© Kamla-Raj 2014 J Soc Sci, 39(1): 43-50 (2014)

The Impact of Training on Employee Job Satisfaction andRetention among Administrative Staff Members:

A Case of a Selected Tertiary InstitutionSharon Ruvimbo Terera1 and Hlanganipai Ngirande2

1Department of Industrial Psychology, University of Fort Hare. Private Bag x1314,Alice, 5700 South Africa

2Department of Business Management, University of Limpopo (Turfloop Campus.Private Bag 1106. Sovenga, 2707, South Africa

Cell: 1<073 531 5801>, 2<073 526 4366>E-mail: 1<sharonruvimboterera@gmail.com>, 2<hlanganipai.ngirande@ul.ac.za>

KEYWORDS Turnover. Training. Retention. Impact. Tertiary

ABSTRACT The paper presents the findings of the study that was conducted to explore the impact of training onjob satisfaction and retention of employees at a selected tertiary institution. A quantitative resea rch methodologywas used and 120 randomly selected respondents participated in this study. Self-administered questionnaires wereadministered to respondents drawn from academic administrators. The data collected was analysed using SPSSversion 22.0. The results revealed that there is no significant relationship between training and employee retention.However, there is a significant positive relationship between employee job satisfaction and retention.

Address for correspondenceHlanganipai NgirandeDepartment of Business Management, University ofLimpopo (Turfloop Campus).Private Bag 1106.Sovenga, 2707, South Africa

INTRODUCTION

In order to survive and prosper in today‘seconomy, the concept of employee retention isnow very important for many South African in-stitutions. Many organizations have found itvery important to invest in employees throughtraining to improve employee proficiencies sothat they can acquire a greater return in humancapital investment through increased job com-mitment and high employee retention. The worldis constantly shifting such that institutions ofall types have to adapt to external and internalchanges for their own survival (Cummings andWorley 2005). According to Samuel and Chipun-za (2009), retaining skilled employees is criticalin order to sustain competition and effective andefficient service delivery among organizations.

In South Africa‘s job market, retaining keyemployees has become a critical issue for orga-nizations. Employers are seizing on training asone of the most effective retention tools avail-able. Kauffman (2010) argues that when it comesto improving employee retention. it is impera-tive to use grass-root employee involvement

program like training in the firm‘s business. To-day‘s employees are now very different becausethey now have so many opportunities at theirdisposal (Kauffman 2010). If they are not happywith their present company they move over tothe next organization. The responsibility there-fore lies with the employer to ensure that theypreserve and maintain their best employees. Agood employer is one who knows how to bothattract and retain its employees. This can beachieved through providing adequate employ-ee training. Therefore if training is not devised,it may also pose a threat to employee organiza-tional commitment which in turn leads to a neg-ative impact to the organizational success.

Forgacs (2009) defines training is as aplanned activity aimed at improving employees‘performance by helping them realize an obliga-tory level of understanding or skill through theimpartation of information. Armstrong (2000) alsodefines training as an organized process toamend employee proficiencies so that they canachieve its objectives. In the traditional ap-proach to training, most organizations neverused to believe in training. Organizations hadthe view that training was very costly and un-worthy. The scenario is however changing. Themodern approach to training is that globally, or-ganizations have realized the importance of train-ing. Training is now viewed as a commitment

44 SHARON RUVIMBO TERERA AND HLANGANIPAI NGIRANDE

and retention tool than a cost (Torrington et al.2004).

Statement of the Problem

High labour turnover damages the organiza-tion through increased costs of recruitment andselection, delayed service delivery and low mo-rale amongst employees. Kabungaidze et al.(2013) argues that such activities greatly affectorganizational success to prosper in today‘scompetitive economy due to their inability toretain the right quality of employees. There alsoseems to be a grey area between training andemployee retention because most researches onthe impact of training on employee retention haveshown inconclusive results (Coetzee andSchreuder 2013; Terera and Ngirande 2014). An-other factor is that although various researcheswere conducted on the impact of training in or-ganizations, not enough research has been con-ducted in higher learning institutions to provideempirical support for the impact of training onattitudinal factors such as organizational com-mitment and employee retention especially amongadministrative staff in higher learning institutions.Therefore the research seeks to investigate theimpact of training on employee retention.

