bs_bs_banner

doi: 10.1111/1748-8583.12069

Training match and mismatch as a driver of key

employee behaviours
Gregory John Lee, Wits Business School, University of the Witwatersrand
Human Resource Management Journal, Vol 25, no 4, 2015, pages 478–495

Training is widely believed to have the potential to improve key workplace outcomes such as the in-role
behaviours and organisational citizenship of employees. However, this article argues that match of actual
training provision to requirements leads to the greatest possible improvement in key behaviours, an
assertion that lacks prior validation. Undertraining relative to requirements would typically be associated
with lower behavioural gain, or even negative behaviours. Overtraining may have both positive and
negative implications; however, this article argues that on aggregate excess training will be associated
with worse outcomes compared with match. An analysis of 699 matched employee–manager dyads
supports the assertion that match is associated with the best relative levels of key workplace behaviours,
and associates either undertraining or overtraining with degradation in outcomes. This research
highlights the importance of training needs analysis and encourages active management of trained
workers to match work to skills.
Contact: Gregory John Lee, Wits Business School, University of the Witwatersrand, #2 St
David’s Place Parkwood, Johannesburg 2000, South Africa. Email: gregory.lee@wits.ac.za
Keywords: training; employee performance; overtraining; overqualification; undertraining;
difference score regressions

INTRODUCTION

E
mployee training, defined here as ‘instruction intended to improve performance or
support learning of a specific level of knowledge and skill required to perform some
aspect of a job or task’ (Spector et al., 2013: 963), is one of the pillars of HRM. This is
especially because of the potential for training to raise individual and firm performance
through improvements in key workplace behaviours (Bartel, 1994, 2000; Bishop, 1994; Huselid,
1995; Black and Lynch, 1996; Blundell et al., 1999; Jones et al., 2012; Lee, 2012).
However, training is unlikely to be universally effective. For a given person, task set and
environment, there may exist optimal levels, types and qualities of training, a view underlining
the focus of the instructional design process approach to planning training (e.g. Tannenbaum
and Yukl, 1992; Taylor et al., 1998). This article argues that matching training provision to job
and person requirements optimises employee behavioural responses, an assertion that, while
deceptively intuitive, lacks much prior validation and theoretical development.
In addition, the article investigates the relative behavioural effects of ‘undertraining’ or
‘overtraining’ in relation to requirements. Undertraining refers to a situation in which firms
provide inadequate quantity or quality of training in contrast to that required by an employee
to perform his/her job adequately, whereas overtraining refers to an opposing situation in
which firms provide more training than is required.
Unfortunately, little direct evidence or even theory exists regarding associations between
training match/mismatch and key employee behaviours such as in-role behaviours (IRB;
enactment of core behaviours required on the job), organisational citizenship (helpful
workplace behaviours that exceed the job’s strict role ambit) and negative behaviours

478 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL 25 NO 4, 2015

© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Please cite this article in press as: Lee, G.J. (2015) ‘Training match and mismatch as a driver of key employee behaviours’. Human Resource
Management Journal 25: 4, 478–495.
 Gregory John Lee

[counterproductive workplace behaviours (CWB)]. Extant literature on the effects of training

(see citations in the first paragraph) usually focuses on the gross amount or types of training
and does not include a benchmark measure of needs or requirements required to address
such questions. The lack of a theoretical base is especially stark in the case of overtraining.
Analyses of major research databases for keywords such as overtraining, excess training,
overdevelopment and others bring up no results that pertain to key employee behaviours or
performance (although there is plenty on athletes). Kalleberg and colleagues (Kalleberg and
Sørensen, 1973; Kalleberg, 2006, 2008) address overtraining in principle but without specific
study into key behaviours or performance.
Accordingly, this article first discusses some essential theoretical foundations for the possible
effects of match or mismatch in training provision relative to requirements. Next, the article
presents the results of a dyadic empirical study on these relationships, which suggests various
theoretical, practical and research directions.

THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS FOR BEHAVIOURAL EFFECTS OF TRAINING

MATCH/MISMATCH

Various areas of theory provide bases for effects of match or mismatch of training provision to
requirements. These include economic, cognitive, psychological and sociological foundations.

