留學生人力資源管理英語dissertation

眾所周知，培訓和發展對企業本身以及員工都有好處。那么為什么有些企業和個人卻不愿在培訓上投資呢？

一個企業的成就，也就是說，這個企業的生存和繁榮，在很大程度上都是依賴于它合適的人力資源教育方案。培訓與發展是企業們用來提高員工們的基本技能的一系列活動。（石妮爾，波蘭德爾，2007,282頁）。這一系列的過程是為了教給員工們適當的知識和技能，這樣以來，員工們便可以擁有足夠的能力來很好的完成他們的任務。本文旨在研究培訓與發展對于公司和員工雙方面的好處，主要偏重于闡述企業以及個人不愿在此類培訓計劃上進行投資的原因。

我們需要考慮到這樣一個十分重要的因素，那就是對于培訓與發展的定義。培訓，可以被定義為通過系統性的學習，指導，開發以及計劃性的體驗從而使被培訓人得到行為上的修正（阿姆斯特朗，1996,529頁）。

Training and development is said to be beneficial for both firms and employees. Why then are some organizations and individuals reluctant to invest in training?

The achievement of an organization’s objectives and therefore its survival and thriving is highly dependent on the optimization of its human resources through suitable educational programmes. Training and development is the combination of activities organizations use to increase the skill base of employees (Snell, S. and Bohlander, G. 2007, p.282). According to them, the main purpose of this procedure is to provide employees with the appropriate level of knowledge, skills and abilities in order to enable them perform adequately . The aim of this essay is to evaluate the beneficial role of training and development for both firms and employees but mainly to explain the reasons of the organization’s and individuals’ evident reluctance to investing in such kind of fostering practice.

A considerable point that needs to be taken into consideration is the clarification of both training and development. Training can be defined as the systematic modification of behavior through learning which occurs as a result of education, instruction, development and planned experience (Armstrong, M., 1996, p. 529).

However, development, along with management development and career development, belongs to the broader sense of human resource development (HRD), which is related to the long-term , constant development of people and the connection between the individual’s career ambitions and the company’s anticipation of that individual (Currie, D., 1997). Thus, training can be really beneficial for the long-term development of the workforce and can be considered as an element of development.

In recent years, an environment of constant and intense competition is dominant within organisations. The practice of human resources training and development can help an organization to develop and retain the competence of its employees and simultaneously to facilitate its adjustment to the variable organizational needs and the introduction of new technologies as well (Taylor, D. S., 1989). Berge Z. et al. also recognize that individuals and organisations are constantly confronted with challenges in increasing performance and in obtaining the maximum competitive advantage and thus, training and development can be defined as a ?competitive strategy in the global workplace? (2002). In addition, Muhlemeyer, P. and Clarke, M. illustrate the necessity of a significantly skillful workforce which can be the foundation of increasing productivity, improving economic performance nationally and insurance of future competitiveness (1997).

The advantage of increased competency and productivity can be achieved through a series of benefits that the systematic exploitation of training and development can offer. According to Taylor, D. S., employees can be equipped with a wide variety of powerful skills which enable them to increase their work performance as well as their motivation levels and working speed (1989). As a result, learning cost is reduced and supervisors’ work is eliminated and concentrated mostly on organizational and developmental activities. Grugulis, I. explains that training and development help employees in undertaking different tasks, control quality of production and prepare them properly for following potential jobs (2009). The author adds that the organisations can, therefore, be adapted to the environmental changes that occur within the business.

As far as the benefits of training and development programmes for the individuals are concerned, Vincent, A. and Harmon Gary, D. consider that increased efficiency can be transformed to higher wages, promotions or bonuses and consequently to increased self-respect and job satisfaction (1989). Therefore, training can be a very effective way of satisfying an individuals’ ?esteem and self-actualization?, an element that is placed in the highest level of Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs. Moreover, increased guidance can provide broader education, new opportunities and minimize the likelihood of unemployment (Grugulis, I., 2009). Besides, employees are benefited by acquiring new skills that can be implemented to other jobs and as a result they are not captured by the fear of loosing their present one and they feel far more confident in positively putting into practice their gained knowledge and experience (Bagshaw, M., 1996).