Research Objectives

The research objectives are: To determine the impact of training on em-

ployee retention; To make recommendations to the policy

makers in the organization on possibleways to improve employee retention basedon the research findings.

Research Hypothesis

H0: There is no relationship between train-ing and employee retention.

H1: There is a significant positive relation-ship between training and employeeretention.

H0: There is no relationship between train-ing and employee retention

H2: There is a significant positive relation-ship between training and employeeretention.

Research Questions

1. Does training lead to employee retention?2. Does lead to employee job satisfaction?

Review of Related Literature

One of the core concepts in Human Resourc-es literature for employers is the retention anddevelopment of the human capital to facilitate acompetitive advantage (DeYoung 2000). Themanagement of labour turnover has become agrowing challenge particularly in professionalorganizations like in health and academic insti-tutions (Cappelli 2000). Increased employee turn-over results in instability, additional workloadand stress on remaining staff thus escalatingjob dissatisfaction which potentiates the turn-over cycle (Moseley et al. 2008). Schuler andJackson (2006) also state that recruiting employ-ees to meet the organization’s human resourcedemands is only half of what is needed in talentmanagement. The need to keep these people isanother battle. Organizations that have lowerlabour turnover rates gain a competitive advan-tage through a reduction in overall labour costsand an increase in productivity.

According to Horwitz (2008) skills shortag-es are a threat to economic growth. He arguesthat retention strategies are critical in a globalmarket that is faced with the shortage of skilledworkers. The skills shortage challenge is not aSouth African phenomenon alone. It is there-fore important for business, government publicand private sector leaders to address this criti-cal component of employee retention for com-petitiveness and service delivery. Moseley et al.(2008) state that employee retention is impor-tant to organizations as increased turnover cre-ates instability and puts additional workload andstress on remaining staff, increasing job dissat-isfaction and therefore potentiating the turnovercycle.

Recent trends also show that employees nowhave a desire to obtain fresh skills. Particularlyin technical skills because acquisition of skillsprovides job security as compared to seniority(Chaminade 2007). As a result employees lookfor organisations that are prepared to afford themsome training and development opportunities.This can be in the form of bursaries on the jobtraining and ongoing development opportuni-ties .This results in affective commitment be-

TRAINING AND RETENTION 45

cause the employees will strongly identify withthe organization if their personal goals are beingmet by the organisation (Coetzee and Schreuder2013). This affective commitment often promptsemployees to stay with the organisation. There-fore it is very important for any organization toprovide its employees with adequate trainingand keep track on their level of job satisfaction.

Theoretical Framework

Herzberg 1968’s two factor theory was uti-lised for this study to better comprehend em-ployees‘ attitudes and motivations to remain inor leave an organization. Frederick Herzberg per-formed studies in the workplace to establish fac-tors that led to satisfaction or dissatisfaction.Interviews were conducted whereby employeeswere asked about factors that pleased them inan organisation and those that they were un-happy about (Herzberg 1966). Herzberg furtherformulated the motivation-hygiene theory togive details of the results. He called the satisfi-ers motivators and the dissatisfiers hygiene fac-tors. Hygiene factors were considered mainte-nance factor that are required to avoid dissatis-faction but they themselves do not cause satis-faction (Sungmin 2009).

Herzberg (1966) differentiated factors lead-ing to satisfaction from those leading to dissat-isfaction as follows.

Hygiene factorsMotivation factors

· Supervisionrecognition

· Company policygrowth

· Work conditionsresponsibility

· Relationship with managementadvancement

· Salarywork itself

· Relationship with colleaguesachievement

According to the two-factor theory the pres-ence of hygiene factors does not result in satis-faction but however their absence certainly leadsto dissatisfaction in employees. In contrast thepresence of motivation factors in an organiza-tion leads to higher satisfaction and their ab-sence results in no satisfaction in employees(Sungmin 2009).

