U4-assignment

bamaboi

Relationship-unit4-db8008.pdf

Home >Business & Finance homework help >Management homework help >U4-assignment

International Journal of Training and Development 11:1 ISSN 1360-3736

Organizational commitment

1••••Articles

Organizational commitmentInternational Journal of Training and Development

Mohammed Asad Shareef Al-Emadi, Head Internal Auditor, Qatar Petroleum, PO Box 536, Doha, State of Qatar; Visiting Scholar and Adjunct Professor, California State University, 560 Loma Verde Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94306, USA. Email: [email protected]. Michael J. Marquardt, Professor of Human Resource Development and International Affairs, The George Washington University, 2134 G Street, Washington, DC 20052, USA. Email: [email protected]

Relationship between employees’ beliefs regarding

training benefits and employees’ organizational

commitment in a petroleum company in the State of Qatar

Mohammed Asad Shareef Al-Emadi and Michael J. Marquardt

The study examined the relationship between the beliefs of senior staff Qatari national employees regarding training benefits as measured by the benefits of employee training, and employees’ organizational commitment as measured by the three-component model of organizational commitment. This relationship was assessed through a quantitative associa- tional research design. From the study site, Qatar Petroleum, a total of 283 responses were analysed using stepwise regres- sion analysis. The findings suggest that there is a positive relationship between employees’ beliefs regarding training ben- efits and employees’ organizational commitment.

Overview

Emphasizing and implementing powerful training and development programs are becoming more critical in order to accomplish organizational objectives and goals

International Journal of Training and Development

effectively and efficiently. Organizations continue to struggle with the specific issues of employee retention and manpower shortages. Accordingly, there has been an increased interest in organizational commitment. Academic and professional journals present an extensive literature that seeks to define, measure and explain organiza- tional commitment. For example, Kontoghiorphes and Bryant (2004) assert that commitment of employees to the organization has been one of the most popular organizational research constructs over the last three decades. Guffey

et al

. (1997) suggest that ‘successful organizations recognize that employees are their most valu- able resources because of employee commitment to the organization’ (p. 12). Accord- ingly, the organizational need to retain human capital has become a primary concern for organizations (Harkins, 1998). Becker’s (1975) human capital theory explains that organizations can achieve greater productivity through employee training. Grossberg (2000) adds that ‘investment in firm-specific human capital should result in employ- ment spells of greater duration’ (p. 578). Organizational investment in human capital has resulted in management being required to pay ever closer attention to employee training.

Statement of the problem

The relationship between employees’ beliefs regarding training benefits and employ- ees’ organizational commitment is as yet unclear. Review of the literature on employee training and organizational commitment suggest that there is such a relationship between employee training and organizational commitment (Bartlett, 2001, Becker, 1975; Grossberg, 2000; Lang, 1992, Meyer & Smith, 2000; Pinks, 1992; Tannenbaum

et al

., 1991). However, the nature of this relationship has not been clearly delineated. For example, there continues to be lack of empirical studies that identify which benefit of employee training (personal, career and job-related) is the best predictor of which component of organizational commitment (affective, continuance and normative).

Researchers and practitioners have invested considerable time, effort and money in identifying the importance of employee training and organizational commitment over the past 30-plus years, and varied studies have linked organizational commitment to a variety of factors. Marsh and Mannari (1977) reported early on that ‘there has been a continuing interest in the commitment of employees to their organization’ (p. 57). More recently, Tobias and Fletcher (2000) add that ‘training is a vast and costly activity that affects a huge segment of the workforce at any point in time’ (p. 3). Lang (1992) suggests that employee training and development should be designed to achieve increased organizational commitment. Pinks (1992) writes that ‘irrelevant training programs may negatively affect organizational commitment’ (p. 18). Grossberg (2000) asserts that employee training across genders is strongly associated with longer durations of employment. Meyer and Smith (2000) document the existence of a link between organizational commitment and training. Bartlett (2001) reports the existence of a strong relationship between training and organizational commitment. All of these point out an awareness of the significance of the relationship under study.

The petroleum industry is the focus of the study for a number of reasons. First, there is limited empirical research that examines the relationship between employees’ beliefs regarding training benefits and employees’ organizational commitment in this type of industry. Yet this industry is at the epicenter of the global economy; small shifts in the oil business have large repercussions. Second, the petroleum industry spends millions of dollars training its workforce, yet it is unknown if training has any impact at all on how committed those employees feel towards the company. Third and finally, under- standing the relationship between organizational commitment and employee training may help reduce costs associated with employee turnover, recruitment and training. Becker (1975) reports that investment in firm-specific human capital reduces the prob- ability of employee turnover. Grossberg (2000) adds that employee training across genders is strongly associated with longer durations of employment.

Clark (2001) reports that the petroleum industry ‘has numerous problems that need solving. Three current trends are particularly troublesome: the market’s rise-and-fall

Organizational commitment

cycle with its accompanying industry staffing dilemma, an aging workforce that neces- sitates recruitment of younger personnel, and the critical need for the industry to maintain a positive public image. These elements all play off one another in a number of ways’ (p. 17). Bahree and Gold (2005) add that ‘a lot of skilled people have either been laid off, or have retired from the industry in the last 18 years . . . recruiting and training their replacements takes time and requires a global approach’ (p. 1). Further, McKenna (2004) suggests that ‘[c]ompanies without a strong retention strategy will continue to lose the battle on talent, and be left with a mediocre workforce at best. You can’t differentiate with mediocrity. In general, people prefer to stay put, but this requires leaders who possess the ability to create a store climate and culture that makes staying worthwhile. Companies that understand the causes of employee turnover and take action to create solutions will win the war on talent’ (p. 15).

Purpose of the study

The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between petroleum com- pany employees’ beliefs regarding training benefits (personal, career and job-related) and the three components of those employees’ organizational commitment: affective commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment.

Research questions

The overarching research question that guided this study is: what is the relationship between petroleum company employees’ beliefs regarding training benefits and the commitment of those employees’ to the organization? The following sub-questions derived from components of the two constructs under study were addressed:

1. What is the relationship between affective commitment and personal bene- fits, career benefits and job-related benefits of employee training in a petroleum company in the State of Qatar?

2. What is the relationship between continuance commitment and personal benefits, career benefits and job-related benefits of employee training in a petroleum com- pany in the State of Qatar?

3. What is the relationship between normative commitment and personal benefits, career benefits and job-related benefits of employee training in a petroleum com- pany in the State of Qatar?

4. What is the relationship between organizational commitment represented by affective, continuance and normative commitment and demographic factors rep- resented by age, gender, education and years of service?

Hypotheses

The study examined the following research hypotheses.

Affective commitment

H1a

There is a positive relationship between affective organizational commitment and personal benefits of training.

H1b

There is a positive relationship between affective organizational commitment and career benefits of training.

H1c

There is a positive relationship between affective organizational commitment and job-related benefits of training.

Continuance commitment

H2a

There is a positive relationship between continuance organizational commit- ment and personal benefits of training.

International Journal of Training and Development

H2b

There is a positive relationship between continuance organizational commit- ment and career benefits of training.

H2c

There is a positive relationship between continuance organizational commit- ment and job-related benefits of training.