Economics of the behavioural–optimal training link

Economic theory provides only the most basic background and usually focuses on amounts or
broadly construed types of training across firms or economies rather than on nuances of match
to requirements at the individual. Broadly, however, economics proposes optimal levels of
training provision because of decreasing marginal returns to the productivity of training (e.g.
Frazis and Loewenstein, 2005) that at some stage cannot overcome increasing economic and
productive costs such as those of having the trainee absent from work (e.g. Smits, 2007). This
approach would suggest, all else being equal, that a match between training provision and
requirements is associated with maximum behavioural and performance gains, while
training-based gains decline with either undertraining, because there remain marginal
productive gains to be had with more training, or overtraining, because the productive costs,
especially of having the employee absent from work, are higher than marginal gains.

Cognitive theory regarding training match/mismatch

Second, various strains of cognitive theory may apply. The fundamental basis of much training
is its ability to expand levels of knowledge, skills and abilities, with implicit links to improved
behavioural outputs, and cognitive ability has long been located as a key component in training
transfer (e.g. Burke and Hutchins, 2007; Salas and Cannon-Bowers, 2001). Such gain applies
especially to the type of IRB analysed in this article, such as adequate completion of role tasks
and meeting formal performance requirements.
In addition to the direct link to role tasks, the cognitive gain from training may also provide
resources to the individual, for example where higher skills facilitates more efficient work
processes, thereby reducing core work stress. These added resources may provide the
individual with the ‘space’ (opportunity) to engage in extra-role behaviours as envisaged in the
organisational citizenship outcomes analysed in this article, such as helping others who have
heavy workloads.
However, the cognitive gain from training may be context dependent. As one of its major
foundations, person–job fit theory (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005) proposes that match between the

HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL 25 NO 4, 2015 479

© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Training match and mismatch

demands of the job and the knowledge, skills and abilities (the demands–abilities hypothesis;
Edwards, 1991) facilitates task enactment. Appropriate training by definition narrows
ability–demands gaps, therefore potentially improving task-related behaviours and
performance. With regard to mismatch, person–job fit theory would suggest cognitive strain
and therefore negative effects from undertraining as abilities do not meet demands.
The effects of overtraining may be more debatable. On the one hand, higher skills and
knowledge of the overtrained may help them outperform peers in key behaviours (Liu and
Wang, 2012: 13). However, limited cognitive resources may dictate an appropriate level
and depth of cognitive transfer and utilisation that, if exceeded, may overwhelm the capabilities
of the trainee. Overtraining may therefore also cause cognitive strain and potentially stress or
even burnout, as proposed by theories such as the vitamin model of stress (Warr, 1987).

Psychological effects of training match/mismatch

Training match or mismatch may affect important psychological constructs, which job
performance models often position as central drivers (e.g. Santos and Stuart, 2003). It is perhaps
in this arena that divergent effects for overtraining especially may be located.
First, training may be a desired and expected inducement for employees, as it can help fulfil
personal or professional needs and aims such as career development or self-actualisation
(Tannenbaum and Yukl, 1992). Therefore, once again person–job fit applies, this time in another
major foundation, namely the ‘needs–supplies’ hypothesis (see Edwards, 1991 for a review),
which focuses on the satisfaction and adjustment from situations that fulfil ones perceived
needs.
In this light, too, training may be seen as an expectation (Porter and Steers, 1973),
psychological contract obligation (Rousseau, 1989: 123; Robinson, 1996; Coyle-Shapiro and
Kessler, 2000) and therefore an issue of distributive justice (Greenberg, 1990; Shore and Tetrick,
1994). Appropriate training may be seen as met justice, which generally may facilitate positive
attitudes, behaviours and performance.
Generally, such theories would predict negative reactions to training underprovision, which
in terms of the above theories may lead to cognitive dissonance (Festinger, 1957) because of
discrepancies between needs and supplies and expectation and delivery, deprivation of need
(Crosby, 1976), and feelings of unmet expectations, psychological breach and injustice.
Employees may therefore react to perceived underprovision with reductions in role behaviours
as well as citizenship and possibly even counterproductive behaviours (e.g. Marescaux et al.,
2013). For instance, perceptions of deprivation may lead an employee to feel that it would be
fair social exchange to reduce the extent to which (s)he helps others when absent [one of the
organisation citizenship behaviour (OCB) items] or even to engage in time wasting or the like
(one of the CWB measured) as a form of compensatory activity.
However, it is in the overtraining arena that interesting and possibly contrasting
psychological effects may occur. Excess provision may be psychologically positive for several
reasons. Social exchange theories suggest that employees may interpret high training levels as
indicative of organisational care and support, and respond with positive psychological
responses such as affective commitment (e.g. Ehrhardt et al., 2011; Marescaux et al., 2013). Such
positive psychological states have been associated with positive role behaviours as measured
here such as fulfilling duties, citizenship such as passing information along to co-workers and
reduction in negative behaviours. Overtraining may also create opportunities for promotion to
more skills-appropriate levels (Dekker et al., 2002; Hung, 2008), leading employees to perform
well in current jobs and engage in image management through visible citizenship such as
helping supervisors to improve promotion chances.