Basing on this theory, Coetzee and Schreud-er (2013) argue it is therefore important that or-ganisations have both hygiene factors and mo-tivation factors to keep their employees satis-fied so that they will not leave the organisation.Motivation factors are often said to lead to highretention but the absence of hygiene factors mayresult in increased turnover (Coetzee andSchreuder 2013).

RESEARCH DESIGN ANDMETHODOLOGY

The quantitative design method was used inthis research. A quantitative methodology makesuse of statistical representations rather than tex-tual pictures of the phenomenon (Kabungaidzeet al. 2013).

Population

The population of the study consisted ofboth male and females from administration staffat a selected tertiary institution in the EasternCape Province. The total size of the populationwas 120 (N=120). Using the RaoSoft sample sizecalculator, a minimum recommended sample sizeof 190 was obtained. The respondents were se-lected using a simple random sampling method.

Measuring Instrument

A self-administered questionnaire was usedto collect data for this research. According toBabbie (2013) a questionnaire contains ques-tions and other types of items designed to seekappropriate information for data analysis. Threeinstruments were used to compute the variablesin this study. These are the biographical ques-tionnaire training questionnaire and the inten-tion to leave questionnaire. A self-designed bio-graphical and occupational questionnaire wasused for sample description.

Training was measured using a 5-item mea-sure developed by Teseena and Soeters (2006)and it has an alpha coefficient of 0.82. Employeeretention was measured by the intention to leavequestionnaire developed by Cowin (2002). Re-sponses to each of the six items were rated us-ing a 5-point Likert scale with anchors labelled:1 = strongly disagree. 2 = disagree. 3 = neitheragree nor disagree. 4 = agree. 5= strongly agree.The alpha coefficient for this six-item scale hasbeen 0.96 in previous studies.

46 SHARON RUVIMBO TERERA AND HLANGANIPAI NGIRANDE

Administering of the Questionnaire

Permission was requested from the HR Di-rector of the institution to give out the ques-tionnaires. The questionnaires were left with theHR officials for distribution. The anonymity andconfidentiality of the information to be obtainedfrom questionnaires was stressed to the HR de-partment and to the respondents through a cov-er letter.

To facilitate a good response rate, an agree-ment was made that the collection of data shouldtake a period of one month.

Data Analysis

The research utilised quantitative techniquesof data analysis. The Statistical Package for theSocial Sciences (SPSS) version 20 program wasused to analyze data. Demographic data was re-ported by using frequencies and percentages.The level of statistical significance was measuredusing Chi-Square test and set at p < 0.05. Pear-son Product Moment Correlation analysis wascarried out to determine the direction andstrength of the relationship between training andemployee retention. One way ANOVA was usedto test the significance level of relationship be-tween variables.

RESULTS

This section seeks to present and discussthe results obtained from this study through datacollection.

Descriptive Statistics

The results illustrate the gender distributionof respondents. Out of the 120 respondents,(36%) were males and (64%) were females. Ac-cording to the responses, it can be concludedthat the gender representativity was achieved.The reason most respondents were females canbe attributed to the fact that in most organiza-tions, females are the dominant sex due to thenature of the work (administration). However itis not always the case these days in most SouthAfrican organizations due to different policiessuch as the affirmative action. The majority ofthe respondents were Blacks ranging from 25-34years of age.

The results are shown on the Table 1.

In responding to whether the participantswere prepared to remain in the organization be-cause of education and training opportunities,results show that most respondents were notwilling to remain in the organization because re-gardless of the education and training opportu-nities afforded to them. Out of 120 participants102 participants were not prepared to remain inthe organisation as indicated in Table 2. Giventhis, it shows that training opportunities do nothave a positive impact on employee retention.Pare et al. (2001) also found training to be nega-tively related to continuance commitment (em-ployee retention).

