An Exploratory Study of Learning Transfer Systems Among Star-rated Hotels in Hainan, China #

Transcription

1 442 Zibin Song Gregory Mavrides E.F. Holton III Reid A. Bates An Exploratory Study of Learning Transfer Systems Among Star-rated Hotels in Hainan, China # Zibin Song *, Gregory Mavrides Hainan University, China E.F. Holton III, Reid A. Bates Louisiana State University, USA Abstract: This study explored the effects of employee sociodemographic variables on learning transfer systems, from training to changes in job performance, in ten 2- to 5-star hotels in Haikou, China. Hotels were contacted for participation by use of snowball sampling and respondents were selected by use of convenience sampling, constituting approximately 15 percent of the star-rated hotels in Haikou City and 32 percent of each hotel's total staff. Respondents, who had completed training no more than one year prior, completed the Learning Transfer System Inventory (LTSI), an 89 item instrument consisting of 15 scales distributed across four dimensions: Secondary Influences, Motivation, Work Environment and Ability factors. The data revealed that elder, male, contracted, college educated (and higher) employees, engaged as managerial staff, and earning over 1000 RMB per month, were more likely to endorse items across the four explored dimensions than other respondents. The findings also indicated that employees from the 3-star hotels were the least likely to expect that changes in job performance would lead to valued outcomes and they were, paradoxically, also the least likely to anticipate supervisor resistance or opposition to implementing # A preliminary analysis of the data used in this paper was presented at Second PolyU China Tourism Forum and Third China Tourism Academy Annual Conference held in Guangzhou in December 2005 and published as: Song. Z. B., & Mavrides, G. (2005). An exploratory of hotel learning transfer systems in Haikou, China, in proceedings of the conference. Mr. Zibin Song conceptualized the research idea, conducted the literature review, selected the instrument, conducted the initial analysis and interpretation of the data, wrote the first English draft, and translated the final draft into Chinese. Dr. Gregory Mavrides consulted on the research methodology, refined the data analysis and wrote the final English manuscript. Drs. Holton and Bates contributed their research instrument (LTSI) without direct involvement in the project. * Corresponding author Zibin Song, Lecturer, Tourism School of Hainan University, simonsoongzb@gmail.com. Gregory Mavrides, Professor, Tourism School of Hainan University, Talkdoc@gmail.com. E. F. Holton III, Professor, Louisiana State University, eholton2@lsu.edu. Reid A. Bates, Associate Professor, Louisiana State University, rabates@lsu.edu.

2 An Exploratory Study of Learning Transfer Systems Among Star-rated Hotels in Hainan, China 443 new skills. Possible inferences of these findings and some unique features of the Chinese culture such as guanxi and mianzi were discussed. Suggestions for enhancement of learning transfer systems were also made in this study for hotels to consider. Key words: Learning Transfer System; Learning Transfer System Inventory (LTSI); exploratory study; China hotel; employee sociodemographic 1. Introduction China is developing rapidly on many fronts. By the year 2020, it is predicted that China will become the world s number one tourist destination (World Tourism Organization [UNWTO], 1999). As with other sectors of China s tourism, its hotel industry has been growing enormously since Deng Xiaoping first introduced his open-door policy in 1978 (Lam & Han, 2005). However, the hotel industry currently finds itself faced with the problem of a poorly qualified and inadequately trained labor pool (Lam & Xiao, 2000). As a result, hotels routinely offer training programs to improve the quality of their workforce, to educate and inform staff about the needs of international visitors, and to be better positioned for the predicted tourism boom in the coming years (Wang, Xiao, & Li, 2002; Zhao, Zhan, & Namasivayam, 2004). Despite the hospitality organizations efforts to improve service quality through large investments in training, hoteliers in China are at a loss to explain why the results of such training are often unsatisfactory (Zhao et al.). This issue has been addressed, in the literature of Human Resource Development (HRD), as a problem of transfer of learning. Georgenson (1982), for example, predicted that, despite the total monies allocated to training, no more than 10 percent of the knowledge and skill sets acquired from such training will ever be applied or transferred to an actual improvement in the trainees job performance. It is increasingly understood that transfer of learning to changes in job performance involves a system of influencing factors (Ruona, Leimbach, Holton, & Bates, 2002). The systematic factors that affect transfer of learning to job performance are referred to as the learning transfer system, which includes all such relevant factors in the person, training, and organization (Holton, Bates, & Ruona, 2000). However, the existing literature on learning transfer offers little of value to industry practitioners because the study of learning transfer has been mostly exploratory, and not prescriptive for designing interventions that can improve transfer effectiveness (Holton et al., 2000). Scholars have stopped short at the point of identifying, describing, or measuring factors that may influence transfer without investigating how those factors might be effectively changed or managed (Holton & Baldwin, 2003; Holton, Chen, & Naquin, 2003). On the other hand, practitioners usually fail to apply the new knowledge that does exist. For example, in addition to its use in exploratory research, the Learning Transfer System Inventory (LTSI) can also be utilized as a pulsetaking diagnostic tool in action-research (Cummings & Worley, 1998) and in organizational development (Holton et al., 2000). Holton et al. (2000) developed the LTSI with two explicit goals: the first was to identify and then operationalize the factors involved in the learning transfer

