order to determination the sample size the research study used following formula:
Where, n= the sample size,
Z= the standard normal variete value (1.96%) at 5% confidence level,
e= the allowable sampling error at 5 % and
s= the standard deviation.
Based on the pilot study, the standard deviation (0.4404) was substitute in the above mentioned
formula to get a requited sample size for this study.
SCOPE OF THE STUDY
This research made attempt to evaluate the effectiveness of training provided and its impact in the
manager’s development. The banking employees designated as managers, branch managers, asst.
Branch managers are consider for this study.
PROFILE OF STATE BANK OF INDIA
The origin of the State Bank of India goes back to the first decade of the nineteenth century with the
establishment of the Bank of Calcutta in Calcutta on 2 June 1806. Three years later the bank received
its charter and was re-designed as the Bank of Bengal (2 January 1809). A unique institution, it was the
first joint-stock bank of British India sponsored by the Government of Bengal. The Bank of Bombay
(15 April 1840) and the Bank of Madras (1 July 1843) followed the Bank of Bengal. These three banks
remained at the apex of modern banking in India till their amalgamation as the Imperial Bank of India
on 27 January 1921. Primarily Anglo-Indian creations, the three presidency banks came into existence
either as a result of the compulsions of imperial finance or by the felt needs of local European
commerce and were not imposed from outside in an arbitrary manner to modernize India's economy.
Their evolution was, however, shaped by ideas culled from similar developments in Europe and
England, and was influenced by changes occurring in the structure of both the local trading
environment and those in the relations of the Indian economy to the economy of Europe and the global
economic framework.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK OF TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT IN SBI
TRAINING EVALUATION MODEL
ANALYZING TRAINING EFFECTIVENESS
This is where Kirkpatrick's Four-Level Training Evaluation Model can help you objectively analyze the
effectiveness and impact of your training, so that you can improve it in the future. The Kirkpatrick four
levels and we'll examine how you can apply the model to evaluate training. We'll also look at some of
the situations where the model may not be useful.
THE FOUR LEVELS
Donald Kirkpatrick, Professor Emeritus at the University of Wisconsin and past president of the
American Society for Training and Development (ASTD), first published his Four-Level Training
International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 -
6510(Online), Volume 7, Issue 2, February (2016), pp. 578-592 © IAEME Publication
582
Dr. G. S. David Sam Jayakumar and G. Rafick, “Modelling Training Effectiveness and Its Impact on
Development of Managers In State Bank of India” - (ICAM 2016)
Evaluation Model in 1959, in the US Training and Development Journal. The model was then updated
in 1975, and again in 1994, when he published his best-known work, "Evaluating Training Programs."
THE FOUR LEVELS ARE
1. Reaction.
2. Learning.
3. Behaviour.
4. Results.
LEVEL 1: REACTION
This level measures how your trainees (the people being trained), reacted to the training. Obviously,
you want them to feel that the training was a valuable experience, and you want them to feel good
about the instructor, the topic, the material, its presentation, and the venue. It's important to measure
reaction; because it helps you understand how well the training was received by your audience. It also
helps you improve the training for future trainees, including identifying important areas or topics that
are missing from the training.
LEVEL 2: LEARNING
At level 2, you measure what your trainees have learned. How much has their knowledge increased as a
result of the training?
When you planned the training session, you hopefully started with a list of specific learning
objectives: these should be the starting point for your measurement. Keep in mind that you can measure
learning in different ways depending on these objectives, and depending on whether you're interested in
changes to knowledge, skills, or attitude. It's important to measure this, because knowing what your
trainees are learning and what they aren't will help you improve future training.
LEVEL 3: BEHAVIOUR
At this level, you evaluate how far your trainees have changed their behaviour, based on the training
they received. Specifically, this looks at how trainees apply the information.
It's important to realize that behaviour can only change if conditions are favourable. For instance,
imagine you've skipped measurement at the first two Kirkpatrick levels and, when looking at your
group's behaviour, you determine that no behaviour change has taken place. Therefore, you assume that
your trainees haven't learned anything and that the training was ineffective. However, just because
behaviour hasn't changed, it doesn't mean that trainees haven't learned anything. Perhaps their boss
won't let them apply new knowledge. Or, maybe they've learned everything you taught, but they have
no desire to apply the knowledge themselves.