The controversy that lies on whether train-ing triggers high turnover or retention is the onethat led to the buildup of Figure 1. The resultsshow that 75% of the respondents were likely toquit the organization because they are nowequipped with the necessary skills which makethem marketable to other organizations. These

Table 1: Frequency distribution for demographicvariables (n=120)

Demographic variables Percentage

Gender (n=120)Male 3 6Female 6 4Total 100

Ethnic Group (n=120)Black 6 6Whi te 2 0Colored 1 0Other 4Total 100

Age (n=120)16-24 525-34 4 035-44 2 045-54 2 255+ 1 3Total 100

Table 2: “I am prepared to remain in the organi-zation because of education and training oppor-tunit i es ”

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Agree 6 5Agree 6 5Neutral 6 5Disagree 5 4 4 5Strongly Disagree 4 8 4 0

Total 120 100

TRAINING AND RETENTION 47

results are similar to the literature of (Jiang andKlein 2000) which states that training opportu-nities do not improve employee retention be-cause employees regard them as hygiene fac-tors which are necessary to be available buthowever their availability does not necessarilylead to either job satisfaction or organizationalcommitment.

Inferential Statistics

In order to test the contribution of the inde-pendent variables (training) to the dependentvariable (employee) several statistical modelswere used. These include the Chi-Square test totest whether there is an association between in-dependent and dependent variables. Anova wasalso used to test the significance of the associ-ation and Pearson Correlation to test the strengthand direction of the relationship between vari-ables. A Chi-square was used to determinewhether there was an association between train-ing and employee retention. Results from theanalysis indicated that training alone cannotpredict employee retention. The results areshown in Table 3.

A Chi-square test of association was per-formed by cross tabulating two variables name-ly training and employee retention. Results fromTable 3 shows a Chi-square value of .861a and 2degrees of freedom with a probability value of0.650. Since the p-value is greater than 0.05. Ittherefore means that we reject the null hypothe-sis and conclude that training only cannot canpredict employee retention. To determine thedirection of the association one way Anova wasused as shown in Table 4.

The homogeneity of variance option pro-vides a Levene’s test for homogeneity of vari-

Fig. 1. I often think about quitting the organization

Table 3: Chi-Square test showing the associationbetween adequate training and employee reten-t io n

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square .861a 2 .650Likelihood Ratio 1.239 2 .538Linear-by-Linear .744 1 .388 AssociationN of Valid Cases 120

a. 4 cells (66.7%) have expected count less than 5. Theminimum expected count is .10.

48 SHARON RUVIMBO TERERA AND HLANGANIPAI NGIRANDE

ances which tests whether the variance in scoresis the same for each of the five groups. If thevalue is greater than 0.05 the assumption of ho-mogeneity of variance is not violated. In thiscase it is 0.377.

A chi-square test of association was per-formed by cross tabulating two variables name-ly job satisfaction and employee retention. Fromthe results we got a chi-square value of 20.000a

and 1 degrees of freedom with a probability val-ue of 0.000. Since the p-value is less than 0.05, ittherefore means that we do not reject the nullhypothesis and conclude that satisfied employ-ees have low turnover intentions and likely toremain with the organization as depicted in Ta-ble 5.

In addition to the Chi-square test of associ-ation. Pearson Product moment Correlation anal-ysis was carried to determine strength, directionand significance of the relationship betweenemployee job satisfaction and retention.

The Relationship between EmployeeJob Satisfaction and Retention

Results from the correlation analysis indi-cates a positive relationship between job satis-faction and employee retention (r=0.182. p=0.007)meaning the more satisfied the employee are,the more they remain in the organization (Table6).

It was also important to test the overall meanof retention in order to determine whether therespondents were likely to stay or leave the or-ganization in future. The overall retention meanwas 3.39726. This indicates that respondents(administrators) were uncertain of staying orleaving the organization. This is as a result ofrespondents (administrators) being exposed toboth job satisfying factors such freedom to plan,high degree of initiative and on the other handbeing exposed to dissatisfying factors such aslack of conscience in doing work, poor workingconditions, the rural nature of the province anda lot more. Consequently, administrators are notsure whether they are totally satisfied or dissat-isfied.

DISCUSSION

The purpose of this study was to investi-gate the impact of training on employee reten-tion. It was hypothesized that training does notimprove employee retention (administrators) inan organization. It was also hypothesized thatthere is a positive correlation between trainingand employee job satisfaction. This section dis-cusses the results and findings of the study andseeks to answer the research questions of theresearch.