3 444 Zibin Song Gregory Mavrides E.F. Holton III Reid A. Bates system; the second was to organize those factors into a valid and generalized set of transfer system scales. In practice, however, many Chinese hoteliers are unaware of the LTSI and, even among those who are, it is seldom used as a diagnostic tool. Although some research has been conducted on assessing transfer issues in Chinese hotels (Song, 2003; Kuang, 2003), none of it has incorporated the LTSI instrument provided by its original author. Without valid and reliable instrumentation, researchers will be limited in their ability to reach conclusions and prescriptions about transfer systems because there will always be a question about the extent to which measurement error has contaminated the findings (Holton et al., 2000). This study explored the problem of learning transfer in the hotel industry on Hainan Island in China incorporating the latest version of the LTSI. Specifically, the objective of this study was to examine the relationship between learning transfer system factors, with regard to hotel organizations star-rating level, and hotel respondents sociodemographic variables such as age, education, income, gender, contract status and job function. In Hainan province, due to rapid over-development and increasing competition within the industry, human resource managers in the hotel industry are being forced to re-examine their staff development strategies and for good reasons. In an industry in which success is ultimately dependent upon customer service, managers are finding that their workforce is over-represented by relatively uneducated and unsophisticated personnel: only 13.3% of the hotel and tourism industry s employees possess a college education or better (Chen, 2003) in a market that is becoming exceedingly more competitive by the day. Statistics reveal that in 2004, there were 219 star-rated and at least 700 unrated hotels (approximately 23.83% and 67.17% of the total, respectively) with an average room occupancy of no more than 50% (Wang, 2005). In response to this burgeoning competitive environment, an ever increasing number of hoteliers on the island are engaging in cut-throat price-wars, in which they are operating their hotels at a loss, for extended periods of time, with the intent of bankrupting the competition. One of the fiercest competitions for guests on the island can be observed between star-rated and unrated economy (1- and 2-star) hotels in which the latter are not bound by the same government agency regulations and prohibitions against operating at a loss. In comparison, the moderately priced (3-star) hotels are relatively free from the practice and effects of predatory pricing because most hotels at this level are rated (and are thus bound by the same government regulations) and only one moderately priced and branded international hotel chain offers competition at that level. However, and in stark contrast, the market at the higher end, i.e., for luxury (4- and 5-star) hotels, competition is as fierce as it is at the economy end of the scale as an increasing number of international and domestic hotel chains, as well as independent ventures, vie for the same number of limited high-end guests. Consequently, it is becoming increasingly clear to the island s hoteliers that their ultimate success depends greatly on customer loyalty i.e. repeat business and in this context, the stakes in training their service personnel, and in making the most of their training investment, have never been higher. Despite the fact that hotel organizations on Hainan Island appreciate the value of human resource development, the evaluation of training effectiveness is often parsimoniously conducted

4 An Exploratory Study of Learning Transfer Systems Among Star-rated Hotels in Hainan, China 445 on the basis of Kirkpatrick s (1967) initial two levels of training evaluation, which focus on the participants reactions to the trainer and the learned content, often to the exclusion of the model s third and fourth levels of evaluation. Consequently, this four-level model of training evaluation, which is essentially a system for classifying training outcomes, is insufficient for making informed decisions about the ultimate effectiveness of training (Holton, 1996; Swanson & Holton, 1999). In this context and given the stakes involved in implementing training programs that actually result in the transfer of what is learned to improved job performance, it is of paramount importance that standardized and validated measurement tools such as the LTSI be implemented in hotel settings to evaluate effectiveness in a more realistic manner. This study, by utilizing the latest validated version of the LTSI, engaged in a preliminary and novel HRD approach by exploring the transfer of learning in ten star-rated hotel organizations in Haikou, the provincial city of Hainan. It is hoped that this study offered prescriptive and useful recommendations for our participating hotel organizations, and will serve as an impetus for hoteliers elsewhere, as well as future researchers, to attend to the various organizational systems that impact upon the transfer of learning. OK=iáíÉê~íìêÉ=oÉîáÉï The literature on transfer of learning has been largely concentrated in three areas. Firstly, what is transfer of learning? According to Wexley and Latham (1981), transfer of learning is defined as the degree to which trainees effectively apply the knowledge, skills, and attitudes gained in a training context to the job. Baldwin and Ford (1988) articulate that for transfer to have occurred, learned behavior must be generalized to the job context and maintained over a period of time on the job. Although there are multiple definitions, it is generally agreed that transfer involves the application and maintenance of new knowledge and skills (Ford & Weissbein, 1997). Secondly, what factors affect transfer of learning? Traditional views lay emphasis on specific features of training (e.g. training needs analysis, program implementation, and the like) and exclude consideration of factors outside the training (Tracey & Tews, 1995). Modern views on factors influencing transfer of learning, however, hold that transfer involves a system of influences both inside and outside training. Baldwin and Ford (1988) were one of the first researchers to introduce a model which proposes three sets of factors related to transfer of learning: (a) trainees characteristics including ability, personality, and motivation; (b) training design, including a strong transfer design and appropriate content; and (c) the work environment, including available support systems and opportunities. Since then, considerable progress has been made in identifying the specific and systematic factors that affect transfer. Some researchers term the systematic influencing factors as transfer climate and stated that it may even be as important as the training itself (e.g. Roullier & Goldstein, 1993). In addition, several studies have found that the transfer climate can significantly affect an individual s ability and motivation to transfer learning into job performance (e.g. Tracey, Tannenbaum, & Kavanaugh, 1995; Xiao, 1996). A significantly greater proportion of the researchers, however, have applied a different label to the systematic factors affecting an individual s transfer of learning into job performance: the learning transfer system (e.g. Holton et al., 2000;