Normative commitment

H3a

There is a positive relationship between normative organizational commitment and personal benefits of training.

H3b

There is a positive relationship between normative organizational commit- ment and career benefits of training.

H3c

There is a positive relationship between normative organizational commitment and job-related benefits of training.

Significance of the study

This study is significant for the following reasons:

Contribution to theory

: little is know about the relationship between employees’ training and organizational commitment. Use of the three-component model of organizational commitment and benefits of employee training will add to what is known about organizational commitment and benefits of employee training at the individual level of analysis. Additionally, this empirical study is the first to exam- ine the relationship between benefits of employee training and organizational commitment in the petroleum industry.

Contribution to practice

: the study identifies linkages between organizational com- mitment and benefits of employee training. Understanding such linkages may enable organizations to reduce costs associated with recruiting, hiring and training.

Recommendations for future actions

: the study may assist in determining actions managers and directors can take to maximize organizational commitment among employees, thus leading to retaining human capital. The study may also serve to highlight areas for further research.

Theoretical/conceptual framework

The study uses two well-grounded theories to measure the relationship between employees’ beliefs regarding training benefits and employees’ organizational commit- ment: Meyer and Allen’s (1997) three-component model of organizational commit- ment, and Noe and Wilk’s (1993) benefits of employee training.

Figure 1 depicts the conceptual framework used to ground, or anchor, the study. The conceptual framework for this study focuses on understanding the relationship between employees’ beliefs regarding training benefits and employees’ organiza- tional commitment in a petroleum company. It identifies the relationship between the constructs (proposition) and the relationship between the research variables (ques- tions or hypotheses) based on a review of relevant literature related to employee training and organizational commitment. More specifically, the study is built around two constructs: employee training and organizational commitment. The variables in this study are divided into two categories: organizational commitment variables and employee training-related variables. Organizational commitment variables include: affective commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1997). Employee training variables include personal benefits, career benefits and job-related benefits of training (Noe & Wilk, 1993). These variables are considered important for inclusion in the study based on an examination and review of the literature related to employee training and organizational commitment (Bartlett, 2001).

Organizational commitment

Literature review

Organizational commitment

Organizational commitment has been a popular field of study among organizational and behavior researchers since the 1960s with Becker’s (1960) work. Becker concludes that ‘[c]ommitments come into being when a person, by making a side-bet, links extraneous interests with a consistent line of activity’ (p. 32) and, further, that individ- ual bonds to the organization are based on ‘instrumental interests’ such as salary and benefits. From that point, interest in the phenomenon expanded. For example, Marsh and Mannari (1977) report that ‘there has been a continuing interest in the commitment of employees to their organization’ (p. 57). This is because organizational commitment is recognized as one of the major determinants of organizational effectiveness (Steers, 1975). Ferris and Aranya (1983) add that ‘organizational commitment is becoming an increasingly used construct to predict performance, absenteeism and turnover’ (p. 96). Liou and Nyhan (1994) point out that management is recognizing the link between increased organizational commitment and higher levels of job performance, lower levels of absenteeism and lower levels of employee turnover. Mitchell

et al

. (2001) suggest that ‘organizations of all sizes and types are recognizing that they are engaged in a struggle to retain talent, and are actively trying to do something about it’ (p. 97).

Mowday

et al

. (1982) identify some of reasons for the increased popularity of studies related to organizational commitment. For example, organizational commitment predicts important behaviors such as employee turnover and increased management interest in improving employee commitment and achieving employee loyalty to the organization. Hom and Griffeth (1995) identify the following determinants of organi- zational commitment: procedural justice which is ‘fair procedures for allocating rewards in the organization’ (p. 114); expected utility of internal roles, or ‘prospects for attaining desirable work roles inside the company’ (p. 114); employment security, which deals with employment reliability; and job investment, including pension ben- efits and on-job training. Meyer and Allen (1997) suggest that it is not financial rewards that develop organizational commitment; rather, employee commitment to the orga- nization is based on the opportunity the organization offers its employees to conduct

Figure 1: Theoretical/conceptual framework.

Employee training

Career benefits of training

Job-related benefits of training

Personal benefits of training

Organizational commitment

Continuance commitment

Normative commitment

Affective commitment

Retained human capital

Research question #1

Research question #2

Research question #3

International Journal of Training and Development

important and challenging work, the interaction with interesting people, and the environment that facilitates developing and building new skills. Such varied views lead naturally to the question of the essential nature of organizational commitment.

Organizational commitment has been defined as both an attitudinal and a behav- ioral construct. The attitudinal approach to organizational commitment is based on the employee’s development of an emotional or psychological attachment to the orga- nization (Meyer & Allen, 1997). In contrast, the behavioral approach to organizational commitment is based on cost-benefits decisions of leaving or remaining with the organization (Becker, 1960).

Meyer and Allen (1997) note that no one definition of organizational commitment is more ‘correct’ or universally accepted than the others. That the definitions are different, therefore, can only confuse the issue if we speak of commitment without indicating which definition we are using. Organizational commitment can be thought of as the level of attachment felt towards the organization where one is employed (Meyer & Allen, 1997). According to Meyer and Allen (1997), a committed employee is an employee that remains with the organization during good and bad times, attends work regularly, protects company assets and shares organizational goals.

Organizational commitment variables

This study adapts its organizational commitment variable from Meyer and Allen’s (1997) three-component model of organizational commitment; i.e. affective, continu- ance and normative commitment. ‘Affective commitment also develops on the basis of work experiences that employees find rewarding or fulfilling’ (p. 56). Affective commitment is based on emotional attachment to the organization. Employees choose to remain with the organization because they want to stay. Continuance commitment is somewhat more pragmatic, referring to ‘employee’s awareness that costs are asso- ciated with leaving the organization . . . continuance commitment can develop as a result of any action or event that increases the costs of leaving the organization, provided the employee recognizes that these costs have been incurred’ (p. 56). Con- tinuance commitment is based on perceived cost associated with leaving the organi- zation. Employees remain with the organization because they think that in some way they ‘have to’ stay. ‘Normative commitment refers to an employee’s feelings of obli- gation to remain with the organization. Thus, employees with strong normative com- mitment will remain with an organization by virtue of their belief that it is the “right and moral” thing to do’ (p. 60). Normative commitment is based on the belief that it is an employee’s obligation to be committed to the organization. Employees remain with the organization because they believe they should stay in the organization.

According to Meyer and Allen (1997), ‘It is more appropriate to consider affective, continuance and normative commitment to be components, rather than types, of commitment because an employee’s relationship with an organization might reflect varying degrees of all three . . . consequently, researchers stand to gain a clearer under- standing of an employee’s relationship with an organization by considering the strength of all three forms of commitment together than by trying to classify it as being of a particular type’ (p. 13). Accordingly, it is important to understand the distinction between types and components of organizational commitment. Types of organiza- tional commitment are discrete and separate, whereas components of organizational commitment represent subscales that measure the construct.

Employee training

Noe (2002) defines training as planned activities on the part of the organization targeted towards increasing the job knowledge and skills or to modify the attitudes and behav- iors of employees in ways consistent with the goals of the organization and the requirements of the job. For the purposes of this study, employee training includes formal training, informal training, on-the-job training, professional development and other developmental learning activities that prepare the employee for his present job

Organizational commitment

as well as possible future jobs. This generalization is made because Qatar Petroleum (QP), the research site, does not distinguish between the terms training and development.