480 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL 25 NO 4, 2015

© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

 Gregory John Lee

However, there are also contradictory arguments suggesting that overtraining may have
negative psychological effects. This area may possibly draw some lessons from
overqualification literature. Overtraining is certainly a more localised and distinct construct
than overqualification. However, theorists such as Kalleberg (2008) have suggested overlaps
between the two. Training adds to qualifications, and it might be argued that job-specific
training may have more powerful relevance as a qualification than the more distal educational
elements usually considered, perhaps adding even quicker to a potential overqualification
situation (for instance, immediate and job-relevant training may make a person promotable
faster than more drawn-out and general diplomas or degrees). In this regard, then, substantial
research has suggested that overqualification may damage job attitudes including job or career
satisfaction (Lee, 2005; Maynard et al., 2006; Verhaest and Omey, 2006; Erdogan and Bauer, 2009;
McKee-Ryan et al., 2009; Peirò et al., 2010; Maynard and Parfyonova, 2013), cynicism (Luksyte
et al., 2011) and others. Stress and other health variables may also suffer from overqualification
(Johnson and Johnson, 1996; Johnson et al., 2002). Researchers have suggested several reasons
(e.g. Erdogan et al., 2011; Liu and Wang, 2012), notably citing deprivation theory (Crosby, 1976)
because employees overqualified for a particular job may develop a sense that they now
deserve better jobs or inducements as a result of their higher skills level. Remaining in the
current job may then lead to sense of deprivation, stimulating negative attitudes and stress.
This theoretical basis may extend to overtraining.
Finally, more general and long-standing theories may apply. One example is cognitive
dissonance (Festinger, 1957), which argues that discrepancies, even with seemingly positive
outcomes, may engender negative psychological responses (e.g. Elliot and Devine, 1994).
Sociological theories
Theories regarding various levels of societal interaction may also apply. The often-applied
equity theory (Adams, 1963) argues that individuals attempt to equalise their ratios of inputs
(such as training) and outputs (such as performance) to those of referent others such as
employees in similar levels, jobs elsewhere and the like. Underprovision may lead to attempts
to adjust outputs downwards, including issues measured later in this article such as completion
of role duties and assisting supervisors with work when not asked. Equity theory also argues
for distress in the case of overprovision, partly because overtraining would potentially place the
individually in a sociologically distant position relative to peers, potentially also negatively
impacting citizenship behaviours directed at the firm or supervisor as reflected in the study.
In the case of overtraining, overqualification theory also may point to the possible creation
of work–life conflict, largely because individuals experiencing negative psychological reactions
as discussed earlier may carry such negativity to their personal lives (e.g. Culbertson et al., 2011;
Feldman, 1996). In the case of undertraining, we may speculate that stress from inadequate
preparation for work tasks may also carry over to personal lives with negative effects. The
earlier theory regarding resource creation, discussed under cognitive gain, may apply. Negative
work–life conflict may undermine employee outputs.

HYPOTHESES

The above foundations of match and mismatch in training suggest three hypotheses. First,
theory seems to predict almost ubiquitous negative economic, cognitive, psychological and
sociological effects of undertraining. Therefore:
Hypothesis 1: There is a negative association between undertraining and key employee
behaviours.

HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL 25 NO 4, 2015 481

© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Training match and mismatch

Given the prior discussion, the relative implications of training match versus overtraining are
more debatable. Economic, cognitive and sociological theory seemingly suggest that a match of
training provision to requirements would lead to improvements in key employee behaviours,
with overtraining leading to declines off this optimal point. Attitudinal literature, on the other
hand, may provide some limited argument for positive psychological effects of overtraining.
However, the bulk of the psychological literature and evidence suggests negative net
psychological effects. In addition, because attitudinal and other psychological effects are
arguably more removed from more objective behaviours than the other considerations, this
article argues for a net negative hypothesis on overtraining. Therefore:
Hypothesis 2: A match between training requirements and provision is associated with the
highest levels of positive employee behaviours.