5 446 Zibin Song Gregory Mavrides E.F. Holton III Reid A. Bates Ruona et al., 2002). Thus far, it has been increasingly understood that transfer of learning is affected by a system of relevant factors in the domains of person, training, and organization, which may facilitate or inhibit trainees from taking what they learn in the training environment and transferring it to their job performances. Thirdly, how does one measure factors affecting transfer? Traditional HRD evaluation models, which focus on the individual training program, have been dominated by the aforementioned Kirkpatrick four-level model for the past 40 years (Holton, 1996). However, as stated above, this four-level evaluation model is flawed despite the fact it has been regarded as the standard in the field of training evaluation by many researchers and practitioners. Therefore, Holton alternatively proposed a more comprehensive model: an HRD Evaluation and Research Model, on the basis of existing research in the area of training evaluation. The model accounts for the impact of primary intervening variables such as motivation to learn, trainability, job attitudes, personal characteristics, and transfer of learning conditions. Holton s model, although complex, suggested that alternative strategies might be possible to enable the development of practical evaluation tools. The model emanates from Noe and Schmitt s (1986) macrostructure that hypothesizes that HRD outcomes are a function of ability, motivation, and environmental influences at three outcome levels: learning, individual performance, and organizational performance. It should first be noted that the learning transfer system describes only one portion of HRD Evaluation and Research Measurement Model (Holton): the transfer of learning into the outcome of individual performance (Ruona et al., 2002). Secondly, as mentioned above, Holton et al. (2000) further developed the LTSI in order to operationalize learning transfer system. As a result, the LTSI is comprised of four sets of factors: three primary and one secondary set of influencing factors. The three primary influencing factors include motivation, work environment, and ability, which directly influence individual performance. The secondary set of influencing factors includes trainee characteristics and is understood to affect motivation and then to further influence individual performance. Moreover, the LTSI has been found to be useful not only for research purposes but in HRD practice as well. At the very least, it has the potential for providing industry practitioners with a sound diagnostic tool for identifying problematic systemic areas within an organization that may be interfering with the desired transfer of learning. For example, after pinpointing potential barriers in their organization s transfer system, HRD managers could then pursue the findings with key personnel, or specific departments, to further assess or clarify the specific nature of the deterrents to transfer (Holton et al., 2000). This would enable organizations to target specific areas in need of improvement or organizational change in order to more fully capitalize on their investment in training. Finally, the LTSI has been tested and validated in different countries and cultures. For example, Chen, Holton, and Bates (2005) in their most recent study have successfully validated the LTSI in Taiwan with an identification of 15 LTSI factors. The definitions of the factors in the inventory and sample items for the LTSI are provided in Table 1 and the conceptual framework of LTSI is detailed in Figure 1.

6 An Exploratory Study of Learning Transfer Systems Among Star-rated Hotels in Hainan, China 447 Figure 1. Learning Transfer System Inventory: Conceptual Model of Instrument Constructs Secondary influences Performance Self-Efficacy Learner Readiness Motivation Motivation to Transfer Transfer Effort Performance Performance Outcomes Environment Feedback Peer Support Supervisor Support Openness to Change Positive Personal Outcomes Negative Personal Outcome Supervisor Sanctions Outcomes Learning Individual Performance Organizational Performance Ability Content Validity Transfer Design Personal Capacity for Transfer Opportunity to Use Source: Holton, Bates, & Ruona (2000, p. 239)