Employee training has been identified as a key of human resource management practices that facilitates and contributes to gaining competitive advantage (Schuler & MacMillan, 1984). Noe (1999) suggests that ‘training refers to a planned effort by a company to facilitate employees’ learning of job-related competencies. These compe- tencies include knowledge, skills or behaviors that are critical for successful job per- formance. The goal of training is for employees to master the knowledge, skill and behaviors emphasized in training programs and to apply them to their day-to-day activities’ (p. 4). According to Noe

et al

. (1987), training ‘is a necessary component of U.S. companies’ efforts to improve quality, meet the challenges of global competition, use new technologies in producing products and services, and capitalize on the strength of a diverse workforce’ (p. 153). Gritz (1993) documents the increasing num- ber of studies devoted to training and its role on labor markets. Martel (2003) reports that the best companies are companies that make investments in people through training, compensation, benefits and facilities.

Employee training variables

According to Craig (1996), an employee benefits from on-the-job training in many ways. For example, on-the-job training:

reduces unproductive periods of assimilation of new employees to the work requirements; there- fore increasing individual productivity more quickly, ensures that employees learn how to perform tasks in line with the expectations and standards of the organization; the work unit, and the manager-supervisor, allows the learner to experience the day-to-day realities of the job which provides an opportunity to identify problems or discrepancies and enhance present job methods and procedures, eliminates the transfer-of-training problem experienced in other training method- ologies since learning is done in the actual workplace, encourages the creation and maintenance of job and task descriptions and standards and procedures which support consistency and conti- nuity in the job, increases learner’s confidence and productiveness by allowing them to work at their own rate, establishes and strengthens relationship between leaner and supervisor through positive reinforcement and feedback, increases the supervisor’s understanding of the work done by individual contributors through the review and implementation of training plans, defines outcomes in advance, which increases the predictability of achieving results, requires active involvement by learners and on-job training instructors, which is a cornerstone for any learning process, incorporates just-in-time training principles which support the concept of learning new skills as required, and establishes a learning partnership between the new employee and the organization which reinforces joint training and development solutions. (p. 749)

In short, on-the-job training increases efficiency and effectiveness of the workforces and facilitates achieving organizational goals and objectives.

Phillips (1997) adds that increased organizational commitment is one of the benefits of employee training. Phillips and Stone (2002) note that ‘Most successful training programs result in some intangible benefits. Intangible benefits are those positive results that either cannot be converted to monetary values’ (p. 210). Phillips and Phillips (2000), along with Phillips and Stone (2002), identify increased organizational commitment as one of the intangible results of employee training.

Noe and Wilk (1993) grouped employee training benefits into three categories: personal benefits, career benefits and job-related benefits. Personal benefits represent the extent to which employees believe that participation in training activities help them network, improve their job performance and make progress towards their per- sonal development. Career benefits result from participation in training activities that lead to identifying career objectives, reaching career objectives and creating opportu- nity to purse new career paths. Job-related benefits lead to better relationships between peers and managers, and provide a necessary break from the job (Noe & Wilk, 1993).

Noe and Wilk (1993) developed a 14-item scale that measures the benefits of employee training based on an earlier study of Nordhaug (1989). Five items assess personal benefits of employee training (i.e. participating in training programs will help

International Journal of Training and Development

my personal development; participating in training programs will help me network with other employees; participating in training programs will help me perform my job better; participating in training programs will help me stay up to date on new processes and products or procedures related to my job; and participating in training programs will lead to more respect from my peers), six items assess career benefits of employee training (i.e. participating in training programs will increase my chances of getting a promotion; participating in training programs will help me reach my career objective; participating in training programs will give me a better idea of the career path I want to purse; participating in training programs will result in more opportu- nities to purse different career paths; participating in training programs will result in having to do extra work without being rewarded for it; and participating in training programs will help me obtain a salary increase), and three items assess job-related benefits of employee training (i.e. participating in training programs will help me get along better with my peers; participating in training programs will help me get along better with my manger; and participating in training programs will give me a needed break from my job). Responses were made using 7-point Likert-type scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Below are the scales derived from Noe and Wilk’s (1993) benefits of employee training.

A literature review of training and organizational commitment suggests that there is a relationship between employee training and organizational commitment. How- ever, the exact nature of the relationship is unclear. It is important to investigate the relationship between employees’ beliefs regarding training benefits and employees’ organizational commitment for both theoretical and practical reasons. The study will contribute to theory by adding to what is known about organizational commitment and employee training at the individual level of analysis, and by expanding the body of knowledge with respect to the relationship between employees’ beliefs regarding training benefits and employees’ organizational commitment. The study contributes to practice by providing practitioners with insights about the relationship between organizational commitment and employee training. The findings of this study hope to:

• contribute to the organizational commitment and employee training literature at the individual level; and

• provide management with useful information about the relationship between employees’ beliefs regarding training benefits and employees’ organizational commitment. More specifically, identify the relationship between personal/ career/job-related benefits of training and affective/continuance/normative com- mitment. Understanding this relationship should assist organizations reduce costs associated with recruiting, hiring and training.

This section provides an analysis of the literature regarding previous and current research findings related to employee training and organizational commitment. More specifically, the literature on organizational commitment was examined with the focus on construct definitions, components, antecedents, consequences and measures. Employee training literature reviewed training definition, cost of employee training, types of training and benefits of training. The research design is introduced in the next section.

Methodology

This quantitative study utilized survey methodology with associational or nonexper- imental correlational-descriptive research design.

Study variables

In this study, employees’ organizational commitment was examined as a possible consequence of – a condition affected by – employees’ beliefs regarding training benefits. Therefore, employees’ organizational commitment (affective commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment) was the dependent variable

Organizational commitment

under investigation. Employees’ beliefs regarding training benefits were considered a possible antecedent or predictor of employees’ organizational commitment; therefore, employees’ beliefs regarding training benefits (personal benefits, career benefits and job-related benefits) were viewed as the independent variable. Biographic and demo- graphic factors (age, gender, education level and length of service at the organization) were considered potential intervening variables that could affect the results of the study.

Site

QP is the organization that was studied in this research. QP was established in 1974 as a national corporation owned by the State of Qatar. In 2004, its total assets amounted to $11.8 billion (QR 43.2 billion) and total revenue of $9.8 billion (QR 36 billion). The organization has a total workforce of approximately 8600 employees. The rationale for selecting a nationally owned petroleum company in Southwest Asia is based both on its appropriateness for the research questions posed and its convenience. The organi- zation’s management is interested in retaining talented employees and agreed to participate in the study of examining the relationship between employees’ beliefs regarding training benefits and employees’ organizational commitment.

Population

The target population for this study included Qatari national employees at the senior staff level. This study analyses the organizational commitment of Qatari employees in relationship with the benefits of training – whereas prior studies examined different aspects of commitment of only US employees – and an analysis of this type is limited in the literature.

