In this study, the relationship between formal training opportunities and internal promotions in organizations was examined in order to support the value of organizations investing in employees through training opportunities, as training is often seen as an expense to be cut in difficult times. Differences between general and specific training topics on the impact of frequency of promotion in an organization were addressed, as well as assessing differences between employees and managers. Training allows for a more capable workforce and pool of employees to pull from when an organization needs to hire. Hiring from within can save time, money, and allow for a proven person-organization fit that hiring from the external workforce cannot provide. The archival data used in the study were from the National Organizations Survey, 1996-1997 which included organizations of all sizes and forms. The analyses produced mixed support for the hypotheses. Significant relationships were found between hours of formal training and frequency of promotions of employees, and between importance of training in promotions and frequency of promotions for managers. Multiple regressions revealed that the hypothesis predicting that increased hours of training focused on general skills would positively contribute to promotion rates was not supported for either employees …

Job satisfaction has, and continues to be an important construct of interest to researchers and practitioners alike. However, conflicting operational definitions and inconsistent measurement systems have reduced the efficacy of the construct in predicting important job-related outcomes for organizations and their employees. The Facet Satisfaction Scale (FSS) was designed to overcome these deficiencies by creating a facet-based measure that assesses job satisfaction in accordance with recent definitions of the construct. Reliability and validity analyses were conducted on both the complete and shortened version of the scale. The FSS exhibited evidence of reliability (ranging from .52 to .93 for the shortened FSS, and .53 to .96 for the complete FSS). Evidence of scale validity was also obtained through the use of construct, content, and criterion-related validity measures. Implications of the study on future research on job satisfaction are discussed.

In recent years, organizations have invested increasing financial and labor-related resources on employee training. The assumption is that training will benefit the organization through improved performance which will result in greater efficiency, greater customer satisfaction and, ultimately, increased revenue and profits. Further, employees are assumed to benefit because their improved performance should lead to career advancement and increased compensation. However, measuring the effect of training on employee performance has been problematic due to the difficulty of isolating the effect of training from other human resource management practices and environmental and organizational influences. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses were used to test a model for predicting merit pay increase, job promotion and performance ratings from measures of general and finance training, as well as employee tenure, gender, educational level and organizational level. It was found that while significant contributions (i.e., betas) were made by finance and general training for performance ratings, promotion and merit pay increase, they did not increase the variance accounted for by tenure, organizational level and gender.

Data were collected by an external company for a healthcare service firm interested in learning the job-related attitudes of their employees. Thus, archival data from 1,287 employees were collected for a different purpose. The survey consisted of 117 questions covering a broad range of constructs. Consequently, the items were used to derive effective measures of employee engagement and behavioral outcomes, as well as the emotional, mental, spiritual and physical dimensions. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis procedures were used to create scales reflecting these four factors. Interestingly, six scales emerged, logically linking to and further specifying the initial dimensions. These were Organizational Linkage, Manager Relationship, Job Fit, Job Clarity, Work Pressure, and Meaningful Work. To test the hypotheses, six separate regression equations were calculated, which statistically supported modification by each of the dimensions. However, statistical significance of the interactions resulted from having a large sample, given the actual association was too small to be meaningful (e.g., a contribution of 0.6% of the variance). As each of the dimensions had a main effect on the behavioral measure during hypothesis testing, exploratory regression equations were calculated to further understand the interrelationships. Of most interest was finding that in the presence of Engagement, the …