LEVEL 4: RESULTS
At this level, you analyze the final results of your training. This includes outcomes that you or your
organization have determined to be good for business, good for the employees, or good for the bottom
line. Reaction measures how the participants liked the program, and it is the evaluation method most
commonly used by organizations. Typically, participants are given a “post-training questionnaire” that
uses a Linker-type scale (1 = disagree strongly, 2 = disagree, 3 = neither agree nor disagree, 4 = agree,
5 = agree strongly).
Questions asked focus on the participants’ opinion about program issues:
“I really enjoyed attending this program.”
“This program will be a great help in my job.”
“The instructor was very knowledgeable about the topic.”
“I would recommend this program to my peers.”
Reactions are easy to measure, and they certainly provide trainers a sense of well-being and
comfort about their human resource development (HRD) programs. Additionally, they can be
determined quickly and easily immediately after any program. Reactions also can be seen as one
International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 -
6510(Online), Volume 7, Issue 2, February (2016), pp. 578-592 © IAEME Publication
583
Dr. G. S. David Sam Jayakumar and G. Rafick, “Modelling Training Effectiveness and Its Impact on
Development of Managers In State Bank of India” - (ICAM 2016)
measure of how motivated trainees are to attend the program, but there are some issues that make
reactions less than perfect as a method of measuring the effectiveness of an intervention. For instance,
reactions can be easily manipulated — good food and a pleasant day away from work can be a very
nice way to spend a day.
The second level, learning, focuses on the participant being able to repeat concepts presented
during the program. Learning typically is measured using both a pre-test and a post-test and comparing
the results. The change is considered to be a measure of what the participants learned during the
program.
While learning is a very useful means for evaluating some programs, it is of little value in
evaluating many others. (Is it worthwhile to “know” the steps for performing CPR?).
Levels 3 and 4 of Kirkpatrick’s model focus on issues more critical to most organizations than the
first two levels. Behavior, the third level, looks at how participants act after the program compared with
the way they acted before the program. Behaviors, while very important factors in many programs, can
be difficult to measure and analyze.
It is usually essential to use both a pre- and a post-measure and to include a control group for
comparison purposes. The control group is similar in as many ways as possible to the group receiving
the intervention, but the control group does not receive the intervention. The use of a control group
allows you to make the assertion that any changes in the group receiving the intervention, which do not
occur in the control group, are most likely because of the HRD intervention. While the above is
generally straightforward, evaluating behavioral changes is further compounded by the difficulty in
measuring behaviors at all — how do we measure behaviors? We can observe how people behave and
record those observations, but this is time-consuming, and people often behave differently when being
observed.
Data analysis and interpretation
Table 1 Descriptive statistics of demographic factors
Demographic factors particulars No of bank Managers Percent
Gender Male 132 62.9
Female 78 78
Age
20-25 years 42 20.0
26-35 60 28.6
36-45 60 28.6
45-50 30 14.3
Above 50 18 8.6
Category
Manager 54 25.7
Branch manager 105 50.0
Asst. branch manager 51 24.3
Experience
Below 2 years 27 12.9
2-5 years 33 15.7
5-10 years 78 37.1
10-15 years 57 27.1
Above 15 years 15 7.1
Monthly Income
Below 40,000 36 17.1
40,000-50,000 117 55.7
Above 50,000 57 27.1
n= 210
International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 -
6510(Online), Volume 7, Issue 2, February (2016), pp. 578-592 © IAEME Publication
584
Dr. G. S. David Sam Jayakumar and G. Rafick, “Modelling Training Effectiveness and Its Impact on
Development of Managers In State Bank of India” - (ICAM 2016)
The Table visualized the gender, age group, designation, experience, income of the bank managers
of SBI, majority of the managers are female (78%). This is followed by male managers (62.9%).