Excluded from this study were employees with the following characteristics: (1) non-Qatari nationals; (2) junior-level staff employees; and (3) temporary-level employ- ees. The focus of the study was on Qatari national employees exclusively; expatriate employees are hired based on definite short-term contracts that minimize commitment or turnover problems, and they do not participate in training activities because of their high skill level. Junior-level staff employees were excluded from this study because training them does not pose a problem to the organization. Junior staff employees hold positions that are mostly clerical and require minimum skill sets that can be filled rapidly (Mobley, 1982; Mowday

et al

., 1979). Temporary-level employees are excluded from this study because their employment duration, as defined by the organization, does not exceed three months, and their commitment does not pose a problem to the organization.

The survey was distributed to all units in the target population. This sampling method is known as the comprehensive sampling approach. Of this particular sam- pling method, Wiersma and Jurs (2005) report that ‘comprehensive sampling is used when every unit is included in the sample’ (p. 312). Comprehensive sampling was used to ensure a large enough sample size of Qatari employees at the senior staff level.

Instrumentation

The data used for this study were obtained through Meyer and Allen’s (1997) three- components of organizational commitment questionnaire and Noe and Wilk’s (1993) benefits of employee training questionnaire. Additional demographic information items were included in the survey to facilitate describing the sample. The survey consists of the following measures:

• The three-component model of organizational commitment is represented by 23 items to measure organizational commitment. Eight items assess affective organi- zational commitment, nine items assess continuance organizational commitment and six items assess normative organizational commitment.

International Journal of Training and Development

• Employee benefits of training is represented by a 14-item scale that measures the benefits of employee training. Five items assess the personal benefits of employee training, six items assess the career benefits of employee training and three items assess the job-related benefits of employee training.

• Five demographic items – age, gender, education level, length of service at the organization and others (i.e. Is there anything else you wish to share about orga- nizational commitment or training?) – were included in the survey to facilitate the interpretation of the results.

Unit of analysis

Nardi (2003) defines unit of analysis as ‘the element about which you are observing and collecting data, such as a person responding to a questionnaire, a school, an editorial, or a local business’ (p. 98). This study was conducted at the individual level of analysis.

Level of significance

The 0.05 level of significance was used in this study. Alreck and Settle (2004) define level of significance as ‘the critical value, or probability level above which a relation- ship between variables will not be regarded as statistically significant because it is too likely that it could result only by chance from sampling error’ (p. 437).

Statistical analysis

Three types of statistical analysis were conducted for this study using SPSS 11.5. First, regression analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between study vari- ables as highlighted in the research questions, and to test the research hypotheses. This study employs multiple regression analysis to investigate the relationship between variables and to identify the strength of that relationship. More specifically, multiple regression analysis was employed to identify the relationship between employees’ beliefs regarding training benefits as measured by personal, career and job-related benefits (independent variables) and employees’ organizational commitment as mea- sured by affective, continuance and normative commitment (dependent variables). Second, for both instruments, internal reliability analysis using Cronbach’s alpha (Cronbach & Furby, 1970) was used to determine the reliability of all scales. The results of Cronbach’s alpha scores were compared to the published estimates for pre-existing scales for instruments used in the study. Third and finally, for both instruments, factor analysis was conducted to determine construct validity, fit and appropriateness of the instrument (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2000).

Results

Reliability analysis

Reliability analysis using Cronbach’s alpha was conducted to determine the reliability of all scales. The reliability scores for organizational commitment variables (affective commitment, 0.77; continuous commitment, 0.67; and normative commitment, 0.80) and benefits of employee training variables (personal benefits, 0.86; career benefits, 0.78; and job-related benefits, 0.64) were compared and were found to be consistent with the published estimates for pre-existing scales.

Factor analysis

Statistical Software for Social Sciences (SPSS) software was used to conduct factor analysis to determine construct validity, fit and appropriateness of the instruments. Benefits of employee training items and three-component model of organizational

Organizational commitment

commitment items were factor analysed using Varimax rotation. The results of the factor analysis indicated that, overall, the questions are well segregated and that the scaled-items measure the intended construct.

Regression analysis

Affective commitment

The results of the regression analysis, as presented in Table 1, showed that there is a significant positive relationship between affective organizational commitment and both personal benefits of employee training (

0.003) and career benefits of employee training (

0.030). The relationship between affective organizational commitment and job-related benefits of employee training, although positive, is not significant (

0.216). Additionally, two demographic/biographic variables are significantly and positively related to affective commitment: age (

0.014) and years of service (

0.037). The stepwise regression results indicate that personal benefits of employee training

and age (

0.014) are the best predictors of affective commitment. Career benefits, although significantly related to affective commitment (

0.030), is not a predictor of affective commitment. Further, although the predictors are significant, together they explain only 5.0 per cent of the variance in affective commitment. Personal benefits alone explain 2.8 per cent of the variance in affective commitment. Whereas years of service initially appears significant (

0.037), the model eliminates it as a predictor of any meaningful explanation of variance.

Continuance commitment

The results of the regression analysis, as presented in Table 2, illustrated that there is a significant positive relationship between continuance organizational commitment and the three benefits of employee training: personal benefits of employee training (

0.002); career benefits of employee training (

0.000); and job-related benefits of employee training (

0.000). Additionally, one demographic/biographic variable is significantly and positively related to continuance commitment: years of service (

0.029). The stepwise regression results indicate that career benefits of employee training

and years of service (

0.029) are the best predictors of continuance commitment. Personal benefits and job-related benefits, although significantly related to continuance commitment (

= 0.002 and p = 0.000), are not a predictor of continuance commitment. Further, although the predictors are significant, together they explain only 9.7 per cent of the variance in continuance commitment. Career benefits alone explain 6.5 per cent of the variance in continuance commitment.

Normative commitment The results of the regression analysis, as presented in Table 3, illustrated that there is a significant positive relationship between normative organizational commitment and both personal benefits of employee training (p = 0.000) and career benefits of employee training (p = 0.006). The relationship between normative organizational commitment and job-related benefits of employee training, although positive, is not significant (p = 0.290). Additionally, two demographic/biographic variables are significantly and positively related to normative commitment: age (p = 0.001) and years of service (p = 0.003).

The stepwise regression results indicate that personal benefits of employee training and age (p = 0.001) are the best predictors of normative commitment. Career benefits, although significantly related to normative commitment (p = 0.006), is not a predictor of normative commitment. Further, although the predictors are significant, together they explain only 8.5 per cent of the variance in normative commitment. Personal benefits alone explain 4.5 per cent of the variance in normative commitment. Although years of service initially appears significant (p = 0.003), the model eliminates it as a predictor of any meaningful explanation of variance.

T ab

le 1

: S

te pw

is e

re gr

es si

on a

n al

ys is

– a

ff ec

ti ve

c om

m it

m en

A C

P B

T C

B T

JB T

A g

e G

en d

er E

d u

ca ti

o n

Y ea

rs o

f se

rv ic

Si g

n ifi

ca n

ce (1

-t ai

le d

) A

ff ec

ti v

e co

m m

it m

en t

(A C

) 0.

00 3

0. 03

0 0.

21 6

0. 01

4 0.

23 1

0. 07

8 0.

03 7

P er

so n

al b

en efi

ts o

f tr

ai n

in g

( P

B T

) 0.

00 3*

0. 00

0 0.

00 0

0. 08

7 0.

48 4

0. 23

8 0.

