Measuring instrument

The measuring instrument used in this research study is the LTSI or Learning Transfer System Inventory (Holton et al., 2000). It is an instrument that measures and presents valuable information on the barriers to learning transfer. For this study, version three of the LTSI was used. It asks a total of 51 questions and measures 16 factors under four categories or scales.

The four categories are: trainee characteristic scales; motivation scales; work environment scales; and ability scales. These categories and its related factors support HRD outcomes as they relate to ability, motivation and environmental influences (Noe & Schmidt, 1986). The version of the LTSI used in this study measured 16 factors that are likely to improve or hinder successful transfer of learning. The 16 factors of the LTSI are described below to indicate how they relate to achieving the research objectives.

Factor 1 refers to learner readiness. This implies the degree to which respondents had the opportunity to provide input prior to training, knew what to expect during training, and understood how training was related to job-related development and work performance.

Factor 2 refers to performance self-efficacy. This implies the extent to which respondents feel confident and self-assured about applying new abilities in their jobs, and are able to overcome obstacles that hinder the use of new knowledge and skills.

Factor 3 refers to motivation to transfer. This implies the extent to which respondents are motivated to utilise learning in their work. It includes the degree to which respondents feel better able to perform, plan to use new skills and knowledge, and believe new skills will help them to more effectively perform on the job.

Factor 4 refers to transfer effort and performance. This implies the extent to which respondents believe that applying skills and knowledge learned in training will improve their performance. It includes whether an individual believes that investing effort in utilising new skills will affect future productivity and effectiveness.

Factor 5 refers to performance and outcome expectations. This implies the extent to which respondents believe the application of skills and knowledge acquired during training will lead to recognition they value. It includes the extent to which organisations demonstrate the link between development, performance and recognition; clearly articulate performance expectations; recognise and reward respondents for effective and improved performance; and create an environment in which respondents feel good about performing well.

Factor 6 refers to performance coaching. This implies the extent to which respondents receive constructive input, assistance and feedback from people in their work environment, such as peers, employees, colleagues and managers,hi when applying new abilities or attempting to improve work performance (formal and informal cues).

Factor 7 refers to supervisor support. This implies the managers’ involvement in clarifying performance expectations after training, identifying opportunities to apply new skills and knowledge, setting realistic goals based on training, working with respondents on problems encountered while applying new skills, and providing feedback when respondents successfully apply new abilities.

Factor 8 refers to supervisor sanctions. This implies managers opposing the use of new skills and knowledge, use techniques different from those taught in training, do not assist respondents in identifying opportunities to apply new skills and knowledge, or provide inadequate feedback when respondents successfully apply learning.

Factor 9 refers to peer support. This implies the degree to which peers mutually identify and implement opportunities to apply skills and knowledge learned in training, encourage the use of or expect the application of new skills, display patience with difficulties associated with applying new skills, or demonstrate appreciation for the use of new skills.

Factor 10 refers to resistance to change. This implies the work groups’ resistance to change, willingness to invest energy in change, and degree of support provided to

Factor 11 refers to personal outcomes that are positive. This includes increased productivity and work effectiveness, increased personal satisfaction, additional respect, a salary increase, reward, the opportunity to further career development plans, or the opportunity to advance in the organisation.

Factor 12 refers to personal outcomes that are negative. This includes reprimands, penalties, peer resentment, reassignment to undesirable jobs or reduced opportunities for further job or career development as a result of using the techniques learned in training.

Factor 13 refers to opportunity to use newly acquired skills and knowledge. This implies the organisation providing respondents with opportunities to apply new skills, resources needed to use new skills (equipment, information, materials) and adequate financial and human resources.

Factor 14 refers to personal capacity to transfer new skills and knowledge. This implies the extent to which an individual’s work load schedule, personal energy, and stress level facilitate or inhibit the application of new learning on the job.

Factor 15 refers to perceived content validity. This implies the degree to which the skills and knowledge taught during training are similar to performance expectations, as well as what is needed by the individual to perform more effectively. It addresses the extent to which instructional methods, aids and equipment used in training are similar to those used in an individual’s work environment.

Factor 16 refers to transfer design. This implies the extent to which the training programme is designed to clearly link learning with on-the-job performance through the use of clear examples, methods similar to the work environment and activities and exercises that clearly demonstrate how to apply new knowledge and skills. A match between job requirements and the training designed and delivered is clear.

The adapted 53-item LTSI questionnaire used 51 Likert-type scaling statements, with ratings of 1 to 5, with 1 being “strongly disagree” and 5 being “strongly agree”. Respondents were requested to indicate the extent to which they agreed or

disagreed with each statement. An additional 2 qualitative questions were included so that respondents could describe their personal views. Respondents required 20 – 25 minutes to complete the LTSI.

In order to use the research instrument, the researcher signed a user agreement and received the necessary consent to use the LTSI questionnaire for this study. Email correspondence secured the required permission from the instrument designers. The LTSI Administrator Guide was used as guideline to administer the LTSI. This adherence to procedure and process allows the results of the measuring instrument used in this study to be compared to other studies using the same instrument either conducted previously or in the future.