Hizmet İçi Eğitim Algısının İşgörenlerin Öğrenme Motivasyonu Üzerindeki Etkisi: Bodrum Örneği

Yıl 2018, Sayı: 39, 44 - 55, 01.02.2018

Duygu Mahmutoğulları Nilüfer Şahin Perçin

Öz

Hizmet sektörü gücünü insan kaynağından alan, insan kaynağına değer verdikçe var olan bir sektördür. Özellikle yüz yüze iletişimin yoğun şekilde yaşandığı turizm endüstrisinde işgören istihdamının fazla olması, otomasyon ve makineleşmenin sınırlı ölçüde gerçekleşmesi hizmet içi eğitime olan ihtiyacı ortaya koymaktadır Şener, 2001; 14 . Hizmet içi eğitimler işgörenlerin bilgi, beceri ve yeteneklerinin gelişmesini sağlayan, onları güncelleyen yeniliklere adapte olmasını teşvik eden bir süreçtir. Bu süreçte işgörenlerin bireysel özellikleri, algı ve motivasyonları önem taşımaktadır. Bu çalışmanın amacı hizmet içi eğitim algısının işgörenlerin öğrenme motivasyonu üzerindeki etkisini ortaya koymaktır. Clemenz 2001; 9 hizmet içi eğitim algısını, eğitime katılan işgörenlerin eğitime yönelik değerlendirmeleri olarak tanımlamıştır. Hizmet içi eğitim algısı, literatürde eğitim değerlendirmeleri sonucunda elde edilen hoşnutluk, olumlu tepki, gelecek eğitimlere olumlu bakış olarak belirtilmiştir. Noe 1986; 743 ’ ye göre öğrenme motivasyonu işgörenlerin eğitimlerin içeriğini öğrenmeye yönelik arzusu ve istekliliğidir. Ayrıca öğrenme motivasyonu, işgörenlerin tepkilerinden, tutum ve karakteristik özelliklerinden etkilenmektedir. Motivasyon teorileri içerisinde yer alan beklenti teorisi, hizmet içi eğitim algısı ve öğrenme motivasyonu ile yakından ilişkilidir. Clemenz, 2001;17; Tombs, 2011; 11 . Vroom’un beklenti teorisine göre, bir insanın güdülenmesi; bireyin belli bir davranışının amaca ödüle ulaştıracağı beklentisi ile o bireyin amaca ödüle verdiği değerin çarpımına eşittir Budak ve Budak, 2016; 215 . Beklenti teorisininin tanımında geçen, istek, beklenti, arzu kavramları öğrenme motivasyonunun da anahtar kelimeleridir. Ayrıca, işgörenlerin eğitim programlarına katılımında bireysel faydalar etkili olmaktadır. Bireysel fayda bilgi, yetenek artışı, maaş artışı, terfi olanağı gibi. sağlamış olan işgörenlerin hizmet içi eğitimlere yönelik algısı da olumlu olmaktadır Vyas, 2015; 154 . Tannenbaum vd. 1991 , eğitime katılacak olan bireylerin eğitim öncesi beklenti, arzu ve algısının eğitimin verimliliğini, sonraki eğitimlere bağlılığı, öz yeterliliği ve motivasyonu etkilediğini belirtmiştir. Çalışma, Bodrum ilindeki beş yıldızlı otel işletmelerinde çalışan işgörenleri kapsamaktadır. İşgörenlerden anket tekniği ile elde edilen veriler ilgili analiz yöntemleri ile analiz edilmiştir. Regresyon analizi sonucunda hizmet içi eğitim algısının öğrenme motivasyonu üzerinde pozitif yönlü ve anlamlı bir etkiye sahip olduğu görülmüştür.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Hizmet İçi Eğitim Algısı, Öğrenme Motivasyonu

The Effect of In-Service Training Perception on Employee’s Motivation to Learn: A Case Report of Bodrum