00 8

C ar

ee r

b en

efi ts

o f

tr ai

n in

g (

C B

T )

0. 03

0* 0.

00 0

0. 00

0 0.

01 1

0. 29

7 0.

28 4

0. 00

0 Jo

b -r

el at

ed b

en efi

ts o

f tr

ai n

in g

( JB

T )

0. 21

6 0.

00 0

0. 00

0 0.

02 2

0. 16

0 0.

27 1

0. 00

8 A

g e

0. 01

4* 0.

08 7

0. 01

1 0.

02 2

0. 00

0 0.

39 6

0. 00

0 G

en d

er 0.

23 1

0. 48

4 0.

29 7

0. 16

0 0.

00 0

0. 26

6 0.

00 0

E d

u ca

ti o

n 0.

07 8

0. 23

8 0.

28 4

0. 27

1 0.

39 6

0. 26

6 0.

34 5

Y ea

rs o

f se

rv ic

e 0.

03 7*

0. 00

8 0.

00 0

0. 00

8 0.

00 0

0. 00

0 0.

34 5

M o

d el

R R

s q

u ar

ed A

d ju

st ed

R s

q u

ar ed

St an

d ar

d e

rr o

r o

f th

e es

ti m

at e

1 0.

16 6a

0. 02

8 0.

02 4

8. 43

2 2

0. 22

4b 0.

05 0

0. 04

3 8.

35 0

a P

re d

ic to

rs :

(c o

n st

an t)

, p

er so

n al

b en

efi ts

o f

tr ai

n in

g .

b P

re d

ic to

rs :

(c o

n st

an t)

, p

er so

n al

b en

efi ts

o f

tr ai

n in

g ,

ag e.

* Si

g n

ifi ca

n t

at t

h e

0. 05

l ev

el .

T ab

le 2

: S

te pw

is e

re gr

es si

on a

n al

ys is

– c

on ti

n u

an ce

c om

m it

m en

C C

P B

T C

B T

JB T

A g

e G

en d

er E

d u

ca ti

o n

Y ea

rs o

f se

rv ic

Si g

n ifi

ca n

ce (1

-t ai

le d

) C

o n

ti n

u an

ce c

o m

m it

m en

t (C

C )

0. 00

2 0.

00 0

0. 00

0 0.

24 7

0. 27

4 0.

10 8

0. 02

9 P

er so

n al

b en

efi ts

o f

tr ai

n in

g (

P B

T )

0. 00

2* *

0. 00

0 0.

00 0

0. 10

3 0.

50 0

0. 27

8 0.

00 6

C ar

ee r

b en

efi ts

o f

tr ai

n in

g (

C B

T )

0. 00

0* **

0. 00

0 0.

00 0

0. 01

0 0.

29 5

0. 44

2 0.

00 0

Jo b

-r el

at ed

b en

efi ts

o f

tr ai

n in

g (

JB T

) 0.

00 0*

** 0.

00 0

0. 00

0 0.

04 9

0. 20

0 0.

27 3

0. 01

5 A

g e

0. 24

7 0.

10 3

0. 01

0 0.

04 9

0. 00

0 0.

40 3

0. 00

0 G

en d

er 0.

27 4

0. 50

0 0.

29 5

0. 20

0 0.

00 0

0. 21

9 0.

00 0

E d

u ca

ti o

n 0.

10 8

0. 27

8 0.

44 2

0. 27

3 0.

40 3

0. 21

9 0.

26 2

Y ea

rs o

f se

rv ic

e 0.

02 9*

0. 00

6 0.

00 0

0. 01

5 0.

00 0

0. 00

0 0.

26 2

M o

d el

R R

s q

u ar

ed A

d ju

st ed

R s

q u

ar ed

St an

d ar

d e

rr o

r o

f th

e es

ti m

at e

1 0.

25 5a

0. 06

5 0.

06 2

8. 82

4 2

0. 31

2b 0.

09 7

0. 09

0 8.

68 7

a P

re d

ic to

rs :

(c o

n st

an t)

, ca

re er

b en

efi ts

o f

tr ai

n in

g .

b P

re d

ic to

rs :

(c o

n st

an t)

, ca

re er

b en

efi ts

o f

tr ai

n in

g ,

y ea

rs o

f se

rv ic

e. *

Si g

n ifi

ca n

t at

t h

e 0.

05 l

ev el

. **

Si g

n ifi

ca n

t at

t h

e 0.

01 l

ev el

. **

* Si

g n

ifi ca

n t

at t

h e

0. 00

1 le

v el

T ab

le 3

: S

te pw

is e

re gr

es si

on a

n al

ys is

– n

or m

at iv

e co

m m

it m

en t

N C

P B

T C

B T

JB T

A g

e G

en d

er E

d u

ca ti

o n

Y ea

rs o

f se

rv ic

Si g

n ifi

ca n

ce (1

-t ai

le d

) N

o rm

at iv

e co

m m

it m

en t

(N C

) 0.

00 0

0. 00

6 0.

29 0

0. 00

1 0.

06 2

0. 43

4 0.

00 3

P er

so n

al b

en efi

ts o

f tr

ai n

in g

( P

B T

) 0.

00 0*

** 0.

00 0

0. 00

0 0.

12 1

0. 49

2 0.

24 1

0. 00

7 C

ar ee

r b

en efi

ts o

f tr

ai n

in g

( C

B T

) 0.

00 6*

* 0.

00 0

0. 00

0 0.

01 3

0. 27

9 0.

34 1

0. 00

0 Jo

b -r

el at

ed b

en efi

ts o

f tr

ai n

in g

( JB

T )

0. 29

0 0.

00 0

0. 00

0 0.

04 4

0. 22

3 0.

29 5

0. 01

3 A

g e

0. 00

1* *

0. 12

1 0.

01 3

0. 04

4 0.

00 0

0. 44

6 0.

00 0

G en

d er

0. 06

2 0.

49 2

0. 27

9 0.

22 3

0. 00

0 0.

24 8

0. 00

0 E

d u

ca ti

o n

0. 43

4 0.

24 1

0. 34

1 0.

29 5

0. 44

6 0.

24 8

0. 30

8 Y

ea rs

o f

se rv

ic e

0. 00

3* *

0. 00

7 0.

00 0

0. 01

3 0.

00 0

0. 00

0 0.

30 8

M o

d el

R R

s q

u ar

ed A

d ju

st ed

R s

q u

ar ed

St an

d ar

d e

rr o

r o

f th

e es

ti m

at e

1 0.

21 2a

0. 04

5 0.

04 1

7. 93

0 2

0. 29

2b 0.

08 5

0. 07

8 7.

77 5

a P

re d

ic to

rs :

(c o

n st

an t)

, p

er so

n al

b en

efi ts

o f

tr ai

n in

g .

b P

re d

ic to

rs :

(c o

n st

an t)

, p

er so

n al

b en

efi ts

o f

tr ai

n in

g ,

ag e.

** Si

g n

ifi ca

n t

at t

h e

0. 01

l ev

el .

** *

Si g

n ifi

ca n

t at

t h

e 0.

00 1

le v

el .

Discussion of findings The research study resulted in five major findings. These findings are presented in the subsequent sections.

