Your reflection notes should be organized to present:

1. Key learning points from the three readings of your choice (a summary)
2. Your reflections
3. References

Reflections is underlined as this is considered one of the most important parts of the learning process. Based on the readings, you must consider your unique experiences and perspectives. And also Cite

TRANSFER OF TRAINING: A REVIEW AND DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

TIMOTHY T. BALDWIN Indiana University

J. KEVIN FORD Michigan State University

Transfer of training is of paramount concern for training researchers and practitioners. Despite research efforts, there is a growing concern over the "transfer problem." The purpose of this paper is to provide a critique of the existing transfer research and to suggest directions for future research investigations. The conditions of transfer include both the generalization of learned material to the job and ihc maintenance of trained skills over a period of time on the job. The existing research exatnining the effects of training design, trainee, and work-environment factors on conditions of transfer is reviewed and critiqued. Research gaps identified from the review include the need to (I) test various operationallzations of training design and work-environment factors that have been posited as having an impact on transfer and (2) develop a framework for conducting research on the effects of trainee characteristics on transfer. Needed advancements in the conceptualization and operationalization of the criterion of transfer are also discussed.

Positive transfer of trainitig is defined as the degree to which trainees effectively apply the knowledge, skills, and attitudes gained in a training context to the job (Newstrom. 1984; Wexley & Latham, 1981). Transfer of training, therefore, is more than a function of original learning in a training program (Atkinson, 1972; Fleishman. 1953). For transfer to have occurred, learned behavior must be generalized to the job context and maintained over a period of lime on the job.

There is growing recognition of a "transfer problem" in organizational training today (Michalak, 1981). It is estimated that while American in- dustries annually spend up to $100 billion on training and development, not more than 10% of these expenditures actually result in transfer to the job (Georgenson. 1982). While researchers have similarly concluded that much of the training conducted in organizations fails to transfer to the work

A previous draft of this manuscript was presented at the 47th annual meeting of the National Academy of Management. New Orleans, August, 1987.

Authors contributed equally and are listed alphabetically.

The authors wish lo thank Ray Noe and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful com- ments.

Correspondence and requests for reprints should be addressed to Timothy T. Baldwin, 939 WoodbHdge Drive, Bloomington, IN 47401.

COPYRtGHT 19R8 PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY. INC.

63

64 PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY

setting (e.g., I. Goldstein, 1986: Mosei, 1957; Wexley & Latham. 1981), a comprehensive review atid critique of the empirical research on transfer has not appeared.

Several researchers have stated that the existing literature on transfer offers little of value to trainers concerned with maximizing positive transfer (Gagne, 1962; Wexley, 1984). On the other hand, Hinrichs (1976) has suggested that trainers often fail to apply the scientific knowledge that does exist. Rather than argue for one viewpoint or the other, it is our belief that it is more beneficial to investigate systematically what we do know about transfer of training and to consider how we can proceed to learn more. Rather than continue to bemoan what is a widely recognized concern, we must begin to specify the type of investigations needed to generate the knowledge base for improving our understanding of transfer issues.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a critique of the existing transfer research and to suggest directions for future research Investigations. First, we will provide an organizing framework outlining the factors we believe affect transfer of training. Second, we will review the existing research on factors affecting transfer. Third, we will present a critique of the research and highlight critical research gaps. Finally, we will specify the types of research needed to improve our understanding of the transfer process.

A Framework for Examining Training Transfer

Examination of transfer issues requires a clear understanding of what is meant by transfer as well as the identification of factors that affect transfer. Figure 1 presents a framework for understanding the transfer process. In Figure 1. the transfer process is described in terms of training-input factors, training outcomes, and conditions of transfer. The conditions of transfer include both the (1) generalization of material leamed in training to the job context and (2) maintenance of the leamed material over a period of time on the job. Training outcomes are defined as the amount of original leaming that occurs during the training program and the retention of that material after the program is completed. Training-input factors include training design, trainee characteristics, and work-environment characteristics. The major training-design factors are the incorporation of leaming principles (Bass & Vaughan, 1966), the sequencing of training material {Gagne, 1962; Tracy, 1984), and the job relevance of the training content (Campbell, 1971; Ford & Wroten, 1984). Trainee characteristics consist of ability or skill, motivation, and personality factors. Work-environment characteristics include climatic factors such as supervisory or peer support as well as constraints and opportunities to perform leamed behaviors on the job.