Majority of the managers are at the age group of 26 – 45 (28.6%). This is followed by age group of
managers at 20 – 25 (20%). Managers above the age of 50 are leased numbered (8.6). The managers
are at the designation of branch managers (50%). This is followed by designation of the managers
(25.7%). The leased numbered are Asst. Branch manager (24.3). Majority are at the year of 5-10 years
(37.1%). This is followed by the years of the experienced managers at 10-15 years (27.1%). Managers
above 15 years of experienced are leased numbered (7.1%). Majority are at 40,000-50,000 (55.7%).
This is followed by the Income of bank managers above 50,000 (27.1%). Managers below 40,000 are
leased numbered (7.1%).
Structural Equation Model of Training Effectiveness and its effect on Managers Development
International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 -
6510(Online), Volume 7, Issue 2, February (2016), pp. 578-592 © IAEME Publication
585
Dr. G. S. David Sam Jayakumar and G. Rafick, “Modelling Training Effectiveness and Its Impact on
Development of Managers In State Bank of India” - (ICAM 2016)
Structural Equation Model of Training Effectiveness and its effect on Managers Development
Path Estimate (Table – 1)
Indicators Constraints Estimate S.E. C.R. P R2
TS1 Training session 1.000 - - - .962
TS2 Training session .942 .046 20.617 .000 .695
TS3 Training session .985 .048 20.580 .000 .694
TS4 Training session .952 .077 12.417 .000 .437
TS5 Training session .859 .047 18.311 .000 .638
TS6 Training session .996 .025 40.113 .000 .924
MD1 Managers Development 1.000 - - - .695
MD2 Managers Development 1.182 .066 17.772 .000 .833
MD3 Managers Development .952 .063 15.013 .000 .685
MD4 Managers Development .974 .061 15.872 .000 .733
MD5 Managers Development .866 .054 16.114 .000 .746
TC5 Training content 1.000 - - - .601
TC4 Training content 1.066 .079 13.547 .000 .767
TC3 Training content .935 .073 12.881 .000 .702
TC2 Training content .980 .093 10.570 .000 .502
TC1 Training content 1.009 .090 11.177 .000 .552
MD6 Managers Development .974 .053 18.431 .000 .865
MD7 Managers Development .974 .062 15.581 .000 .717
MD8 Managers Development 1.034 .093 11.180 .000 .865
TL6 Transfer of Learning 1.000 - - - .989
TL5 Transfer of Learning .892 .065 13.820 .000 .483
TL4 Transfer of Learning .453 .060 7.578 .000 .218
TL3 Transfer of Learning .036 .068 .524 .600 .001
TL2 Transfer of Learning 1.024 .015 68.958 .000 .981
TL1 Transfer of Learning .324 .074 4.361 .000 .084
TA5 Trainer Aspects 1.000 - - - .519
TA4 Trainer Aspects .970 .096 10.062 .000 .528
TA3 Trainer Aspects 1.450 .122 11.911 .000 .746
TA2 Trainer Aspects 1.463 .134 10.937 .000 .624
TA1 Trainer Aspects 1.350 .131 10.335 .000 .557
Managers Development Training content .121 .043 2.796 .005
.927 Managers Development Training session .778 .052 14.988 .000
Managers Development Transfer of Learning -.095 .038 -2.521 .012
Managers Development Trainer Aspects .270 .062 4.381 .000
RMR (Root Mean Square Residual) = 0.157, GFI (Goodness of Fit Index) = 0.84, AGFI (Adjusted
Goodness of fit Index) =0.78, AIC (Akakaie Information criteria) = 888.369, S.E = Standardised
Estimate, CR = Critical Ratio, P= p- Value.