Organizational commitment and employee’s beliefs regarding training benefits

First, the results of hypotheses testing revealed that personal benefits and career benefits of employee training are significantly related to all three components of organizational commitment: affective commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment. This suggests that employees who reflect positively on train- ing benefits and expect benefits from their participation in training are likely to be more committed to the organization. These results are consistent with the literature that examined the relationship between employee training and organizational com- mitment (i.e. Bartlett, 2001; Grossberg, 2000; Meyer & Smith, 2000; Tannenbaum et al., 1991).

The significant positive relationship between personal benefits and career benefits of employee training and affective, continuance and normative organizational com- mitment suggests a number of conclusions. First, participation in training activities helps employees network, improve their job performance and make progress towards their personal development (i.e. personal benefits of training). Second, participation in training activities lead to identifying career objectives, reaching career objectives and creating opportunity to pursue new career paths (i.e. career benefits of training). More specifically, (1) commitment that is based on emotional attachment to the orga- nization occurs where employees choose to remain with the organization because they want to stay (i.e. affective commitment); (2) commitment based on perceived cost associated with leaving the organization occurs where employees remain with the organization because they have to stay (i.e. continuance commitment); and (3) com- mitment based on the belief that it is an employee’s obligation to be committed to the organization occurs where employees remain with the organization because they believe they should stay in the organization (i.e. normative commitment).

The previously discussed results are consistent with employee training and organi- zational commitment literature. For example, Becker (1975) suggests that investment in firm-specific human capital reduces the probability of employee turnover. Grossberg (2000) documents that employee training across genders is strongly associated with longer durations of employment. Meyer and Smith (2000) reports the existence of a link between organizational commitment and training from the point that employee training has a positive effect on employees’ commitment to their organizations. Bartlett (2001) maintains that the perceived benefits of employee training are found to affect employee’s organizational commitment. Payne and Huffman’s (2005) study concluded that mentoring is positively related to affective and continuance organizational com- mitment and negatively related to employee turnover.

In summary, the results of the hypotheses testing demonstrated that a comfortable and pleasant work environment represented by personal benefits and career benefits of employee training, influence the development of employees’ attachment (i.e. affec- tive, continuance or normative) to the organization.

Second, the result of hypotheses testing revealed that job-related benefits of employee training is significantly and positively related to continuance organizational commitment only. On one hand, a positive and significant relationship between job- related benefits of employee training and continuance organizational commitment suggests that the more a person learns and acquires skills and knowledge in training, the more likely that individual develops a strong bond towards the organization. This strong bond may be the direct results of the employee receiving a higher compensa- tion as a result of participating in training activities and leading to employees’ contin- uance commitment to the organization. This is consistent with findings of Becker (1975) who suggests that individual bonds to the organization are based on ‘instru- mental interests’ such as salary and benefits. Accordingly, investment in firm-specific

human capital may reduce the probability of employee turnover. On the other hand, a positive but not significant relationship between job-related benefits of employee training and affective and normative organizational commitment leads to the conclu- sion that employees do not develop a greater desire to remain with the organization if they believe that their participation in training activities only results in financial benefits. This may lead to a reduced affective and normative organizational commitment.

The positive and not significant relationship between job-related benefits of employee training and affective and normative organizational commitment can be attributed to a number of reasons. For example, organizational culture or national culture may be one of the reasons behind this insignificant relationship. Schein (1992) suggests that an organization’s culture develops to help it cope with its environment. According to Schein, culture consists of behaviors and artifacts, values, assumptions and beliefs. These underlie and, to a large extent, determine behavior. In this study, we examined the relationship between organizational commitment and employee training. Further studies should be conducted to examine the relationship between organizational commitment and organizational culture.

In this research, the study participants were drawn from a petroleum company outside the United States, in a setting where English is the second language. Accord- ingly, it is not unreasonable to conclude and attribute this nonsignificant relationship, at least tentatively, to culture. Further testing would be required to see if this specu- lation bears out in a wider sample within the culture.

Another reason for the nonsignificant relationship between job-related benefits of employee training and affective and normative organizational commitment may be because of industry-specific reasons. Poruban (2001) reports that the petroleum indus- try is experiencing a high turnover and shortage of skilled employees. Such a human capital problem could adversely affect employee behaviors with respect to desired benefits of training activities and organizational commitment.

Best predictors of affective and normative commitment

The third major finding in this study revealed that personal benefits of employee training and age are the best predictors of affective and normative commitment. This suggests that one of the best predictors for employees to remain with their organiza- tion is the level of their involvement in training activities. According to Noe and Wilk (1993), this is represented by the extent to which employees believe that participation in training activities help them network, improve their job performance and make progress towards their personal development. Accordingly, employee’s emotional attachment and involvement with the organization, such as work experiences they find rewarding and feelings of obligation to remain with the organization, are best predicated by personal benefits of employee training. According to Pinks (1992), employees with strong normative commitment will have better job performance, work attendance and organizational citizenship, because they are linked to the organization by feelings of obligation and duty. Additionally, strong affective commitment among employees leads to lower turnover and higher productivity. Employees with strong affective commitment will not have a high rate of absenteeism and will be motivated to do better on the job (Meyer & Allen, 1997).

Employee age, based on the results of the study, is another best predictor behind the strong affective and normative organizational commitment. This means that the older the employee becomes, the more likely she or he will remain with the organiza- tion. This finding is consistent with previous research. For example, Mowday et al. (1982) as well as Pinks (1992) report that employee age is one of the key influences on organizational commitment. Hackett et al. (1991) report a positive relationship between affective and continuance commitments to age and tenure antecedents of organiza- tional commitment. Sommer et al.’s (1996) study on antecedents of organizational commitment reports a positive relationship between organizational commitment and antecedents relating to age, job tenure and organizational position. Cohen (1999)

reports that affective and continuance commitment are positively related to personal characteristics.

The aforementioned results are significant in that they suggest that affective and normative organizational commitment can be achieved by designing training pro- grams that help employees make progress towards their personal development. This could make employees’ organizational experience rewarding and, ultimately, increase organizational commitment.

Best predictors of continuance commitment

Based on the results of regression analysis, the fourth major finding is that career benefits of employee training and years of service are the best predictors of continu- ance commitment.

Iles et al. (1990) report that ‘different types of commitment have different relation- ships to the organizational behavior. Employees who express high commitment to both the job and the organization may be the least likely to leave. Employees with high job involvement but low organizational commitment may leave for career enhancing reasons’ (p. 149). Meyer and Allen (1997) suggest that employees with strong contin- uance commitment will stay longer with the organization because leaving the organi- zation will be more costly to them. Career benefits of employee training result from participation in training activities that lead to identifying career objectives, reaching career objectives and creating opportunity to pursue new career paths (Noe & Wilk, 1993). Accordingly, one can conclude that the training environment is one of the most important criteria in explaining continuance organizational commitment. The organi- zation’s willingness to provide its employees with additional training opportunities may lead employees to develop a stronger sense of attachment or commitment to the organization.

Additionally, the results indicate that years of service is one of the best predictors of continuance commitment. This means that the longer the employee works for the organization the less likely he or she will leave the organization. Accordingly, one might conclude that when employees spend an extended duration of time with the organization, the employees become more confident, open to change and supportive of each other. This may lead to establishing a bond between employees that leads to increased organizational commitment.

