Using Expectancy Theory to Assess Employee Motivation for Corporate Training

Literaturnachweis - Detailanzeige

Trefferliste

Autor/in	Maier, Anmarie
Titel	Using Expectancy Theory to Assess Employee Motivation for Corporate Training
Quelle	(2017), (334 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit Ed.D. Dissertation, Trident University International
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
ISBN	978-0-3551-0531-5
Schlagwörter	Hochschulschrift; Dissertation; Expectation; Theories; Employee Attitudes; Motivation; Job Training; Workplace Learning; Corporate Education; Surveys; Geographic Regions; Decision Making; Employment Potential; Job Performance; Satisfaction; Models; Correlation; Cultural Differences; Statistical Significance + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Thesis; Dissertations; Academic thesis; Expectancy; Erwartung; Theory; Theorie; Arbeitnehmerinteresse; psychologische; Motivation (psychologisch); Berufsqualifizierender Bildungsgang; Survey; Umfrage; Befragung; Decision-making; Entscheidungsfindung; Arbeitsmarktbezogene Qualifikation; Beschäftigungsfähigkeit; Work performance; Arbeitsleistung; Zufriedenheit; Analogiemodell; Korrelation; Kultureller Unterschied
Abstract	Corporations need a skilled workforce that can quickly develop new competencies in order to master the latest demands of their work environments. Because a college degree has a shelf-life of less than two years and many skills last even less at 12 to 18 months (Meister, 1998), businesses have begun constructing their own in-house universities to stay competitive and support future strategies. However, holding a training event is no guarantee that learning will take place; the learners must be motivated to learn. And, motivation for learning depends upon an employee's willingness to learn and their anticipated success for learning. What is the most motivational way to engage employees in corporate training programs? This study surveyed employees from across the nine geographic divisions (later defined as Cultures) of the United States using multiple decision-making cases built from combinations of values for Valence (attractiveness of engagement in a corporate training program) and Force (effort employed to achieve a valence based upon how likely it will be attained) to determine their motivation (decision to engage in a corporate training program). The valence model was "Higher employer's evaluation of employee" and was comprised of three second level outcomes, or potential motivators, for enrolling in a program. They were: increasing one's employability, improving one's job performance, and obtaining personal satisfaction. The force model was the amount of effort the employee would use to achieve the valence based on how likely it would be attained. The nine geographical divisions were a controlling variable (Cultures) and were correlated to the expectancy theory results. This study extended previous studies examining expectancy theory, student motivation, and cultural differences (Campbell & Niles 2006, Campbell et al., 2003, Geiger & Cooper 1996; Geiger et al., 1998, Harrell et al., 1985) by moving from the academic world and into a corporate training environment. The perception of attractiveness and effort employed for a corporate training program were explored using a non-academic, corporate audience. A within-persons decision model was used as the research instrument to assess the motivation of employees enrolled in corporate training programs in terms of Vroom's expectancy theory with Valence and Force models. In addition, this study used the United States Census Bureau's geographical divisions to ascertain the impact of Cultures on the employees' decisions. This research study revealed that the Expectancy of Success explains an employee's Motivational Force to engage in a corporate training program for all United States Cultures. In other words, the greater the likelihood of successfully attaining a higher annual performance evaluation rating (APER), the more motivated the employee was to attain it. This study also showed that the First Level Attractiveness of the Outcome explains an employee's Motivational Force to engage in a corporate training program for all United States Cultures. In other words, the greater the attractiveness of successfully attaining a higher annual performance evaluation rating (APER), the more motivated the employee was to attain it. Results from this study showed that the Second Level Attractiveness of the Outcome differed across Cultures for the second-level Valence of Employability for certain Cultures. The other Valences (Job Skills and Personal Satisfaction) were not predicted as important. Therefore, the second-level attractiveness differed across Cultures for one valence, most of the time. It did not significantly differ for the Cultures of the other two valences. This implies that, while the second-level valence of Employability was significant for certain Cultures, it can only be partially accredited to the high rate of employability at the time of the survey. The cultural differences warrant further research. One final result of the study showed that Expectancy and Attractiveness account for the greatest variability in Motivation. Cultures accounted for only 0.8%. The interaction of Attractiveness with Cultures accounted for 5%. The interaction of Expectancy with Attractiveness accounted for 4% of the variability in Motivation. The interaction of Expectancy with Cultures was not statistically significant. The interaction of Expectancy, Attractiveness, and Cultures was also not statistically significant as a whole, but drilling down into these results revealed individual pockets of statistical significance. This indicates that the Expectancy of Success and the attractiveness of the outcome can predict their Motivational Force for engaging in a corporate training program for certain Cultures. The implication of these results is that the efficacy of the model used is successful for certain Cultures. As with research question 3, this would warrant future research into building a model successful for all Cultures. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.] (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway, P.O. Box 1346, Ann Arbor, MI 48106. Tel: 800-521-0600; Web site: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01