7 448 Zibin Song Gregory Mavrides E.F. Holton III Reid A. Bates Table 1. LTSI Scale Definitions and Sample Items Factor Definition Sample Item No. of Items Secondary Influences Learner Readiness The extent to which individual knows expected outcomes of the training and understands how the training are prepared for them prior to participating in training. Before the training I had a good understanding of how it would fit my job-related development. 3 Performance Self-Efficacy The extent to which an individual's belief in self on overcoming obstacles to change his or her performance. I am confident in my ability to use newly learned skills on the job. 4 Motivation Factors Motivation to Transfer The extent to an individual's willingness and excitement to try out new learning to the job and belief that new skills will help him or her improve job performance. I get excited when I think about trying to use my new learning on the job. 4 Transfer Effort- Performance Expectation Performance - Outcomes Expectation The extent to which an individual's belief and expectation in effort will lead to performance improvement. The extent to which an individual expect that changes in job performance will lead to valued outcomes. My job performance improves when I use new things that I have learned. For the most part, the people who get rewarded around here are the ones that do something to deserve it. 4 5 Ability Factors Personal Capacity for Transfer The extent to which an individual has the time, energy and mental space in their job to transfer learned skills and knowledge to the job. My workload allows me time to try the new things I have learned. 5 Perceived Content Validity The extent to which an individual judges the match between training content and job requirements. The methods used in training are very similar to how we do it on the job. 3 Transferability The extent to which an individual perceives that training is designed to facilitate opportunities to apply what they learn to the job. Opportunities may include resource availability in the job and case examples and participation in the training. The way the trainer(s) taught the material made me feel more confident I could apply it. 7

8 An Exploratory Study of Learning Transfer Systems Among Star-rated Hotels in Hainan, China 449 Factor Environment Factors Definition Sample Item No. of Items Positive Personal Outcomes The extent to which applying training on the job leads to outcomes, which are positive for the individual. The positive outcomes may include pay raise, incentives, non-monetary rewards, and public recognition. If I use this training, I am more likely to be rewarded. 7 Negative Personal Outcomes The extent to which an individual believe that not applying skills and knowledge learned in training will lead to outcomes that are negative. The negative outcomes may be oral warning, tangible penalty, notification, and some type of punishment. If I do not utilize my training I will be cautioned about it. 4 Peer Support The extent to which an individual's peers reinforce and support use of learning on the job. The reinforcement and support may include a peer's appreciation, encouragement, expectation, and patience to the individual's efforts in transferring learned knowledge and skills to his or her job. My colleagues encourage me to use the skills I have learned in training. 4 Supervisor Support The extent to which an individual's supervisors or managers reinforce and support use of training on the job. The reinforcement and support may include supervisor or manager accessibility, addressing concerns on a regular basis, demonstration of interest about work problems, and facilitation of achievable goal setting for the individual in relation to transfer issues. My supervisor helps me set realistic goals for job performance based on my training. 6 Supervisor Sanctions The extent to which an individual perceives negative responses and actions from his or her supervisors or managers as applying skills and knowledge learned in training. Negative responses and actions may include objection, negatively tacit cues, lack of interests, and critiques in relation to transfer issues. My supervisor thinks I am being less effective when I use the techniques taught in this training. 8

9 450 Zibin Song Gregory Mavrides E.F. Holton III Reid A. Bates Factor Definition Sample Item No. of Items Resistance to Change The extent to which an individual perceives that group norms are to resist or discourage the application of skills and knowledge learned in training. Experienced employees in my group ridicule others when they use techniques they learn in training. 6 Performance Coaching Formal and informal indicators from an organization about an individual's job performance. The indicators may include advice, suggestions, feedback, and conversation from others. After training, I get feedback from people about how well I apply what I learned. 6 Source: Chen, Holton, & Bates (2005, p. 73) PK=jÉíÜçÇ Instrumentation The Mainland Chinese version of the LTSI, used in this study, is based on the second version of the English LTSI (Holton, Bates, Ruona, & Leimbach, 1998) and was informed by the Taiwanese version, which was translated and validated in a recent study (Chen et al., 2005). The Taiwanese version of the LTSI was created using a forward-back translation followed by subjective, objective, and pilot evaluations to ensure the functional equivalence between both versions. The Chinese Mainland version of the LTSI was finalized by the first two authors of this paper: a bilingual Chinese faculty member who modified the Taiwanese version for regional language differences and a local American professor on faculty who verified the functional equivalence of the translatedback version against the original English language version. Finally, the final translation was reviewed by a third bilingual faculty member for consensus regarding its functional equivalence. The LTSI employs a Likert scale ranging from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree), and the instrument s items are divided into two sections representing two construct domains. The first section contains sixty-three items measuring ten constructs representing factors affecting the particular training program the trainee attended. The instructions for this section directed respondents to think about this specific training program. The ten specific factors in training are Learner Readiness, Motivation to Transfer, Positive Personal Outcomes, Negative Personal Outcomes, Personal Capacity for Transfer, Peer Support, Supervisor Support, Supervisor Sanction, Perceived Content Validity, and Transferability. Another twenty-six items measure five constructs. These constructs are less program-specific and represent more general factors that may influence any conducted training program. For these items, trainees were instructed to think about training in general in your organization. The five general training factors are Transfer Effort-Performance Expectation, Performance Outcome Expectation, Openness to Change, Performance Self-Efficacy, and