The results are significant in that they suggest that continuance organizational commitment can be achieved by designing training programs that help employees identify and reach their career objectives. This will make employees’ organizational experience rewarding and would ultimately increase organizational commitment.

Validity and reliability of instruments

The fifth major finding is based on reliability analysis using Cronbach’s alpha and Varimax factor analysis. The result of the analysis revealed that the organizational commitment instrument developed by Meyer and Allen (1997) and the benefits of employee training instrument developed by Noe and Wilk (1993) were reliable and valid. More specifically, the results of the reliability analysis were compared to the published estimates and were found to be consistent with the published estimates for pre-existing scales. Additionally, factor analysis indicated that the questions were well segregated and that the scaled-items measure the intended construct. The results are significant in that they suggest that the three-component model of organizational commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1997) and the benefits of employee training (Noe and Wilk, 1993) may be considered valid and reliable outside the United States (i.e. in the State of Qatar and for the population under study) and in a setting where English is the second language. However, the instruments are not entirely valid unless it has been tested in Asia, Europe and countries in other continents where English is the second language.

Conclusion Understanding the relationship between employee training and organizational com- mitment is a critical factor in assisting organizations reduce costs associated with recruiting, hiring and training. The results of the study revealed a positive and signif- icant relationship between benefits (i.e. personal benefits and career benefits) of employee training and the three components of organizational commitment (i.e. affec- tive commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment). Addition- ally, the findings revealed that personal benefits of employee training and age are significantly related to affective and normative commitment, and career benefits of employee training and years of service are significantly related to continuance com- mitment. QP’s financial and social commitment towards the development of its employees can certainly serve as a model to other petroleum companies as well as to any organization that seeks long-term success.

Limitations The results of this study should be interpreted with recognition of the study’s limita- tions. This study is limited by the following constraints:

1. The sample organization is part of a single petroleum organization located in the State of Qatar. Therefore, the results may not be generalizable to all petroleum organizations in the State of Qatar.

2. The participants were limited to Qatari employees at the senior staff level. There- fore, results may not be generalizable to other petroleum industry employees, or to employees of organizations not petroleum industry related.

3. The organization studied represents a 100 per cent government-owned orga- nization. Results may not be generalizable to not-for-profit or privately owned organizations.

4. The survey nature of this study introduced limitations that are inherent in the research design, such as possible ambiguity of individual questions, answers that cannot be clarified, variations in individual motivations and variations in the knowledge of respondents.

5. The complexity and ambiguity related to organizational commitment and employee training constructs may have reduced the validity and reliability of the measurements. The three-component model of organizational commitment and benefits of employee training selected are not comprehensive measures of organi- zational commitment or benefits of employee training.

6. The participants’ understanding of English as a second language could have affected participants’ responses.

Implications of the study The results of the study identified a number of implications for theory, practice and future research. These implications are presented in the next section.

Implications for theory

1. Results of the study confirm the existence of a positive relationship between organizational commitment and employee training. However, additional research is needed to determine if all three benefits of employee training are significantly and positively related to organizational commitment.

Implications for practice

1. Organizations should consider establishing a formal process of monitoring employee commitment to the organization. For example, preparing quarterly management reports about employees’ duration of service with the organization

facilitates monitoring employees’ organizational commitment. Systematic and continuous assessment of employee commitment allows organizations to consider making timely changes and necessary adjustments in order to maintain a high level of commitment among employees.

2. Organizations need to develop strategies and human resource practices that max- imize employee commitment. For example, organizations might opt to use the quarterly organizational commitment reports to recognize and reward, on an annual basis, employees with long durations of service (e.g. 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 and over 30 years). The reward and recognition can be financial (salary increment) or non-financial (long service certificate). Financial rewards can positively affect employees’ continuance commitment and non-financial rewards can positively affect employees’ affective and normative commitment. These strategies should be shared, reviewed and updated on a regular basis.

3. Organizations should consider designing training and development programs with focus on employee commitment. More specifically, ensuring that employee training and development programs address all aspects of employees’ commit- ment to the organization, including affective, continuance and normative commit- ment. This should facilitate and improve human capital retention.

4. In order for organizations to survive the ‘brain drain’, they need to promote employee commitment to the organization. One way this can be achieved is by addressing all three components of organizational commitment (i.e. affective com- mitment dealing with feelings and emotions, continuous commitment dealing with cost, and normative commitment dealing with obligations and ethical con- cerns of leaving or remaining with the organization). This means that management should develop policies that are sensitive to employee needs.

5. Organizations should identify and satisfy the different training needs of its work- force. More specifically, fresh graduates have different training needs than more experienced employees. Both of these needs should be identified and satisfied. Strategies should be developed to ensure that all employees continuously learn and grow throughout their careers.

6. Organizations should establish a formal process of identifying the return on train- ing investment. Benefits of employee training to both the organization and the employee should be identified. More specifically, personal benefits, career benefits and job-related benefits of employee training should be identified and examined.

Implications for future research

1. Additional research is needed to substantiate the validity and reliability of the instrument outside the United States and to facilitate making a generalization that both the three-component model of organizational commitment and the benefits of employee training instruments are valid and reliable outside the United States and in a setting where English is the second language.

2. Additional research is needed to determine if job-related benefits and other demo- graphic variables (e.g. gender, educational level and marital status) are predictors of organizational commitment.

3. Future research examining the potential similarities and differences between employee training and employee development would be fruitful. This would facilitate a better understanding of the antecedents and consequences of employee training and development.

4. Additional research is needed with respect to the antecedents and consequences of organizational commitment (affective, continuance and normative) for other populations of non-US employees. Understanding the antecedents and conse- quences of organizational commitment for non-US employees is useful for iden- tifying moderating variables that might influence organizational commitment and is relevant to understanding the multidimensionality of the construct as well.

5. Replicating the study using additional levels of employees (e.g. junior staff level and non-national employees) would provide additional and useful information

that would facilitate making comparisons between the groups and allow for more generalizability of the results.

6. When replicating the study using stratified sampling methodology, each stratum should represent a specific job level (i.e. administrative jobs, operational jobs, production job, etc.). This should facilitate making comparisons between different strata and provide additional information with respect to the relationship between employee training and organizational commitment.

7. Replicating the study using a larger sample that includes a number of petroleum companies in Asia would allow for a greater generalizability of the findings.

8. Broadening the scope of research by applying a mixed-method approach that includes surveys and interviews would add depth to the study of organizational commitment by revealing more of the subjective quality surrounding why employees choose not to be committed to their organizations. Interviews and focus groups, for example, could offer additional information that may be useful in interpreting qualitative results. Additionally, such studies might help uncover the source of additional variance.

9. Further studies should be conducted to examine the relationship between organi- zational commitment and other human resource practices such as employee com- pensation, job satisfaction and organizational culture.

10. Broadening the scope of the study to determine how organizational commitment correlates with organizational performance indicators would enable an under- standing of commitment factors beyond retention rates and employee training.

11. The scope of the study should be broadened so as to examine the impact of employee training on employee turnover and turnover rate.

12. Broadening the scope of the study to determine the impact of culture on organi- zational commitment, employee training and turnover would be fruitful. This would identify the impact of organizational and national culture, if any, on the variables under investigation. Understanding the impact of organizational and national culture could affect the site selection, participants’ selection and study instrumentation.