Table 1 describe to measure training session six variables were consider. Out of the six variables,
the adequate resource to implement the training session has maximum beta loading 0.996. the variables
benefit from the training programme has the next maximum beta loading 0.985 & the training
objectives were accurately conveyed was a variables with beta loading 0.952 and its followed by the
variables the training objectives were properly accomplished with the beta loading 0.942 and its
followed by collected feedback forms from the trainees were subjective and objective minimum beta
loading 0.859. Secondly manager’s development eight variables were considered. Out of eight
variables, the variables positive impact on my job and career development has maximum beta loading
International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 -
6510(Online), Volume 7, Issue 2, February (2016), pp. 578-592 © IAEME Publication
586
Dr. G. S. David Sam Jayakumar and G. Rafick, “Modelling Training Effectiveness and Its Impact on
Development of Managers In State Bank of India” - (ICAM 2016)
1.182, 1.034. the variables job provides to do something that makes use of abilities and feel proud to
work and long term for this organization were maximum beta loading 0.974 and its followed by there is
a chance of advancement in the current job lowest beta loading 0.952. Thirdly training content five
variables were considered. Out of five variables skills acquire through training development
programme has increased maximum beta loading 1.066. The variables training session has increased
understanding of the subject is maximum beta loading 1.009. The next variables training contents were
relevant to the job beta loading 0.980 and it’s followed by skills acquire through training were helpful
carrying out of my duties has minimum beta loading 0.935. Transfers of learning six variables were
considered. Out of six variables, the variables were able to transfer the learning from training to work
the maximum beta loading 1.024. The variables training has increased work efficiency and
effectiveness was maximum beta loading 0.892 and its followed by the training has control over the job
beta loading 0.453. Next the trainer aspect five variables were considered. Out of five variables, the
trainer was well prepared the maximum beta loading 1.463. The training showed encouragement and
motivated trainees to learn maximum beta loading 1.450. The next variables the trainer was so helpful
and its beta loading 1.350 and its followed by the trainer used varied learning methods for different
types of learner’s lowest beta loading 0.970. Finally the four dimensions like (Training content,
Training session, Transfer of learning, Trainer aspects) were consider to predict managers
development. Out of the four dimensions the training session predict 0.778 maximum towards
managers development, followed by the trainer aspects which predict 0.270 towards managers
development, the third dimension training content predict 0.121 towards managers development, the
dimension transfer of learning has a negative impact -0.095 towards managers development. And all
the above mention statement and its significant at 0.000 level. The goodness of fit index of the above
model above 84% which shows there is a good fit between the variables in the model.
Structural Equation Model of Training Effectiveness and its indirect Managers Development
International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 -
6510(Online), Volume 7, Issue 2, February (2016), pp. 578-592 © IAEME Publication
587
Dr. G. S. David Sam Jayakumar and G. Rafick, “Modelling Training Effectiveness and Its Impact on
Development of Managers In State Bank of India” - (ICAM 2016)
Structural Equation Model of Training Effectiveness and its indirect Managers Development
Path Estimate (Table -2)
Indicators Constraints Estimate S.E. C.R. P R2
TS1 Training session 1.000 - - - .981
TS2 Training session .930 .045 20.793 .000 .690
TS3 Training session .964 .048 20.203 .000 .677
TS4 Training session .925 .075 12.286 .000 .428
TS5 Training session .828 .048 17.386 .000 .605
TS6 Training session .985 .023 42.436 .000 .923
MD1 Managers Development 1.000 - - - .784
MD2 Managers Development .896 .036 25.014 .000 .876
MD3 Managers Development .730 .036 20.134 .000 .758
MD4 Managers Development .746 .034 21.750 .000 .802
MD5 Managers Development .622 .032 19.210 .000 .731
TC5 Training content 1.000 - - - .617
TC4 Training content 1.075 .076 14.138 .000 .801
TC3 Training content .945 .070 13.536 .000 .737
TC2 Training content .924 .091 10.157 .000 .459
TC1 Training content .929 .089 10.453 .000 .482
MD6 Managers Development .730 .029 25.482 .000 .885
MD7 Managers Development .747 .035 21.274 .000 .790
MD8 Managers Development .797 .037 21.785 .000 .803
TL6 Transfer of Learning 1.000 - - - .360
TL5 Transfer of Learning 1.399 .156 8.973 .000 .774
TL4 Transfer of Learning .815 .105 7.770 .000 .458
TL3 Transfer of Learning .342 .093 3.670 .000 .079
TL2 Transfer of Learning 1.022 .118 8.645 .000 .636
TL1 Transfer of Learning .327 .105 3.118 .002 .056
TA5 Trainer Aspects 1.000 - - - .407
TA4 Trainer Aspects 1.030 .123 8.394 .000 .466
TA3 Trainer Aspects 1.658 .165 10.035 .000 .764
TA2 Trainer Aspects 1.733 .179 9.708 .000 .686
TA1 Trainer Aspects 1.630 .172 9.459 .000 .637
Managers Development Training content .148 .098 1.512 .130
.433 Managers Development Training session .907 .082 11.082 .000
Managers Development Transfer of Learning .147 .103 1.422 .155
Managers Development Trainer Aspects .237 .127 1.873 .061
RMR (Root Mean Square Residual) = 0.404, GFI (Goodness of Fit Index) = 0.80, AGFI
(Adjusted Goodness of fit Index) =0.76, AIC (Akakaie Information criteria) = 1900.317, S.E =
Standardised Estimate, CR = Critical Ratio, P = p-value.