Training Inputs

Trainee Characteristics

Ability

Personality

Motivation

Training Design

Principles of Learning Sequencing

Training Content

Work Environment

Support Opportunity

to Use

Training Outputs

Conditions of Transfer

n

'

Generalization Er Maintenance

i

BALDWIN AND FORD

65

1

1 2|

1

Learning

-^ 16

t Retention

t 1

.

Figure I: A Model of the TVansfer Process

As the model indicates, training outcomes and training-input factors are posited to have both direct and indirect effects on conditions of transfer. These effects are specified in terms of six linkages, which are critical for understanding the transfer process. Working backwards in the model, training outcomes of leaming and retention are seen as having direct effects on conditions of transfer (Linkage 6). That is. for trained skills to transfer, training material must be leamed and retained (Kirkpatrick, 1967). Trainee characteristics and work-environment characteristics are also hypothesized to have direct effects on transfer regardless of initial leaming during the training program or retention of the training material (Linkages 4 and 5. respectively). For example, well-Ieamed skills may not be maintained on the job due to lack of motivation or lack of supervisory support. Finally, training outcomes (leaming and retention) are viewed as directly affected by the three training inputs of training design, trainee characteristics, and

4

66 PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY

the work-environment characteristics (Linkages 1, 2, and 3 respectively). These three training inputs, therefore, have an indirect effect on transfer through their impact on training outcomes.

The model in Figure 1 provides a framework for describing the transfer process. The literature examining transfer issues will now be reviewed and then be critiqued in relation to the impact of training-input factors on training outcomes and conditions of transfer.

Literature Review

For this review, empirical studies cited in the major works of the organizational-training literature (e.g., Bass & Vaughan, 1966; Campbell, 1971; Campbell, Dunnette, Lawler & Weick, 1970; Decker & Nathan. 1985; Ellis, 1965; L Goldstein. 1980. 1986; McGehee & Thayer. 1961; Wexley, 1984; Wexley & Latham, 1981) were examined. Other studies were identified through an extensive literature search and cross-referencing of cited studies. Therefore, this review provides an examination of the

transfer-issue research that has been referenced in the organizational-training literature.

The review was based on the framework provided in Figure I; that is, the research was reviewed in terms of the effects of training design, trainee characteristics, or work-environment factors on either leaming and retention of trained material (training outcomes) or generalization and maintenance of training (conditions of transfer). A summary of the findings will be followed by a critique of the existing research.

Training Design

A large proportion of the empirical research on transfer has concen- trated on improving the design of training programs through the incorpora- tion of leaming principles. Research has centered on four basic principles: (I) identical elements, (2) teaching of general principles. (3) stimulus vari- ability, and (4) various conditions of practice.

Identical elements. The notion of identical elements was originally proposed by Thomdike and Woodworth (1901). They hypothesized that transfer is maximized to the degree that there are identical stimulus and response elements in the training and transfer settings. Empirical research supports the use of identical elements as a means of increasing the retention of both motor (Crafts, 1935; Gagne. Baker. & Foster, 1950) and verbal behaviors (Duncan & Underwood, 1953; Underwood, 1951).

General principles. Teaching through general principles maintains that transfer is facilitated when trainees are taught, not just applicable skills.

BALDWIN AND FORD 67

but also the general rules and theoretical principles that underlie the train- ing content (McGehee & Thayer, 1961). For example, Judd (1908) and Hendrickson and Schroeder (1941) demonstrated the usefulness of teach- ing through general principles by using rules of light infraction to improve proficiency in underwater shooting. Crannell (1956). in a series of three studies, showed the value of teaching general principles for problem solv- ing by improving subjects' ability to leam card-sorting tricks. Goldbeck, Bemstein, Hillix, and Marx (1957) found that individuals instmcted in the principles of analyzing problems were better able to locate problems with malfunctioning electronic equipment.

Stimulus variability. Stimulus variability is the notion that positive transfer is maximized when a variety of relevant training stimuli are em- ployed (Ellis, 1965), Proponents state that several examples of a concept to be leamed strengthen the trainee's understanding so that he/she is more likely to see the applicability of a concept in a new situation (Duncan,

1958; Ellis, 1965). The principle of stimulus variability has received em- pirical support with respect to training outcomes. For example. Shore and Sechrest (1961) found that using a moderate number of different exam- ples that were repeated a few times each was more effective in enhancing leaming than using one example repeatedly.