Besides, there is a wide range of training methods that can be used during a training programme and can be beneficial provided that they are attached to the firm’s needs. On-the-job training is the most often used method which takes place under real working conditions and can create good relationship between the trainer and the employee.

Another method that can be practiced is the off-the-job training which is used in formal training courses away from the place of work and can take the form of group exercise, case study, outdoor learning or workshops. Additionally, improvements in technology have led to the introduction of new methods that are far more effective and economical than the traditional ones ( Snell, S. and Bohlander, G., 2007)

Further presentation of the numerous advantages that training and development can offer to the improvement of the business is beyond the purpose of this essay. More accurately, the importance will be given in explaining the reasons of neglecting in purpose such practices on behalf of the organization and the individuals despite the indisputable benefits that these elements of human resource management can offer. A variety of authors have attempted to investigate and explain this phenomenon. Taylor D.S. states that even though the majority of companies and the executive managers praise the necessity of training, an unwillingness in investing in it can be observed (1989). It has also been noted that top managers are also disregard their own training investment as they can not recognize any connection between training and profitability for their company.

A key factor that provokes an organization’s reluctance in allocation of financial, human and time resources, is the difficulty in transferring and implementing the already provided knowledge and skills during training process in the real work environment. Adamson, P. and Caple, J. also identify that trainee’s ability or willingness to apply the relevant learning material during job execution is uncertain and doubtful (1996). Therefore, training does not always produce the desirable effect. The same obstacle has been observed by Muhlemeyer. P. and Clarke, M. who state that in a number of companies the procedure of training comes to a head as long the employee’s factual programme has been completed (1997). The aforementioned impediment can be attributed to the fact that the complicated process of learning transferring depends on various factors such as employee’s ability and motivation to deploy skillfulness and knowledge, trainee’s characteristics, working environment and relevance of training (Dorovan, P. et al., 2001).

In addition, a significant factor that provokes cautiousness to organisations regarding investment in training and development is the high cost. There are various expenses that compose the cost of training such as costs of trainer’s salary, equipment, materials or participant’s salaries that can result to a rather high costly organizational expenditure (Shell, S. and Bohlander, G., 2007). Campbell, C. P. also clarifies the elements of the direct and the indirect costs that constitute the full cost of training (1994). More precisely, the direct expenses of a training course consists of the wages for the personnel and its benefits, such as insurance or pensions, the expenses for external training services, the cost for training development and the preparation of instructional materials and also the equipment, travel and facilities costs. The indirect cost involves both overhead and general and administrative expenses. Therefore, organisations, in general, are responsible for paying all employee or trainee costs. According to a report constructed by Coopers and Lybrand in British companies’ perspectives of training and development, employers consider it as a process of high operating cost rather than an opportunity for investment (1985).

Assessing the extent to which training investment is reflected to individual and corporate performance, is and additional matter that increase hesitation. Hyman, J. (1992), Muhlemeyer, P. and Clarke, M. (1997) and Wright, P. C. and Belcourt, M. (1995), all agree that there is a difficulty in measuring and determining the direct results of training, hence the relationship between the appliance of training methods as outlined and the organization’s final success is hard to be justified due to the nonexistence of a common formula of quantification the return in financial terms. The existed four methods for estimating the cost-effectiveness of the relevant programmes, as presented by Campbell, C.P., are the return on investment (ROI), the cost-benefit ratio, the bottom-line evaluation and the payback period (1995). Even if these factors are based on accepted principals and can be representative for the measurement of the organization’s return performance, they are characterized by a number of disadvantages. For example, the ROI is only suitable provided that the benefits can be quantified in monetary terms and the cost-benefit ratio is based on a subjective method of predicting these benefits in monetary units as well. A sense of subjectivity or bias can also be observed either in the trainee’s potential questionnaire responses or in the provided questionnaire data during the bottom-line evaluation. Efenfioglu A.M. and Murray, L.W. concentrate on the problematic areas of evaluating the real impact of training by explaining that there are some expected benefits that can be intangible and, thus, complex to be measured, such as the job satisfaction, the increased self-esteem, the reduced levels of stress, the workforce stability and the improvement of time management and qualified staff. (2007).