Table 2 describe to measure training session six variables were consider. Out of the 6 variables, the
individual variables adequate resource to implement the training session has maximum beta loading
0.985. The variables benefit from the training programme has the next maximum beta loading 0.964.
The next variables the objectives were properly accomplished with the beta loading 0.930. The benefit
from training programme the beta loading 0.925 and it’s followed by collected feedback forms from
the trainees was subjective and objective minimum beta loading 0.828. Secondly manager development
eight variables were considered. Out of eight variables, the individual statement positive impact on my
International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 -
6510(Online), Volume 7, Issue 2, February (2016), pp. 578-592 © IAEME Publication
588
Dr. G. S. David Sam Jayakumar and G. Rafick, “Modelling Training Effectiveness and Its Impact on
Development of Managers In State Bank of India” - (ICAM 2016)
job and career development has maximum beta loading 0.896 & 0.797. The variables to do something
that makes use of abilities feel proud to work for this organization were maximum beta loading 0.74,
0.746 & 0.730 its followed by the job provides new ways of learning lowest beta loading 0.622.
Thirdly the training content five variables were considered. Out of five variables, the individual
statement sills acquire through training development programme has increased maximum beat loading
1.075. The variables skills acquire through training were helpful to carrying out of my duties has beta
loading 0.945. The training session has increased understanding of the subject beta loading 0.929 and
it’s followed by training contents were relevant to the job perform minimum beta loading 0.924. The
transfer of learning six variables were considers. Out of six variables, the individual statement the
training has put control over the job is maximum beta loading 1.399. The variables was able to transfer
the learning from training to work allowed learn from mistakes that happened during affect transfer of
learning minimum beta loading 0.815. The trainer aspects five variables were considered. Out of five
variables, the individual variables were well prepared the maximum beta loading 1.733. The training
showed encouragement and motivated trainees to learn maximum beta loading 1.658. The next
statement the trainer was so helpful maximum beta loading 1.630 and it’s followed by trainer used
varied learning methods for different types of learners beta loading 1.030. The four dimension like
(Training session, Training content, Transfer of learning, Trainer aspects) were consider to predict
managers development. Out of the four dimensions the training sessions predict 0.907 maximum
towards managers development, followed by the trainer aspects which predict 0.237. The third
dimension training content predicts 0.148 towards managers development, the dimension transfer of
learning predict 0.147 towards managers development. And all the above mention statement and its
significant at 0.000 level. The goodness of fit index of above model is above 80% which shows there is
a good fit between the variable in the model.