In order to contextualize the research, com-parisons are drawn with available literature ontraining and employee retention amongst admin-istrators. Based on the above results the follow-ing section answers the research questions andhypothesis.

Training and Employee Retention

The results of the current research indicatethat there is no statistically significant associa-

Table 4: Test of homogeneity of variances

Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig.

1.061 4 214 .377

Table 5: Chi-Square Tests results showing an as-sociation between adequate training and employ-ee job satisfaction

Value df Asymp. Sig.(2-sided)

Pearson Chi-square 20.000a 1 .000Continuity Correctionb 4.488 1 .034Likelihood Ratio 7.941 1 .005Fisher’s Exact TestLinear-by-Linear 19.000 1 .000 AssociationN of Valid Cases 120

a. 3 cells (75.0%) have expected count less than 5. Theminimum expected count is .05.

Table 6: Correlations for employee job satisfac-tion and retention

Mean Mean jobretention satisfaction

Mean Turnover 1 .182**

Intentions PearsonCorrelationSig. (2-tailed) .007N 120 120

Mean JobSatisfaction Pearson .182** 1

CorrelationSig. (2-tailed) .007N 120 120

TRAINING AND RETENTION 49

tion between training and employee retentionamongst employees (administrators). Results inTable 3 shows that there is no association be-tween training and employee retention (r=-0.206.p=0.6). This means that training is not the onlydeterminant of employee retention especiallyamong administrators in an organization. This isalso supported by a study conducted based ona sample of 750 administrators in higher learninginstitutions which revealed that there is no astatistically significant relationship betweentraining and employee retention (Coetzee andSchreuder 2013).

Job Satisfaction and Employee Retention

Results from this study show a positive rela-tionship between job satisfaction and employeeretention (r=-0.182, p=0.007) meaning the moresatisfied the administrators are, the more theyare likely to remain in the organization. The studyalso tested the overall mean of turnover inten-tions in order to determine whether administra-tors were likely to stay or leave the profession infuture. The overall retention mean was 3.39726.This indicates that respondents (administrators)were uncertain of staying or leaving the admin-istrative profession. This is as a result of admin-istrators being exposed to both job satisfyingfactors such as freedom to plan, high degree ofinitiative and on the other hand being exposedto dissatisfying factors such as lack of con-science in doing work, poor working conditions,the rural nature of the province and a lot more.Consequently, administrators are not surewhether they are totally satisfied or dissatisfied.Similarly Kabungaidze et al. (2013) also reporteda statistical significant relationship between jobsatisfactions based on training in his study of150 administrators on employee retention.

CONCLUSION

It is apparent from the research results thatthe research hypothesis has been proved false.The hypothesis which states that training doesnot improve employee retention in the organiza-tion is accepted because many respondents in-dicated that they were not willing to stay withtheir organizations because of the training anddevelopment opportunities afforded to them. Itis therefore important for management to realizethe importance of other initiatives in their reten-

tion strategy. This is because the results of theresearch also show that other than training, thereare other retention factors which are also as im-portant as training in terms of retention amongthe administration staff employees for examplemonetary rewards and the need for global expo-sure and experience.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The results from this study show that em-ployees consider a very number of factors inaddition to training when choosing to remain inan organisation. It is very important thereforethat the management develop an attractive em-ployee value proposition as a retention strategythat is inclusive of training, promotion opportu-nities and opportunities for global exposure,monetary rewards and health benefits also. Thismeans that management should be able to cre-ate a total reward structure that includes morethan just compensation. Training alone is notenough for employee retention. Managementshould also consider making their compensa-tion and benefits package lucrative so that theright quality of employees are attracted and alsoremain in the organization. This retention strate-gy should make a company a great place to work.Exit interviews should also be conducted when-ever an employee resigns so that they can knowthe reasons why their employees are leaving theorganization. Exit interviews are important be-cause they will help shape the retention strate-gy of the university.