Öz

Service is a sector that takes its power from human resource and its existence depends on the value it gives to human resource. Since worker employment rate is high, automatization and mechanization is very limited in the tourism industry which heavily depends on the face to face communication, it shows a need for in-service training Şener, 2001; 14 . In-service trainings are a process that enhance employee’s knowledge, abilities and talents and keep them up to date with the new information. Employees’ personal traits, perception and motivation are important during this process. The purpose of this study is to determine the effect of in-service training perception on employee’s motivation to learn. Clemenz 2001; 9 defines in-service training perception as the in training employee’s assessments towards the training. In-service training perception is defined in literature as the satisfaction as a result of the assessments of training, positive reaction, and a positive point of view towards the future trainings. Noe 1986; 743 says that motivation to learn is employee’s desire and willingness towards learning the contents of the training. Moreover, motivation to learn also effected by employee’s reaction, attitude and personal traits. Expectancy theory which is one of the motivation theories, is in a close relation with in-service training perspective and motivation to learn. Clemenz, 2001; 17; Tombs, 2011; 11 . According to Vroom’s expectancy theory, a person’s motivation is equal to multiplication of expectancy of one’s behavior is going to make them achieve their goal and the value one gives to that goal Budak and Budak, 2016; 215 . Desire, willingness, expectancy that are included in the definition of expectancy theory are concepts which are also the keywords of motivation to learn. Likewise, personal benefits are also a factor that makes employee’s attend the training programs. Employee’s, gain personal benefits knowledge, gaining talents, rise to their wage, promotion opportunity etc. , perspective towards the training program become positive Vyas, 2015; 154 . Tannenbaum et al 1991 , indicate that person’s, who is going to attend the training, expectations, willingness and perspective before training effect efficiency of training, commitment to future trainings, self-sufficiency and motivation. This study includes employee’s work at 5-star hotels in Bodrum province. Data collected from the employee’s with a survey analyzed with related analyze techniques. As a result of regression analyze, a positive and meaningful relation between in-service training perception and motivation to learn was observed.