10 An Exploratory Study of Learning Transfer Systems Among Star-rated Hotels in Hainan, China 451 Performance Coaching. This research replicated the study of Chen et al. (2005) in terms of adopting the identical factors or item-groupings developed and validated in their most recent study in Taiwan, where the dominant Chinese culture is the same as that in Hainan. Participants Participants were employees currently working at ten star-rated hotels in Haikou, the capital City of Hainan Island, China. The study s participants were predominantly female, between the ages of 20 and 24, with a senior middle school education, earning between 401 to 1000 RMB (approximately US$49.72 to US$124.00) per month working on a non-contracted basis in the capacity of a non-managerial, frontline employee (e.g., front desk, housekeeping, food and beverage department, etc.) with a length of employment between two and three years. Procedure The hotels were selected for participation using a snowball sampling technique based on personal relationships with and referrals from one general manager to another, distributed across 2- to 5-star hotels in Haikou (there were no 1-star hotels in Haikou at the time this study was conducted). The general managers of each selected hotel were then contacted by a letter of inquiry with a copy of the mainland Chinese version of the LTSI informing them of the study s purpose and inviting their participation. The result was that 10 star-rated hotels agreed to participate in the survey consisting of one 5-star, two 4-star, four 3-star, and three 2-star hotel organizations, comprising approximately 15 percent of each of the four levels of star-rated hotels in Haikou City. Following their agreement to participate, each of the 10 general managers were provided with a sufficient number of questionnaires to survey approximately 35 percent of their employees with the request that the questionnaires be distributed as equally as possible across all three shifts. The final sample constitutes approximately 32 percent of each hotel's total employees. Data Analysis SPSS11.0 (the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) was used to analyze the data. A oneway Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and the Independent-samples T-test were used to identify significant differences for each of the instrument s factors across the respondents sociodemographic variables and their hotel s star-rating levels. In addition, Duncan s Multiple-Range test (Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 2002) was employed to identify precise differences among the means within significant findings.

11 452 Zibin Song Gregory Mavrides E.F. Holton III Reid A. Bates Table 2. Employees Sociodemographic Effect on Secondary Influence, Motivation and Ability Factors in LTSI Sociodemographic Variables Secondary Influences Motivation Factors Ability Factors Learner Performance Motivation Transfer Performance Personal Perceived Transferability Readiness Self-Effcacy to Transfer Effort- Outcomes Capacity Content Performance Expectations for Validity Expectations Transfer Age a. <20 (n=60) b. 20 and above (n=414) T-value Sig.: Monthly Income (RMB) a & below (n=413) b. >1000 (n=59) T-value Sig.: * * Educational Level a. High School and below (n=391) b. College and above (n=83) T-value Sig.: 0.01* 0.00** 0.00** 0.02* 0.00** * 0.01* Gender a. male (n=170) b. female (n=304) T-value Sig.: * Contract Status a. Contracted Staff (n=196) b. Non-contracted Staff (n=274) T-value Sig.: * * * Job Title a. Non-managerial staff (n=362) b. Managerial staff (n=112) T-value Sig.:

12 An Exploratory Study of Learning Transfer Systems Among Star-rated Hotels in Hainan, China 453 Employment Hotel Star Rating a. 4- and 5-star hotel employees ( N=249) b. 3-star hotel employees (N=122) c. 2-star hotel employees ( N=103) All (n=474) ANOVA F: Sig.: ** 0.03* Differ. (Duncan test) b<a, c b>a, c Note: * 0.05 significance level; ** 0.01significance level. 4. Results Secondary Influences Only the respondents level of education was associated with Learner Readiness, t(472) = -2.41, p <.05. Prior to attending the training, those with no less than a college education (hereafter referred to as college educated ) felt they had a clearer understanding of the training than did those employees with no more than a high school level of education (hereafter referred to as high school educated, see Table 2). Three sociodemographic variables, education, t(472) = -3.10, p <.001, contract status, t(468) = 2.25, p <.05 and monthly income, t(470) = -2.17, p <.05 were associated with differences in Performance Self-Efficacy. Those with monthly incomes over 1000 RMB were more likely than their counterparts to believe in their own abilities to overcome obstacles faced in changing their job performance as were contracted trainees and employees with a college education or higher. Motivation Factors Motivation to Transfer, which denotes the extent to which an employee is excited by learning and believes that the acquisition of new skills will help him or her improve job performance, was found to be associated only with level of education, t(472) = -3.00, p <.01. Respondents with a college degree rated this scale significantly higher than those with a high school education (see Table 2). Transfer Effort-Performance Expectations were influenced by two variables: education, t(472) = -2.26, p <.05, and contract status, t(468) = 2.26, p <.05. College educated respondents are more likely to believe, than those with no more than a high school education, that effort in transfer learning alone will lead to improvements in job performance. Likewise, those who are on contract are more likely than their counterparts to endorse this scale s items. Four variables were associated with significant differences in Performance-Outcomes Expectation. They are education level, t(472) = -2.69, p <.01, monthly income, t(470) = -2.59,