The results of the study also show that or-ganizations do not want to retain just any em-ployee but only those that they find valuable.Valuable employees are those that possess thenecessary skills and competencies. It is veryimportant therefore for employees to take ad-vantage of the training and development oppor-tunities that are available at the university andequip themselves with the required skills. In theevent of retrenchments and layoffs, such em-ployees may be retained by the organizationbecause they will be considered valuable.

Priorities for future research include control-ling for extraneous and confounding variableswhich would simultaneously improve the inter-nal validity of the research. A more rigorous re-search design could have facilitated this. Ideal-ly a larger sample based on a stratified randomdesign could be drawn. This is because strati-

50 SHARON RUVIMBO TERERA AND HLANGANIPAI NGIRANDE

fied random sampling is argued to minimize sam-pling errors and enhance the external validity ofresearch findings. Consequently, it allows forresults to be extrapolated from the sample to thepopulation with greater confidence.

REFERENCES

Armstrong M 2000. Understanding Training: HumanResource Management Practice. 8 th Edition. Lon-don: Kogan Page Limited.

Babbie E R 2013. The Practice of Social Research.13th

Edition. Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.Cappelli P 2000. A market driven approach to retain-

ing talent. Harvard Business Review. 78(1): 103-11.

Chaminade B 2007. A Retention Checklist: How DoYou Rate? From <www. humanresource magazine.co.au.>

Coetzee M, Schreuder D 2013. Personnel Psychology:An Applied Perspective. South Africa: Oxford Uni-versity Press.

Cowin L 2002. The effects of nurses’ job satisfactionon retention: An Australian persepective. Jona,32(5): 283-290.

Cummings TG, Worley CG 2005. Organization Devel-opment and Change. Ohio: South-Western.

De young P 2000. High technical talent perks are ripefor picking. Journal of Work Span, 43(10): 283.

Forgacs L 2009. Recruitment and Retention acrossContinents. Journal of T+D, 63(6): 40-44.

Herzberg F 1966. Work and the Nature of Man. Cleve-land, Ohio: World Publishers.

Horwitz F 2008. Retention strategies critical in a glo-bal market skills shortage. Resource ManagementJournal, 13(4): 23-44.

Hyun S 2009. Re-examination of Herzberg’s Two-Fac-tor Theory of Motivation in the Korean Army

Foodservice Operation. MS Thesis.  Iowa State Uni-versity. United States.

Jiang JJ, Klein G 2000. Supervisor support and careeranchor on the career satisfaction of the entry-level information systems professional. Journal ofManagement Information Systems, 16(3): 219-240.

Kabungaidze T, Mahlatshana N, Ngirande H 2013. Theimpact of job satisfaction and some demographicvariables on employee turnover intentions. Inter-national Journal of Business Administration, 4(1):53-65.

Kauffman C 2010. Employee involvement: A new blue-print for success. Journal of Accountancy, 209 (5):46-49.

Moseley A, Jeffers L, Patterson J 2008. The retentionof the older nursing workforce: A literature reviewexploring factors that influence the retention andturnover of older nurses. Contemporary Nurse.Australian Nursing Profession, 30(1): 46-56.

Pare G, Temblay M, Lalone P 2001. The Role of Orga-nizational Commitment and Citizenship Behaviorsin Understanding the Relations Between HumanResource Practices and Turnover Intentions of ITPersonnel. CIRANO, Montreal, Canada.

Samuel MO, Chipunza C 2009. Employee retentionand turnover: Using motivational variables as apanacea. African Journal of Business Management,3(8): 410-415.

Schuler SR, Jackson SC 2006. Managing human re-sources. Cengage learning. Sociology . 66(1): 32-40.

Terera SR, Ngirande H 2014. The impact of rewardson job satisfaction and employee retention. Medi-terranean Journal of Social Sciences, 5(1): 481-487 .

Tessema M, Soeters J 2006. Challenges and prospectsof HRM in developing countries: Testing the HRM-performance link in Eritrean civil service. Inter-national Journal of Human Resource Management,17(1): 86-105.

Torrington D, Hall L, Taylor S 2004. Human ResourceManagement. London: Pearson Education.