Anahtar Kelimeler

In Service Training, Motivation to Learn

Kaynakça

• Ahmad, K. Z., & Bakar, R. A. (2003). “The association between training and organizational commitment among white colour workers in Malaysia”. Intaernation Journal of Training and Development, vol: 7 (3), pp: 166-185.
• Armstrong, M. (1999). A handbook of human resource management practice, London, Kogan Page.
• Baldwin, T. T., & Magjuka, R. J., & Loher, B. T. (1991). “The perils of participation: Effects of choice of trainee on trainee motivation and learning”. Personnel Psychology, vol: 44, pp: 51-66.
• Bartlett, K. (2001). “The relationship between training and organizational commitment: A study in the health care field”. Human Resource Development Quartely, vol: 12 (4), pp: 335-352.
• Bonacorda, D. A. (1992). “Employee characteristics and perceptions affecting their desire to attend training programs”. Yayınlanmamış doktora Tezi, Kansas Üniversitesi, ABD.
• Budak, G., & Budak, G. (2016). İşletme Yönetimi, Ankara, Nobel Yayıncılık.
• Cater, V. D. T. (2013). “The influence of training and training transfer factors on organisational learning and performance”. Personnel Review, vol: 42 (3), pp: 324-348.
• Clement, R. W. (1978). “An empirical test of the hierarchy theory of training evaluation”. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi, Michigan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, USA.
• Clemenz, C. E. (2001). “Measuring perceived quality of training in the hospitality industry”. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi, Virginia Polytechnic Üniversitesi, Blacksburgh/ Virginia.
• Colquitt, J. A., & LePine, A., & Noe, R. A. (2000). “ Toward an integrative theory training motivation: a meta-analytic path analysis of 20 years of research”. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol: 85, pp: 678-707.
• Dhar, R. L. (2015). “Service quality and the training of employees: The mediating role of organizational commitment”. Tourism Management vol: 46, pp: 419-430.
• Dubin, S. S. (1990). Maintaining competence through updating, San Francisco, Jossey Bass.
• Facteau, J. D., & Dobbins, G. H., & Russell, J. E. A., & Ladd, R. T., & Kudisch, J. D. (1995). “The influence of general perceptions of the training environment on pretraining motivation and perceived training transfer”. Journal of Management, vol: 21 (1), pp: 1-25.
• Far, J. L., & Middlebrooks, C. L. (1990). Maintaining professional competence, San Francisco, Jossey Bas.
• Ferreira, A. P., & Leite, R. (2012). “What you get is what you see? Employee’s perception of training and development in Portuguese organizations”. Touruism and Management Studies International Conference Algarve, vol: 2, pp: 396-406.
• Fisher, C. D., & Peters, L. H., & O’Connor, E. J. (1982). “The moderating effect of situational control of performance variance on the relationship between individual differences and performance”. Personal Psychology, vol: 35, pp: 609-621.
• Hicks, W. D., & Klimoski, R. J. (1987). “Entry into training programs and its effects on training outcomes: A field experiments”. Academy of Management Journal, vol: 30, pp: 542-552.
• Jonier, A. T., & Bakalis, S. (2006). “The attendance of organizational commitment: The case of Australian Casual Academics”. International Journal of Educational Management, vol: 20 (6), pp: 439-452.
• Keller, J. (1987). “Strategies for stimulating the motivation to learn”. Performance/Instruction, vol: 26, pp: 1-7.
• Kılıç, İ., & Ural, A. (2006). Bilimsel Araştırma Süreci ve SPSS ile Veri Analizi, , Ankara, Detay Yayıncılık.
• Klein,H. J., & Noe, R. A., & Wang, C. (2006). “Motivation to learn and course outcomes: The impact of delivery mode, learning goal orientation and perceived barriers and enablers”. Personal Psychology, vol: 59, pp: 665-702.
• Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Farr, J. L. (1988). “An integrative model of updating and performance”. Human Performance, vol: 1, pp: 5-29.
• Mathieu, J. E., & Martineu, J. (1997). Individual and situational influences on training motivation, Mohwah, NJ: LEA.
• Mathieu, J. E., & Tannenbaum, S. I., & Salas, E. (1992). “Influences of individual and situational characteristics on measures of training effectiveness”. Academy of Management Journal, vol: 35, pp: 828-847.
• McCracken, M., & Witerton, J. (2006). “What about managers? Contradictions between lifelong learning and management development”. İnternational Journal of Training and Development, vol: 10 (1), pp: 55-66.
• Nakip, M. (2003). Pazarlama araştırmaları, Ankara, Seçkin Yayıncılık.
• Noe, R. A. (1986). “Trainees’ attributes and attitudes: Neglected Influences on training effectiveness”. Academy of Management Review, vol: 11 (4), pp: 736-749.
• Noe, R. A. (1999). Employee training and development, çev. Canan Çetin, Irwin, Mc Graw Hill.
• Noe, R. A., & Wilk, S. L. (1993). “Investigation of the factors that influence employees’ participation in development activities”. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol: 78 (2), pp: 291-302.
• Nordhaug, O. (1989). “Reward functions of personnel training”. Human Relations, vol: 42, pp: 373-388.
• O’Connor, E. J., & Peters, L. H., & Rudolf, C. J. (1980). “The behavior and affective consequences of performance relevant situational variables”. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, vol: 25, pp: 79-96.
• Orpen, C. (1999). “The influence of the training environment on trainee motivation and perceived training quality”. International journal of training and development, vol: 3 (1), pp: 34-43.
• Peters, L. H., & O’Connor, E. J., & Pooyan, A., & Weekley, J., & Frank, B., & Erenkranz, B. (1984). “Situational constraints effects on performance, affective reactions and turnover: A field replication and extension”. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol: 69, pp: 663-672.
• Rodin, J. (1990). Self directedness: Cause and effects throughout the life course, Hillsdale, Lawrance Eribaum Associates.
• Ryman, D. H., & Biesner, R. J. (1975). “Attitudes predictive of diving training success”. Personal Psychology, vol: 28, pp: 181-188.
• Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J. (2001). “The science of training: a decade of progress”. Annual Review of Psychology, vol: 52, pp: 471-499.
• Sieben, I. (2007). “Does Training trigger turnover or not? The impact of formal training on graduates”. Job Search Behavior- Work Employment Society, vol: 21, pp: 397-416.
• Susomrith, P., & Coetzer, A. (2015). “Employee’s perceptions of barriers to participation in training and development in small engineering businesses”. Journal of Workplace Learning, vol: 27 (7), pp: 561-578.
• Şener, B. (2001). Modern otel işletmelerinde yönetim ve organizasyon, Ankara, Detay Yayıncılık.
• Tannenbaum, S. L., & Mathieu, J. E., & Salas, E., & Cannon, B. (1991). “Meeting trainees expectations: The influence of training fulfillment on the development of commitment, self efficacy, and motivation”. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol:76 (6), pp: 759-769.
• Tharenou, P. (2001). “The relationship of training motivation to participation in training and development”. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, vol: 74 (5), pp: 599-621.
• Tombs, M. (2011). “Motivation to learn: Test of model in different training context”. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi, Cardiff Üniversitesi, Britanya.
• Torrence, D. R. (1993). “Motivating trainees to learn”. Training & Development, pp: 55-58.
• Vyas, L. (2015). “Convergence or divergence? Trainees and trainer’s perceptions of the customization and effectiveness of public service training”. Journal of Asian Public Policy, vol: 8 (2), pp: 149-177.
• http://etad.usask.ca/802papers/Frith/Motivation.PDF