Structural Equation Model for the impact of Managers Development in the dimensions of
Training Effectiveness
International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 -
6510(Online), Volume 7, Issue 2, February (2016), pp. 578-592 © IAEME Publication
589
Dr. G. S. David Sam Jayakumar and G. Rafick, “Modelling Training Effectiveness and Its Impact on
Development of Managers In State Bank of India” - (ICAM 2016)
Structural Equation Model for the impact of Managers Development in the dimensions of
Training Effectiveness Path Estimate (Table- 3)
Indicators Constraints Estimate S.E. C.R. P R2
TS1 Training session 1.000 - - - .990
TS2 Training session .916 .032 28.990 .000 .810
TS3 Training session .949 .034 28.139 .000 .800
TS4 Training session .910 .053 17.054 .000 .588
TS5 Training session .815 .034 24.165 .000 .744
TS6 Training session .970 .016 60.451 .000 .958
MD1 Managers Development 1.000 - - - .653
MD2 Managers Development 1.239 .073 17.037 .000 .860
MD3 Managers Development .995 .068 14.547 .000 .703
MD4 Managers Development 1.011 .067 15.153 .000 .742
MD5 Managers Development .849 .060 14.106 .000 .674
TC5 Training content 1.000 - - - .598
TC4 Training content 1.060 .080 13.294 .000 .754
TC3 Training content .925 .073 12.584 .000 .683
TC2 Training content 1.001 .093 10.746 .000 .522
TC1 Training content 1.028 .091 11.324 .000 .571
MD6 Managers Development 1.014 .058 17.369 .000 .880
MD7 Managers Development 1.018 .068 15.052 .000 .736
MD8 Managers Development 1.080 .071 15.164 .000 .743
TL6 Transfer of Learning 1.000 - - - .330
TL5 Transfer of Learning 1.561 .171 9.135 .000 .845
TL4 Transfer of Learning .879 .114 7.745 .000 .468
TL3 Transfer of Learning .449 .100 4.499 .000 .119
TL2 Transfer of Learning 1.020 .125 8.185 .000 .555
TL1 Transfer of Learning .335 .110 3.053 .002 .051
TA5 Trainer Aspects 1.000 - - - .457
TA4 Trainer Aspects 1.028 .110 9.377 .000 .523
TA3 Trainer Aspects 1.560 .142 10.960 .000 .761
TA2 Trainer Aspects 1.585 .154 10.265 .000 .644
TA1 Trainer Aspects 1.481 .150 9.893 .000 .591
Training session Managers Development .986 .096 10.215 .000 .418
Transfer of Learning Managers Development .698 .087 8.054 .000 .733
Trainer Aspects Managers Development .555 .064 8.630 .000 .577
Training content Managers Development .565 .067 8.444 .000 .414
RMR (Root Mean Square Residual) = 0.202, GFI (Goodness of Fit Index) = 0.82, AGFI (Adjusted
Goodness of fit Index) =0.78, AIC (Akaike Information criteria) = 1520.194, S.E = Standardised
Estimate, CR = Critical Ratio, P = P- Value
Table 3 describes to measure training session six variables were consider. Out of six variables, the
individual variables adequate resource to implement the training session has maximum beta loading
0.970. The variables benefit from the training programme has next maximum beta loading 0.949. The
training objectives were properly accomplished maximum beta loading 0.916 and it’s followed by the
statement collected feedback forms from the trainees were subjective and objective minimum beta
loading 0.815. Secondly managers development eight variables were consider. Out of eight variables,
the individual statement positive impact on my job, career development maximum beta loading
respectively 1.239, 1.080. The next variables job provides to do something that makes use of abilities
International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 -
6510(Online), Volume 7, Issue 2, February (2016), pp. 578-592 © IAEME Publication
590
Dr. G. S. David Sam Jayakumar and G. Rafick, “Modelling Training Effectiveness and Its Impact on
Development of Managers In State Bank of India” - (ICAM 2016)
and feel proud to work for long term for this organization were maximum beta loading 1.018, 1.014,
1.011 and it’s followed by advancement in the current job lowest beta loading 0.995. Thirdly training
content five variables were considered. Out of five variables, the individual statement variables skills
acquire through training development programme has increased capabilities and maximum beta loading
1.060. The training session has increased understanding of the subject maximum beta loading 1.028.
The next statement training contents were relevant to the job skills acquire through training was helpful
to carrying out of my duties beta loading 0.925. The transfers of learning six variables were considered.
Out of six variables, the training has put control over the job maximum beta loading 1.561. Training
was able to transfer the learning from training to work has maximum beta loading 1.020. The training
was allowed transfers of learning maximum beta loading 0.879 and its followed by the variable to
implement the transfer of learning minimum beta loading 0.449.The trainer aspects five variables were
considered. Out of five variables, the individual variables trainer was well prepared has maximum beta
loading 1.585. The training showed encouragement and motivated trainees to learn maximum beta
loading 1.560. The next variables trainer was so helpful maximum beta loading 1.481 and it’s followed
by the statement the different types of learning methods are following minimum beta loading 1.028. To
measure the four dimension like (Training session, Training content, Transfer of learning, Trainer
aspects) were consider to predict managers development. Out of the four dimensions the training
sessions predict 0.986 maximum towards managers development, followed by the transfer of learning
which predict 0.698 towards managers development. The third dimension training content predicts
0.565 towards manager’s development, the dimension trainer aspect which predict 0.555 towards
manager’s development. And all the above mention statement and its significant at 0.000 level. The
goodness of fit index of above model is above 82% which shows there is a good fit between the
variable in the model.
FINDINGS
BASED ON INDIVIDUAL STATEMENTS IN THE DIMENSION (OVERALL MODEL)
1) Training Session:
Out of six variables in the training session dimension variable (TS 6) managers were provided with
adequate resources to implement the learning from training session has the highest loading .996 and
variable (TS 5) Feedback forms collected from the trainees were Subjective and objective has the least
beta loading .859.
2) Managers Development:
Out of eight variables in the dimension manager’s development variable (MD 2) Organizational steps
for employee growth such as training have positive impact on my job has the highest beta loading
1.182 and (MD 5) the job provides new ways of learning has the least beta loading .866.
3) Training Content:
Dimension training content has five variables out of which (TC 4) the skill(s) acquired through
training/development program has increased my capability has the highest beta loading 1.066 and (TC
3) Skills acquired through Training were helpful in carrying out duties has the least beta loading.935.
4) Transfer of Learning:
Dimension transfer of learning consists of six variables out of which (TL 2) Managers were able to
transfer the learning from training to work has the highest beta loading 1.024 and (TL 3) Managers
were in control on how to implement the learning has the least beta loading .036.
5) Training Aspects:
Out of five variables in training aspects (TA 2) trainer was well prepared has the highest beta
loading 1.463 and (TA 4) Trainer used varied learning methods for different types of learners (e.g.
slides, images, videos, practical demos) has the least beta loading .970 when comparing to other
variables and contributes less towards training aspects.
International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 -
6510(Online), Volume 7, Issue 2, February (2016), pp. 578-592 © IAEME Publication
591
Dr. G. S. David Sam Jayakumar and G. Rafick, “Modelling Training Effectiveness and Its Impact on
Development of Managers In State Bank of India” - (ICAM 2016)
Out of the four dimensions Training content, Training session, Transfer of learning, Trainer
aspects, and training sessions contributes more towards manager’s development 0.778 and the
dimension transfer of learning shows a negative impact -0.095 towards manager’s development.
SUGGESTIONS
In today’s environment of increased accountability, the training evaluation process is a critical
component of an organization’s (Bank) training program. Banks administering the program not only
are accountable for what employees learn, they also are accountable for ensuring that employees
transfer their knowledge to their work performance. While traditional training evaluation methods
focus on using the assessment process to improve training delivery, information should also be
collected to determine whether training is assisting the organization to improve its business
performance. Organizations are constantly affected by change and to be socialized with the changing
nature of the global economic scenario the employees are to be acclimatized with new skills,
knowledge and attitudes. To build up competent and more knowledgeable workforce the following
recommendations could be followed by Organization must follow a systematic training cycle at regular
intervals to get the most out of the training and helping the employees update with latest knowledge
and skills. Employees working in a continuous-learning environment share the perceptions and
expectations that learning is essential to them and associated with their work. Training Performance
should be linked with the reward system to encourage employees. Reward for doing things well and
they need help and advice if they are not performing up to standard. Most importantly feedback should
be given timely, regularly and relevant. The provision of appropriate tools to deliver the training
program is very essential. Availability of latest learning technologies and advanced teaching methods
will helps employees upgrade to the next advanced level. Well trained training professionals are very
vital for the success of any training program in the organization. Trainers must be up to date with latest
knowledge depending with the nature of the organization and nature of the program. They must be well
prepared in all ways to deal with the complexities of the training program. Trainers must be
knowledgeable enough to solve any doubt raised by the trainees. Training must be plan should be based
on a detailed analysis of the existing material and functional possibilities for its implementation. Thus,
the available information should be considered, as well as the tools and resources at hand, the time
required and the approximate costs involved. Ultimately, the evaluation plan must be feasible and
realistic. Support from the management is an essential factor for the success of the training program.