13 454 Zibin Song Gregory Mavrides E.F. Holton III Reid A. Bates p <.05, gender, t(472) = 2.16, p <.05 and the hotel s star-rating, F(2, 471) = College educated respondents are more likely to believe than their high school educated counterparts that changes in job performance will lead to valued outcomes, as were men and those with a monthly salary of over 1000 RMB. In addition, post hoc comparisons (Duncan s test) revealed that employees from moderately priced (3-star) hotels were the least likely, compared to those from luxury (4-and 5-star) hotels and economy (2-star) hotels, to endorse this scale's items. Ability Factors Personal Capacity for Transfer, the extent to which an employee feels he or she has the time, energy and mental space in their place of employment to apply new skills, was associated only with hotel quality, F(2, 471) = 3.51, p <.05. Duncan s multiple range tests revealed that respondents employed at moderately-priced level hotels are significantly more likely than those working at economy and luxury hotels to endorse this scale s items (see Table 2). Perceived Content Validity, the extent to which an employee judges the match between training content and job requirements, was influenced only by the level of education, t(472)=-2.07, p <.05. College educated respondents are significantly more likely to endorse this item than are their high school educated counterparts. Finally, significant differences in Transferability, the perception that the training was designed to facilitate opportunities to apply what they have learned to the job, were associated with education level, t(472) = -2.46, p <.05, and contract status, t(468) = 2.15, p <.05. College educated employees are significantly more likely to endorse the items comprising this scale than are those with no more than a high school diploma. The same finding is true for the contracted staff as opposed to their non-contracted counterparts.

14 An Exploratory Study of Learning Transfer Systems Among Star-rated Hotels in Hainan, China 455 Table 3. Employees Sociodemographic Effect on Environment Factors in LTSI Sociodemographic Variables Environment Factors Positive Negative Peer Supervisor Supervisor Resistance Performance Personal Personal Support Support Sanctions to Change Coaching Outcomes Outcomes Age a. <20 (n=60) b. 20 and above (n=414) T-value Sig.: ** Monthly Income (RMB) a and below (n=413) b. >1000 (n=59) T-value Sig.: * Educational Level a. High School and below (n=391) b. College and above (n=83) T-value Sig.: 0.04* 0.00** * * Gender a. male (n=170) b. female (n=304) T-value Sig.: Contract Status a. Contracted Staff (n=196) b. Non-contracted Staff (n=274) T-value Sig.: ** Job Title a. Non-managerial staff (n=362) b. Managerial staff (n=112) T-value Sig.: ** Employment Hotel Star Rating a. 4- and 5-star hotel employees (N=249) b. 3-star hotel employees (N=122) c. 2-star hotel employees (N=103) All (n=474) ANOVA F Sig ** * 0.00** 0.36 Differ. (Duncan test) -- a, b<c b<a, c c<a, b -- * 0.05 significance level. ** 0.01significance level.