References Alreck, P. I. and Settle, R. B. (2004), The Survey Research Handbook (New York: McGraw-Hill

Irwin). Bahree, B. and Gold, R. (2005), ‘Pursuit of new oil supplies run into bottleneck; crude hits

$60, but industry finds past cuts are slowing efforts to ramp up output’, Wall Street Journal, 6, 28.

Bartlett, K. R. (2001), ‘The relationship between training and organizational commitment: a study in the health care field’, Human Resource Development Quarterly, 12, 4, 335–52.

Becker, G. S. (1960), ‘Notes on the concept of commitment’, American Journal of Sociology, 66, 32– 42.

Becker, G. S. (1975), Human Capital (New York: Columbia University Press). Clark, J. (2001), ‘The relationship between training and organizational commitment: A study in

the healthcare field’, Human Resource Development Quartely, 12, 4, 335–52. Cohen, A. (1999), ‘Relationship among five forms of commitment: an empirical assessment’,

Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 285–308. Craig, R. L. (1996), The ASTD Training and Development Handbook: A Guide to Human Resource

Development (New York: McGraw-Hill). Cronbach, L. J. and Furby, L. (1970), ‘How should we measure change – or should we?’ Psycho-

logical Bulletin, 74, 68–80. Ferris, K. R. and Aranya, N. (1983), ‘A comparison of two organizational commitment scales’,

Personal Psychology, 36, 1, 87–101. Fraenkel, J. R. and Wallen, N. E. (2000), How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education (New

York: McGraw-Hill). Gritz, R. M. (1993), ‘The impact of training on the frequency and duration of employment’,

Journal of Econometrics, 57, 21–51. Grossberg, A. J. (2000), ‘The effects of formal training on employment duration’, Industrial

Relations, 39, 4, 578–88.

Guffey, C. J., West, J. F. and White, C. W. (1997), ‘Employer education assistance: an assessment of the impact on organizational commitment’, Management Research News, 20, 1, 12–21.

Hackett, R. D., Bycio, P. and Hausdorf, P. A. (1991), ‘Further assessment of Meyer and Allen’s three-component model of organizational commitment’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 1, 12–24.

Harkins, P. (1998), ‘Why employees stay or go’, Workforce, 77, 10, 74–75. Hom, P. W. and Griffeth, R. W. (1995), Employee Turnover (Cincinnati, OH: South-Western

College). Iles, P., Mabey, C. and Robertson, I. (1990), ‘HRM practices and employee commitment: Possi-

bilities, pitfalls and paradoxes’, British Journal of Management, 1, 147–57. Kontoghiorphes, C. and Bryant, N. (2004), ‘Exploring employee commitment in a service

organization in the health care insurance industry’, Organizational Development Journal, 22, 3, 59–74.

Lang, D. L. (1992), ‘Organizational culture and commitment’, Human Resource Development Quar- terly, 3, 2, 191–6.

Liou, K. and Nyhan, R. (1994), ‘Dimensions of organizational commitment in the public sector: an empirical assessment’, Public Administration Quarterly, 18, 99–118.

Marsh, R. M. and Mannari, H. (1977), ‘Organizational commitment and turnover: a predictive study’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 22, 57–75.

Martel, L. (2003), ‘Finding and keeping high performers: best practices from 25 best companies’, Employee Relations Today, 30, 1, 27–51.

McKenna, T. (2004), ‘Keeping your superstars’, National Petroleum News, 96, 5, 15–16. Meyer, J. P. and Allen, N. J. (1997), Commitment in the Workplace: Theory, Research, and Application

(Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage). Meyer, J. P. and Smith, C. A. (2000), ‘HRM practices and organizational commitment: test of a

mediation model’, Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 17, 4, 319–32. Mitchell, T. R., Holtom, B. C. and Lee, T. W. (2001), ‘How to keep your best employees: devel-

oping an effective retention policy’, The Academy of Management Executive, 15, 4, 96–108. Mobley, W. H. (1982), ‘Some unmeasured questions in turnover and withdrawal research’,

Academy of Management Review, 7, 111–16. Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W. and Steers, R. M. (1979), ‘The measurement of organizational

commitment’, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 224–47. Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W. and Steers, R. M. (1982), Organizational Linkage: The Psychology of

Commitment, Absenteeism, and Turnover (San Diego, CA: Academic Press). Nardi, P. (2003), Doing Survey Research: A Guide to Quantitative Research Methods (New York:

Pearson Allyn & Bacon). Noe, R. A. (1999), Employee training and development (Boston, MA: Irwin/McGraw-Hill). Noe, R. A. (2002), Employee Training and Development (New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin). Noe, R. A. and Wilk, S. L. (1993), ‘Investigation of the factors that influence employee’s partici-

pation in development activities’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 2, 291–302. Noe, R. A., Wilk, S. L., Mullen, E. G. and Wanek, J. E. (1987), ‘Employee development: issues in

construct definition and investigation of antecedents’, in J. K. Ford (ed.), Improving Training Effectiveness in Work Organizations (Muhwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum), pp. 153–89.

Nordhaug, O. (1989), ‘Reward functions of personnel training’, Human Relations, 42, 5, 373–78. Payne, S. C. and Huffman, A. H. (2005), ‘A longitudinal examination of the influence of men-

toring or organizational commitment and turnover’, Academy of Management Journal, 48, 1, 158– 68.

Phillips, J. J. (1997), Handbook of Training Evaluation and Measurement Methods (Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing).

Phillips, J. J. and Phillips, P. P. (2000), ‘The return-on-investment process: issues and trends’, Training Journal, 1, 8–13.

Phillips, J. J. and Stone, R. D. (2002), How to Measure Training Results: A Practical Guide to Tracking the Six Key Indicators (New York: McGraw-Hill).

Pinks, G. J. (1992), Facilitating Organizational Commitment through Human Resource Practices (Kingston, Ontario: Queen’s University Industrial Relations Center).

Poruban, S. (2001), ‘Oil and gas industry continues to grapple with technical personnel shortage’, Oil & Gas Journal, 99, 39, 22–25.

Schein, E. H. (1992), Organizational Culture and Leadership: A Dynamic View (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass).

Schuler, R. S. and MacMillan, I. C. (1984), ‘Gaining competitive advantage through human resource management practices’, Human Resource Management, 23, 3, 241–55.

Sommer, S. M., Bae, S. H. and Luthans, F. (1996), ‘Organizational commitment across cultures: the impact of antecedents of Korean employees’, Human Relations, 49, 7, 977–89.

Steers, R. M. (1975), ‘Problems in the measurement of organizational effectiveness’, Administra- tive Science Quarterly, 20, 546–58.

Tannenbaum, S. I., Mathieu, J. E., Salas, E. and Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (1991), ‘Meeting trainees’ expectations: the influence of training fulfillment on the development of commitment, self- efficacy, and motivation’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 6, 759–69.

Tobias, S. and Fletcher, J. D. (2000), Training & Retraining: A Handbook for Business, Industry, Government, and the Military (New York: Macmillan Reference).

Wiersma, W. and Jurs, S. G. (2005), Research Methods in Education: An Introduction (Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon).