Better Training Outcomes are just a Few Reminders Away

Topic: Training
Publication: Journal of Applied Psychology
Article: Sometimes you need a reminder: The effects of prompting self-regulation on regulatory processes, learning and attrition.
Authors: T. Sitzmann and K. Ely
Reviewed By: Benjamin Granger

 Have you ever taken a training course and noticed your mind wandering?  Or have you ever found that the decisions you made during training (“I already know this stuff, I think I’ll skip it”) weren’t exactly the best for facilitating your learning?  Don’t feel bad, you’re not alone.  Many adult trainees are guilty of the same bad habits.   

To address these problems, several researchers have begun exploring interventions that are expected to help trainees make better decisions during training, especially when given a great deal of control over their learning (characteristic of e-learning courses).  One intervention that is gaining in popularity is self-regulatory prompting which presents trainees with questions that are intended to focus their attention and behaviors toward learning the training content.  Self-regulatory prompts basically serve as periodic reminders to trainees.  It simply involves periodically presenting trainees with questions such as, “Am I concentrating on learning the training material?” and “Are the studying strategies I am using effective for learning the material?" 

Sitzmann and Ely found that this simple intervention does indeed lead to better learning and attrition as long as it is delivered continuously throughout the entire training course.  Additionally, Sitzmann and Ely found that continuous prompting leads trainees to learn more because trainees who receive continuous prompting spend more time on the training course. 

Overall, Sitzmann and Ely’s findings demonstrate that trainees can use a reminder every now and then, and even the simplest of interventions can have a big impact on training outcomes.

Sitzmann, T., & Ely, K. (2010). Sometimes you need a reminder: The effects of prompting self-regulation on regulatory processes, learning and attrition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(1), 132-144.

Exploratory Training for Everyone! Yes, Everyone!

Topic: Training
Publication: Journal of Applied Psychology: An International Review
Article: Active/Exploratory training promotes transfer even in learners with low motivation and cognitive ability
Authors: N. Keith, T. Richter, and J. Naumann
Reviewed By: Benjamin Granger

 Exploratory training refers to an instructional strategy that allows trainees to explore their learning environment.  For example, in exploratory training trainees are encouraged to use trial and error (or whatever strategies they prefer) to explore the training material.  In other words, trainees are in the driver’s seat!  

Although exploratory training is often thought to improve learning and transfer of training, it is unclear whether it works for all trainees.   Past research has shown that some trainees (particularly those low in cognitive ability and motivation) may not benefit from learner-controlled training environments (e.g., exploratory training).   

Recently, Keith et. al, (2010) compared the efficacy of guided versus exploratory training for trainees differing in cognitive ability and motivation.  Moreover, they investigated two distinct training outcomes: analogical transfer (transferring learning to tasks on the job that are similar to those tasks learned in training) and adaptive transfer (transferring learning to job tasks that differ from those in training). 

Guiding Trainees through e-Learning the Quick and Easy Way

Topic: Training
Publication: Personnel Psychology
Article: A multilevel analysis of the effect of prompting self-regulation in technology-delivered instruction
Authors: T. Sitzmann, B.S. Bell, K. Kraiger, and A.M. Kanar
Reviewed By: Benjamin Granger

 Let’s start with a sobering reality check: Many trainees are ineffective at managing their time and effort in self-paced e-learning environments.  This is problematic because organizations are becoming increasingly reliant on e-learning to deliver training to its workforce.  And since e-learning is clearly here to stay, the question is: How can we help trainees manage their learning and benefit from e-learning?

Sitzmann and colleagues (2009) recently tested the effects of prompting self-evaluation and self-regulation for facilitating knowledge gain over time.  Although this may sound complicated, prompting self-evaluation and self-regulation simply involves presenting trainees with questions throughout the training course.  These questions deal with whether trainees are attending to the material, understanding the material, using effective learning strategies, are prepared to be tested, are distracted, etc. 

While self-regulation prompts help trainees set and manage their goals during training, self-evaluation prompts help trainees gauge the degree of their learning.  Sitzmann et al.’s results suggest that these types of prompts are beneficial to trainees.  Interestingly, the effectiveness of prompting increases over time and tends to be more effective for trainees high in cognitive ability and self-efficacy (confidence for performing well).

The upshot is clear: Self-regulatory and self-evaluation prompting are easy and cheap to implement and facilitate knowledge gain.  All in all, providing prompts to trainees can help them overcome the disadvantages of self-paced e-learning.   

Sitzmann, T., Bell, B.S., Kraiger, K., & Kanar, A.M. (2009). A multilevel analysis of the

effect of prompting self-regulation in technology-delivered instruction. Personnel

Psychology, 62, 697-734. Sitz

Time Spent in Training: Who Stays and Who Goes?

Topic: Training
Publication: Learning and Individual Differences
Article: The influence of goal orientation dimensions on time to train in a self-paced training environment
Authors: K. Ely, T. Sitzmann, and C. Falkiewicz
Reviewed By: Benjamin Granger

 E-learning refers to computer-mediated training that grants trainees a great deal of control over the learning (e.g., time spent, pace, training location).  These freedoms come along with many potential possibilities and pitfalls.  One major disadvantage of self-paced e-learning is that trainees often stop instruction before mastering the training content.  However, from a financial perspective, decreased training time can save big bucks. 

Recently, Ely, Sitzmann and Falkiewicz (2009) predicted that trainee goal orientation (GO) would impact training time as well as knowledge gained from training in a “real world” self-paced e-learning course.  Specifically, the course was an occupational training course for electrical technicians.  

GO basically refers to the ways in which employees choose, work toward, and interpret the goals that they set.  There are several types of GOs that employees can have.  Employees who set mastery goals (mastery goal orientation) focus on mastering skills whereas employees who have performance-avoid GOs are focused on not failing and avoiding negative judgments of others. 

Ely and colleagues found that trainees who reported high levels of performance-avoid GO spend an average of five days longer in training.

The Muddy Waters of Measuring Executive Coaching

Topic: Coaching, Measurement, Training 

Publication: Consulting Psychology Journal
Article: Measuring and Maximizing the Business Impact of Executive Coaching
Author: A. Levenson
Reviewed by: Lit Digger

 Given the amount of money organizations invest in executive coaching programs, it would be refreshing if someone could come up with a reliable and fool-proof way to measure their effectiveness.

Organizations are complex entities, so developing a measurement tool like this would be a notable challenge.  Levenson (2009) explored a dozen coach-coachee pairs to contribute to this ongoing conversation and shed some light on this measurement puzzle.  Given the constraints of the study, Levenson cautioned that we should interpret his findings lightly.

To recap, studies already exist measuring coaching’s effect on:

·      The executive’s actual changes in behavior

·      The degree to which those around the executive perceive increased effectiveness of the executive

·      Changes in what Levenson calls “hard” performance measures (e.g., unit productivity, number of tasks completed, ability to meet goals, etc.)

But how can we measure business impact of executive coaching?  Levenson suggests that we should “start with the organization’s strategy” (p.110).  He recommends that we should determine whether the business impact we care to measure most is strategic or financial.  For example, if a company has a strategic aim to increase sales to a certain demographic group, then the outcome should be designed to target that strategy – not a more distal, less-related financial goal.

Levenson also warns that we should consider the complexity of the executive’s job in relationship to the functioning of the organization.  Take the above sales example for instance.  If the executive’s primary role is to make decisions and cultivate a productive working environment, then he/she may not actually have all that much impact on increasing sales to the target demographic group.  It would be difficult to evaluate the business impact of coaching if the executive’s role has little business impact to begin with.

Levenson reminds us that if other needed training programs or selection systems are being implemented around the time that executive coaching takes place, then you will be much more likely to see organizational changes in the direction desired.  Systemic changes often will have more business impact than executive coaching alone.

Finally, is executive coaching always the answer to our organizational problems?  No!  Levenson cautions that the intervention needed will depend on the issue at hand.  An executive might be better off gaining critical skills from a stretch assignment if the key issue is professional development.  Or if team performance is slacking, perhaps a team building activity would be best.

You’re more likely to see bang for your buck if the interventions you select are targeted appropriately.  Now we just need to figure out how to effectively measure the “bang”.

 Levenson, A. (2009). Measuring and maximizing the business impact of executive coaching. Consulting Psychology Journal, 61 (2), 103-121.

Great Expectations: Catalyst for Employee Learning and Development

Topic: Job Performance, Leadership, Training
Publication: Journal of Management
Article: Pygmalion and employee learning: The role of leader behaviors
Authors: X.M. Bezuijen, P.T. van den Berg, K. van Dam, and H. Thierry
Reviewed By: Benjamin Granger

 Isn’t it fascinating how our expectations of others so frequently come to fruition?  The finding that supervisors’ expectations of their employees’ capabilities accurately reflect their actual performance is well-established.  This phenomenon is called the self-fulfilling prophesy (AKA the Pygmalion effect).  But, how and why do supervisors’ expectations of employees’ capabilities reflect their performance?  Is it magic?  Is it a sixth sense?  Is it prescience? 

No, no and no….

A recent study by Bezuijen and colleagues (2009) suggests that supervisors’ expectations of their employees’ capabilities to learn job-related skills is primarily due to goal-setting (bummer, I had guessed magic).  They demonstrated that high expectations lead supervisors to assign more difficult and specific goals to employees and also provide these employees with more learning opportunities.  Increased opportunities, in addition to more difficult and specific goals, make it more likely that employees will engage in learning and development activities. 

Is this your first time, Doctor?

Topic: Training
Publication: Journal of Applied Psychology
Article: Active learning: When is more better? The case of resident physicians’ medical errors.
Authors: T. Katz-Navon, E. Nevah, and Z. Stern
Reviewed By: Benjamin Granger

Active learning refers to a broad spectrum of training strategies in which individual trainees are encouraged to explore the learning environment, experiment with strategies, ask questions, and make many of the administrative decisions usually made by instructors in passive learning approaches (i.e., traditional classroom instruction).  Active learning places trainees in the driver’s seat of their own learning.  Sounds great, right?  But what if I told you that active learning strategies usually facilitate trainee errors?

Now, errors are not inherently “bad”.  In fact, encouraging trainees to make errors during training actually leads to improved learning and transfer of training.  Errors are considered “bad” when their consequences are bad (e.g., injury, death).  Should we then even consider active learning when such consequences are likely?

Katz-Navon, Nevah and Stern’s (2009) study of resident physicians suggests that even though healthcare errors can be disastrous, resident physicians often use active learning approaches.  Much of their training occurs on-the-job and in “high-stakes” situations (i.e., surgeries).  Thus, we arrive at a very serious dilemma: effective learning via active learning vs. safety.

Cha Cha Cha Changes…in Selection and Training

Topic: Performance, Selection, Training

Publication: Journal of Applied Psychology
Article: Effects of selection and training on unit-level performance over time: A latent growth modeling approach           
Blogger: Benjamin Granger

Recently, Van Iddekinge and colleagues conducted a study of the organizational impact of employee selection and training practices. They collected data from 861 business units of a large fast food organization in the U.S.  Data (including profits) were collected on a monthly basis for a full calendar year. 

Van Iddekinge et al. expected that changes in organizational units’ use of selection and training practices would correspond to changes in business-unit performance (customer service, retention, and profits) over time. 

Results indicated that, in general, as business units increased their adherence to developed selection and training procedures, customer service and retention improved.  As units got more lax in their use of the prescribed selection and training procedures, customer service and retention dropped.  Finally, changes in selection and training ultimately led to changes in business unit profits.

Do happy trainees = learned trainees?

Topic: Training
Publication: Journal of Applied Psychology
Article: Power to the people: Using learner control to improve trainee reactions and learning in web-based instructional environments           
Blogger: Benjamin Granger

Recently, some have argued trainee satisfaction IS important for predicting actual learning in e-learning contexts.

Briefly, e-learning refers to training that utilizes web-based and computer technology.  An important characteristic of e-learning is that it often grants trainees with high levels of learner control.  This simply means that in e-learning trainees tend to have lots of control over their own learning (can skip training material, learn at their own pace, etc.).

In order to find out if and how trainee satisfaction leads to actual learning in e-learning contexts, Orvis, Fisher, and Wasserman (2009) conducted an experiment that had 274 college students go through a multimedia leadership skills training course. 

The findings suggest that trainees with high levels of learner control tended to be more satisfied than those with less control.  This in turn led to increased learning.  Orvis et al. also found that increased satisfaction helped keep trainees’ attention focused on the training course.  And as expected, the more trainees attended to the training course, the more they learned.

Orvis and colleagues go on to stress the value of providing trainees with high levels of learner control as it leads to increased satisfaction and ultimately learning.  

Recommendations from Ten Years of Research on Training

Topic: Training
Publication: Annual Review of Psychology
Article: Benefits of training and development for individuals and teams, organizations and society.
Author: H. Aquinas, K. Kraiger
Reviewed by: Benjamin Granger

In a recent article published in the Annual Review of Psychology, Aguinis and Kraiger (2009) present a review of research on training and development published from the year 2000 to the present.

In the first section, Aguinis and Kraiger discuss the overall impact of training and development.  Very briefly, there is clear evidence that employees who engage in training programs outperform those who do not, training is effective for promoting team performance, and training and development can have beneficial effects on organizational performance as well as society as a whole.

In the second section, Aguinis and Kraiger present several research-based recommendations for how organizations can capitalize on training initiatives.  They include: 

1.    Pre-training Interventions -  Conduct a needs assessment, reduce employees’ anxiety before training, explain the value of training before hand (justify training), and find out if trainees are motivated to participate in training.  

2.    Training Design and Delivery Media - Encourage trainees to make errors during training (Error Management Training – EMT).  EMT can pay off by helping trainees gain greater mastery of material. Provide trainees with guidance over the learning options they control, since many trainees fail to effectively utilize them (e.g. control over pacing, sequence, time, etc.).

3.     Stakeholder Driven Evaluation of Training - Time should be taken to consult with stakeholders prior to training in order to create meaningful evaluation criteria.  Mindlessly measuring outcomes will have little benefit to the organization (and believe it or not, this is very common!). 

In conclusion, organizations that utilize these research-based recommendations and invest in employee training and development, can gain a unique competitive advantage.  

Aguinis, H. & Kraiger, K. (2009). Benefits of training and development for individuals and 

teams, organizations and society. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 451-474.