15 456 Zibin Song Gregory Mavrides E.F. Holton III Reid A. Bates Work Environment Factors Only the respondents level of education was associated with the scale of Positive Personal Outcomes, t(472) = -2.00, p <.05. Those with at least a college degree are more likely to believe, than the other respondents, that applying training on the job leads to positive outcomes, e.g. pay raise, promotion, etc. (see Table 3). Negative Personal Outcomes, the extent to which an individual believes that not applying newly acquired skills and knowledge will lead to negative consequences, was influenced by three sociodemographic variables; level of education, t(472) = 2.70, p <.01, job function, t(472) = 2.89, p <.01, and the star rating of the employees hotel, F(2,471)=12.64, p<.01. College graduates are less likely than those with no more than a high school diploma to be concerned with negative consequences for not transferring new knowledge to their workplaces, as were managerial staff, as compared with non-managerial staff. Likewise, post hoc comparisons showed that employees from moderately-priced and luxury hotels are significantly less likely to endorse, than those from 2-star hotels, items comprising the negative personal outcomes scale. Only one variable was associated with significant differences in the Peer Support scale: contract status, t(468) = 2.81, p <.01. Non-contracted employees are less likely to perceive peer support than their contracted counterparts. The items comprising the Supervisor Support scale-the perception that one s supervisors and managers will support the transfer of learning-are more likely to be endorsed by those with higher levels of education than their counterparts, t(472) = -2.59, p <.05. The same finding is true for employees older than 20 years of age (versus their younger counterparts), t(472) = -2.71, p <.01, as well as for those with monthly incomes greater than 1000 RMB (when compared with those on lower incomes), t(472) = , p <.01. The Supervisor Sanction scale, the extent to which an individual perceives negative responses and actions from his or her supervisors or managers for applying skills and knowledge learned in training, was only associated with one variable: the star rating of the employees hotel, F(2, 471) = 4.37, p <.05. Post hoc comparisons revealed that employees from the medium level (3-star) hotels rated this scale significantly lower than respondents from both economy (2-star) and luxury (4- and 5-star) hotels. Resistance to Change was only associated with one variable: the star-rating of the employees hotel, F(2,471) =7.78, p<.01. Duncan s multiple range test indicated that employees from the economy hotels, in regard to applying new training on the job, are the least likely to perceive organizational resistance than are the respondents from both the medium level and luxury hotels. Performance Coaching, formal and informal organizational feedback about an individual s job performance, was found to be influenced only by educational level, t(472) =-2.32, p <.05. Employees with at least a college degree rated this scale significantly higher than did those with no more than high school education.

16 An Exploratory Study of Learning Transfer Systems Among Star-rated Hotels in Hainan, China Discussion According to Chen et al. (2005), the Secondary Influence Factors of Learner Readiness and Performance Self-Efficacy are understood to affect an employee s motivation for learning, and the subsequent transfer of those newly acquired skills to individual job performance. The sole indicator, in this study, of a respondent s degree of Learner Readiness is his or her level of education. Related, and in addition to level of education, contracted personnel as well as employees with incomes over 1000 RMB per month, are more likely than others to endorse items comprising the Performance Self-Efficacy scale. Although these findings are not surprising, what is noteworthy is the relative suppression of extreme scores in either direction with total mean scores of 3.39 and 3.74 for Learner Readiness and Performance Self-Efficacy, respectively. What this suggests to us is that the needs of the vast majority of personnel, i.e. those with no more than a high school education (82% of the sample studied), are not being met by the training provided. With regard to Motivation Factors in the LTSI two findings, in particular, are noteworthy. One is that the level of education variable was found to be associated with all of the Motivation Factors. That is to say, college educated respondents (compared with those with no more than a high school diploma) are significantly more likely to endorse each of the three Motivation Factors in LTSI. Moreover, this same group of college educated respondents is significantly more likely to endorse all of the above noted Secondary Influences Factors and most of the Environmental and Ability Factors (approximately 57% and 66%, respectively), indicating that an employee s level of education has the single strongest effect on the hotel organizations learning transfer systems (among all the sociodemographic variables included in this study). We believe there are two reasonable explanations for this finding. The first pertains to the issue of trainability, i.e. the degree to which training participants are able to learn and apply the material presented in training (Cheng & Ho, 2001). It is reasonable to assume that higher levels of education are strongly associated with a greater ability to incorporate new information. This intuitive supposition is supported by our aforementioned findings regarding Performance Self-Efficacy. Better educated employees are more likely, than high school graduates, to believe in their own abilities to overcome obstacles faced in changing their job performance. The same assumption is further supported by our previous findings regarding Perceived Content Validity. Better educated employees are more likely to perceive the match between training content and job performance than are their poorer educated counterparts. The other possible explanation, with regard to the effects of education on learning transfer, involves the Chinese cultural and social phenomenon of guanxi, i.e. having interpersonal relationships with key hotel personnel in positions of authority and power. This issue is discussed in detail in the latter part of this paper. The other noteworthy finding, with regard to Motivation Factors, is the effect of the star-rating of the respondent s hotel. Items comprising the Performance Outcomes Expectation scale, the extent to which an individual expects that changes in job performance will lead to valued outcomes, are significantly more positively endorsed by employees from the three economy (2-star) and three luxury (4- and 5-star) hotels sampled, than by employees from the

