Untitled Document
You are from : ( )  
Untitled Document
Untitled Document

International Journal of Information Technology & Computer Science ( IJITCS )

Abstract :

There have been many studies on the influence of motivation in knowledge sharing to transfer training in industrial and business context while there have been a few studies among administrative staff in an academic environment. Hence, the purpose of this study is to identify variables that influence employees’motivation to training and to transfer that knowledge to the work setting. In order to achieve the purpose of this research, a frame of references has been constructed based on a wide literature review. This research sets out a quantitative method to investigate the relationship between motivations in knowledge sharing to transfer training. An online survey method based on a given questionnaire was conducted withall of the targeted respondents. The survey instrument was in English. It consists of 33 Likert item questions designed to evaluate the constructs in research. The research sample size was 60 employees who were attending training programs randomly selected from the Multimedia University in Malaysia.Pearson correlation analysis was used to examine the relationship between knowledge sharing and motivation to transfer training. Multiple regression analysis was used to determine the relationship between both variables. The achieved results show the relation between knowledge sharing and motivation to transfer training demographic parameters and knowledge sharing variable were considered. Among demographic parameters gender and marital status showed a significant relationship on motivation to transfer training. And between knowledge sharing variable perceived behavioral control subjective norm, willingness, and sharing behavior showed a remarkable effect on motivation to transfer training.

Keywords :

: knowledge sharing; motivation; transfer training;

References :

  1. Ford, J., Advances in training research and practice: An historical perspective. Improving training effectiveness in work organizations, 1997: p. 1-16.
  2.  Taylor, F.W., The principles of scientific management1914: Harper.
  3.  Paradise, A., Investment in learning remains strong. T & D, 2008.62(11): p. 44-51.
  4. Van Buren, M.E. and W. Erskine, The 2002 state of the industry report–ASTD’s annual review of trends in employer-provided training in the United States, 2002, Alexandria, VA: American Society ofTraining and Development.
  5.  Salas, E. and J.A. Cannon-Bowers, The science of training: A decade of progress. Annual review of psychology, 2001. 52(1): p. 471-499.
  6.  Newstrom, J.W., Leveraging management development through the management of transfer. Journal of Management Development, 1986.5(5): p. 33-45.
  7. Garavaglia, P.L., How to Ensure Transfer of Training. Training and Development, 1993.47(10): p. 63- 68.
  8.  Baldwin, T.T. and J.K. Ford, Transfer of training: A review and directions for future research. Personnel psychology, 1988.41(1): p. 63-105.
  9. Phillips, J.J. and P.P. Phillips, The value of learning: How organizations capture value and ROI and translate it into support, improvement, and funds2007: Pfeiffer.
  10.  Saks, A.M. and M. Belcourt, An investigation of training activities and transfer of training in organizations. Human Resource Management, 2006.45(4): p. 629-648.
  11. Brinkerhoff, R.O., Increasing impact of training investments: an evaluation strategy for building organizational learning capability. Industrial and Commercial Training, 2006.38(6): p. 302-307.
  12. Baharim, S.B., The influence of knowledge sharing on motivation to transfer training: a Malaysian public sector context, 2008, Victoria University.
  13.  Noe, R.A. and M. Peacock, Employee training and development2002: McGraw-Hill/Irwin Boston.
  14. Noe, R.A., Trainees' attributes and attitudes: Neglected influences on training effectiveness. Academy of management review, 1986: p. 736-749.
  15. Churchill Jr, G.A., A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of marketing research, 1979: p. 64-73.
  16. Spector, P.E., Summated rating scale construction: An introduction1991: Sage Publications,Incorporated.
  17.  Parnell, J.A. and E.D. Bell, The Propensity for Participative Decision Making Scale A Measure of Managerial Propensity for Participative Decision Making.Administration & Society, 1994.25(4): p.518-530.
  18. Darroch, J., Knowledge management, innovation and firm performance. Journal of knowledge management, 2005. 9(3): p. 101-115.
  19. Fortune, M.F., B. Shifflett, and R.E. Sibley, A comparison of online (high tech) and traditional (high touch) learning in business communication courses in Silicon Valley. The Journal of Education forBusiness, 2006.81(4): p. 210-214.
  20. Ajzen, I., The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 1991. 50(2): p. 179-211.
  21. Holton III, E.F., R.A. Bates, and W.E.A. Ruona, Development of a generalized learning transfer system inventory. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 2000.11(4): p. 333-360.
  22. Seyler, D.L., et al., Factors affecting motivation to transfer training. International journal of training and development, 2002. 2(1): p. 16-16.
  23. Chen, H.C., Cross-cultural construct validation of the learning transfer system inventory in Taiwan, 2003, Marshall University.
  24.  Anderson, R.E., et al., Multivariate data analysis2006: Pearson.
  25. Konidaris, G. and A.G. Barto, Skill discovery in continuous reinforcement learning domains using skill chaining. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2009.22: p. 1015-1023.

Untitled Document
Untitled Document
  Copyright © 2013 IJITCS.  All rights reserved. IISRC® is a registered trademark of IJITCS Properties.