Without the support from management bodies allocation of necessary resources that help in gaining
training results will be at risk.
CONCLUSION
Knowledge, Skills and attitude are the most essential criterion of an employee for efficiently
performing the operations in any enterprise. These are the most significant asset in an organization’s
human resources in achieving competitive advantage. Training helps employees to get a clear view of
their job. Training refers to the acquisitions of knowledge and skills and help employees better
understand the information they are given. However, due to changing of business climate training
should not be considered as the only key to develop employees and therefore, look for other
alternatives like work based learning, coaching, mentoring and counselling etc. Thus, there are many
benefits to training evaluation. All that is needed is to set to work to achieve them.
REFERENCES
[1] Acton, t., & Golden, W. (2013) Training the knowledge worker: a descriptive study of
training practices in Irish software companies. Journal of European Industrial Training
27(2), 137-146.
[2] Bendingham, K. (1997). Proving the effectiveness of training. International and
commercial Training, 29(3), 88-91.
[3] Kirkpatrick, (1994), “Transferring learning to behaviour”, TpD, Vol. 59 No. 4, p. 19.
International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 -
6510(Online), Volume 7, Issue 2, February (2016), pp. 578-592 © IAEME Publication
592
Dr. G. S. David Sam Jayakumar and G. Rafick, “Modelling Training Effectiveness and Its Impact on
Development of Managers In State Bank of India” - (ICAM 2016)
APPENDIX
Items
No
Dimension
Variables
Variable code/
item code
1
Training Session
The training objectives were accurately conveyed. TS1
2 The training objectives were properly accomplished. TS2
3 I was told that “How would I benefit from this training
program”. TS3
4 Having told that “How would I benefit from this training
program” helped me to gain commitment. TS4
5 Feedback forms collected from the trainees were
Subjective and objective. TS5
6 I was provided with adequate resources to implement
the learning from training session TS6
1
Training Content
Training session has increased my understanding of the
subject. TC1
2 Training contents were relevant to the job I perform. TC2
3 Skills acquired through Training were helpful to me in
carrying out my duties. TC3
4 The skill(s) acquired through training/development
Program has increased my capability. TC4
5 Training added value by providing opportunity to develop
skills and knowledge TC5
1
Training Aspects
Trainer was so helpful. TA1
2 Trainer was well prepared. TA2
3 Training showed encouragement and motivated trainees to
learn. TA3
4 Trainer used varied learning methods for different types
Of learners (e.g. slides, images, videos, practical demos). TA4
5 The training session was collaborative and involved
discussion with the trainer. TA5
1
Transfer of
Learning
Management supported me in transferring training to work. TL1
2 I was able to transfer the learning from training to work. TL2
3 I was in control on how to implement the learning. TL3
4 I was allowed learn from my mistakes that happened during
transfer of learning. TL4
5 The training has put me in further control over my job. TL5
6 The training has increased work efficiency and effectiveness. TL6
1
Managers
Development
I have made progress towards the goals I have set for myself. MD1
2 Organizational steps for employee growth such as
Training have positive impact on my job. MD2
3 There is a chance of advancement in the current job. MD3
4 The job provides me the chance to do something that makes
use of my abilities. MD4
5 The job provides me new ways of learning. MD5
6 I feel proud in telling others that I work for this organization. MD6
7 I would like to work long term for this organization. MD7
8 Training creates positive impact towards my career
development MD8