17 458 Zibin Song Gregory Mavrides E.F. Holton III Reid A. Bates four moderately priced (3-star) hotels. This would suggest, on the basis of our sample, that employees from the economy and especially the 4-star hotels perceive the greatest degree of possible desirable outcomes from good performance than their moderately-priced counterparts do). This finding is interesting in that it is counterintuitive and is discussed in detail in the latter part of this paper as well. The data regarding the Work Environment Factors, such as Negative Personal Outcomes, Positive Personal Outcomes, Supervisor Support, Supervisor Sanction, Peer Support, and Performance Coaching, indicate that contracted, higher-level employees (including those who are elder and better paid) perceive more favorable work environment conditions for the transfer of newly acquired skills and knowledge. Again, in the forthcoming part of this paper we discuss some of the Chinese cultural factors that we believe, help to elucidate this finding. The most striking findings, from this category of factors were, again, the results related to the star-rating of the respondents hotels. Employees from the moderately-priced hotels were significantly the least likely to believe that not applying skills and knowledge learned in training will lead to negative outcomes from his or her supervisors or managers (e.g. oral warning, tangible penalty, notification, and some type of punishment). In addition, these same employees (those from the moderately-priced hotels) were also significantly the least likely to be embarrassed by negative responses and actions (e.g. criticism in relation to transfer issues) from their supervisors and managers. These findings are particularly interesting when combined with the aforementioned result regarding how employees from the 3-star hotels are the least likely to believe that changes in job performance will lead to valued outcomes. These combined findings suggest that supervisors and managers in our moderatelypriced hotels are the least likely to care about the application of their employees use of new learning to their jobs. They are the least likely to either punish or reward their employees learning transfer behaviors or concern themselves with the subsequent outcomes of training. Consequently, their employees are the most likely to be the least motivated in regard to the transfer of learning into job performance. Conversely, supervisors and managers from both our economy and luxury hotels are much more concerned about their employees use of learning as described in the findings above. One possible explanation for the aforementioned differences in the organizational learning transfer systems across economy, moderately-priced and luxury hotels, is that supervisors and managers in the 3-star hotels are the least affected and concerned by factors involving market competition (when compared with this study s economy and luxury hotels). This supposition was supported by follow-up interviews with the general managers of the various hotels who disclosed their perceptions of the effect of the different regulatory agencies with regard to star and non-star rated hotels (discussed in detail in the introduction of this paper). With regard to Ability Factors, the most interesting finding was the one for Personal Capacity for Transfer, that is, the extent to which an employee feels he or she has the time, energy and mental space in their place of employment to apply new skills and knowledge. Significant differences in this scale were found only for the star-rating level of the hotel. Respondents employed at 3-star hotels were significantly more likely than those working at economy and luxury hotels to endorse

18 An Exploratory Study of Learning Transfer Systems Among Star-rated Hotels in Hainan, China 459 this scale s items. This would seem to support our earlier explanation that the 3-star hotel managers and supervisors are more likely to display apathy with regard to making full use of every possible resource (e.g. time, employee s energy, and the like), resulting in their employees perception of having the greatest latitude, i.e., freedom to use or not use learning in their jobs -albeit, without necessarily expecting valued outcomes from good performance. This study s findings lead us to a concluding discussion of the effects of guanxi (interpersonal relationships within a defined social support network) and mianzi (the giving and receiving of face or personal favor). In Hainan, as is true in all of China, guanxi and mianzi are two core and critical dimensions that guide organizational as well as individual behaviors and interpersonal communications (Gilbert & Tsao, 2000). China s hotel industry is people-based and labor-intensive and, as such, is no exception in regard to the importance of these two Chinese national cultural characteristics. Accordingly, knowing and practicing guanxi is part of the learned behavior of being an employee in any organization. This study found that respondents, with no more than a high school education, receive less support in transfer of learning and performance coaching from their supervisors and managers than the better educated ones did. Paradoxically, the same group of employees also perceive the greatest degree of negative consequences (e.g., oral warnings, some type of punishment) for not applying their newly acquired skills and knowledge as well as positive outcomes (e.g. public recognition and both monetary and non-monetary rewards) for applying the newly acquired learning to their jobs. This possibly leading to a feeling of organizational anomie for lower-educated employees who possess less guanxi and mianzi within the learning transfer system. Related, the younger trainees (as opposed to the elder ones) perceive less support in transfer of learning from their supervisors and managers. It is reasonable to assume that the elder trainees are more skilful in building guanxi with their supervisors and managers. Good guanxi with others enable Chinese people to receive positive or protective support from others in their daily work and lives. It is unsurprising, in the context of Chinese culture, the managerial trainees who have more mianzi (personal favor) are less likely, than their non-managerial counterparts, to perceive negative consequences for not transferring learning into their job performance. Furthermore, the non-contracted employees feel far less supported by their peers, with regard to learning transfer, than the contracted staff. In mainland China s hotel organizations, a non-contracted employee (e.g. a housekeeper assigned to the public area) is usually this kind of employee with less value or importance to the employer. SK=`çåÅäìëáçå=~åÇ=fãéäáÅ~íáçåë In exploring the problem of learning transfer in the hotel industry on Hainan Island in China, by incorporating the latest version of the LTSI, this study illustrates that transfer systems in China s hotel settings are significantly different across star-rated hotel organizations and that there is a relationship between a star-rated hotels learning transfer system factors and its employees sociodemographic variables. Although this might be intuitively obvious to those who work in