Longenecker C. O. and Fink, L. S., conducted a survey among a significant number of managers from organisations that are subjected to quick changes, in order to elicit the reasons of many organization’s negligence of management training obligations (2005). According to their findings, managers do not give great importance in training and development mainly because they consider it to be an unimportant interference in their primary tasks rather than a top manager’s responsibility. They also found out that the inadequacy of properly qualified trainers can be an obstacle to the transmission of needed information and skills. Keep. E., also, recognizes that a significant proportion of personnel and training specialists seem to lack the necessary and predominant professional training qualifications which should be an organization’s high priority (1989). Relevant survey showed that very few nominated specialists in training are characterized by formal qualifications while a high proportion of them turned up to spend an infinitesimal amount of time on training activities (Hyman, J.,1992). Analoui, F., who points out the difficulty in forming a unique description which would summarize the multiple roles of training specialists, explains that the lack of appropriate trainers and learning environment can be a barrier to employee’s motivation, to the above mentioned transfer of knowledge and can even urge employers to look for outside training programmes (1994).

Moreover, time is a very crucial factor that discourages organizations from taking on training initiatives. The relevant programmes need a very careful planning and a specific and sensible period of time in order to have the desirable effects (Mullins, L.J., 2007). This time necessity is apparent because people are not able to assimilate respectably a wide range of information in a short period of time and, thus, a great importance should be given to setting priorities of information, controlling time and making revisions or improvements. According to Longenecker, C.O. and Fink, L.S.’s survey, a reason that is among these of inadequate training, is employer’s resistance on consuming time for education. Under these circumstances, time restriction can be an obstacle to a successful training (2005).

An interesting perspective would be employee’s attitude toward training and development practice. Heyes, J. and Stuart, M., in an effort to indicated the low rate of investing in setting up skills, which has led to a competitive weakness of the UK economy, conducted a survey that examines the relationship between training and employee attitude (2002). Particularly, the authors found out that the most employees are reluctant to receiving further training mostly because they contemplate that they are already trained to a satisfying and rather high degree. Additional reasons turned out to be employees’ doubt about the improvement of their job expectations and the possibility of gaining reward for their new skills by supplementary training. In general, the majority of the workforce considers that the development of skills does not affect in a positive way their reward, the possibilities of promotion and the job security.

Furthermore, reluctance towards training and development practices can be especially obvious in small and medium-sized firms. As Loan-Clark, J. et al. explain, the resistance on investing in training in this kind of companies is far greater than in large organisations and is rather influenced by the specific characteristics of the owner, the size of the firm and the number of the managers (1999). The authors indicate that the absence of appropriate information and knowledge as far as the benefits of training and development are concerned, renders the levels of such practices low in small firms. Perez de Lema, D.G. and Durendez, A. also recognize that family businesses do not invest a lot of resources on skills development as they do not consider education as a competitive advantage and they contain a very limited number of managers who possess a university degree (2007).

In conclusion, there are several difficulties and inhibitive factors that provoke both organizations’ and individuals’ unwillingness to invest in training and development. However, companies, in order to accomplish their goals and secure their prominence and competence in the future years, need to gather the optimization of the workforce’s skills and the constant development as a top priority. The limitation of such resistance and the insurance of being wholly benefited from a successful training can be achieved through a ?planned and systematic approach to the effective management of training? (Mullins, L.J., 2007, p.490). This effectiveness can result from a series of important considerations such as the specific objectives, plan and commitment of training, the choice of the most suitable technique and skillful staff, the appropriate evaluation based on quantifiable factors and the sufficient finance and time. Finally, the profound comprehension of the benefits that these practices offer, can be strengthened either through better education and promotion or through public subsidies (Loan-Clark, J. et al., 1999). In this way, more and more organisations and individuals can be prompt to invest in training and development.