Hypothesis 3: There is a negative association between overtraining and key employee

behaviours.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This study employs matched employee–manager data from two electronically administered
surveys. A first survey gathers data from organisational employees based on the sampling
method described below, requesting data on a wide range of training and other inputs including
analyses of actual amount of training given and how much training the employee believes to
have been required to adequately skill him or her for the job. A second survey gathers data from
each employee’s direct manager, primarily ascertaining key performance-related behavioural
ratings of the subordinate. The aim of the current study is to focus on the perceptual gap
between actual and ‘required’ training, and to investigate whether and how such gaps seemingly
associate with manager ratings of employee behaviours.
The dyadic nature of this study provides a relatively strong design that helps to minimise
common method bias by virtue of separated sources for predictor and criteria variables
(Podsakoff et al., 2003), also fulfilling Guest’s (2011) suggestion that multisource data are
desirable for HRM research. The following sections describe further aspects of this research.

Participants and sampling procedure

The sampling frame for the study comprised extensive contact lists of South African
organisational members held by the business school of the researcher. This includes prior MBA
and other students and broader industry contacts totalling approximately 3,750 contacts.
The researcher contacted the list between February and April 2013, with data gathered by
the end of this period being the final sample. The list was separated into senior management
and those in more junior positions. Senior managers were asked to nominate a subordinate who
had been their direct report for longer than a year and fill in manager survey, after which their
nominated subordinate was contacted and asked to fill in the employee survey. More junior
employees, or those whose seniority was difficult to ascertain, were asked to complete the
employee survey and nominate their direct management, who was then contacted to fill in the
manager survey. In total, initial responses totalled some 879 employee and 733 manager
surveys. However, only for 699 pairs from 227 organisations were both manager and employee
pairs matched adequately and both data sets usable (with adequate data and the like). In total,
this is a net matched response rate of some 20 per cent from the original list.
Average age is 32.92 for employees [standard deviation (SD) = 8.07] and 36.43 for managers
(SD = 8.23); average organisation and job tenure for employees are 64.11 and 36.77 months,

482 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL 25 NO 4, 2015

© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

 Gregory John Lee

respectively. In addition 47 per cent and 39 per cent of employees and managers respectively
are female, 26 per cent of managers and 47 per cent of employees and managers, respectively,
have no higher than high school education while 26 per cent of employees and 47 per cent of
managers have postgraduate education. The most represented industries compared with
national percentage of gross domestic product (Statistics South Africa, 2013) are mining and
quarrying (4 per cent vs 6 per cent nationally), manufacturing (21 per cent vs 17 per cent),
utilities (2 per cent vs 2 per cent), construction (6 per cent vs 4 per cent), wholesale and retail
trade, hotels and restaurants (9 per cent vs 13 per cent), transport, storage and communication
(5 per cent vs 10 per cent), finance, real estate and business services (28 per cent vs 24 per cent),
general government services (13 per cent vs 15 per cent), and personal services (12 per cent vs
6 per cent). This is fairly representative of the South African economy, and sample weighting
is not applied as wider generalisability of results than the local economy are anticipated.

Measures
The surveys include the following measures. Table 1 gives wording and averages for all
measures.

Key behavioural outcomes This research uses multifaceted key behaviour scales. The three
major dimensions include IRB, which encompass core job task enactment, CWB encompassing
negative actions such as deliberate time wasting and OCBs encompassing positive extra-role
behaviours. This article will disaggregate these performance outcomes to study each separately,
adding further value.
To assess these, managers provided appraisals of their employee using the measures from
Williams and Anderson (1991), measured on a 0–100-point slider scale beneath five-point anchors
from always to never. This scale includes 5 positive IRB items, 5 negative items corresponding
to CWB and 11 items measuring organisational citizenship. Furthermore, the citizenship items
were originally split into seven organisation-focused (sample item is ‘Conserves and protects
organisational property’) and four individual-focused items (e.g. ‘Takes time to consider
co-workers’ problems and worries’), although as seen later I do not follow this distinction.

Perceived required versus actual training The survey asks employees for data on the amount
of training they feel they required since starting the job in order to do the current job well
(‘Please indicate on the scale below how much training you felt you should have received in
order to do your current job well’). In order to minimise subjectivity and arbitrary answer scale
issues, the chosen approach to an answer scale is to provide a specific anchored scale including
the points ‘None – I came in fully trained’, ‘Some limited amounts of training’, ‘A moderate
amount of training’ and ‘A lot of training’. Similarly, the actual training question (‘Please
indicate on the scale below how much training you felt you have in fact received’) has the
answer scale ‘None’, ‘Some limited amounts of training’, ‘A moderate amount of training’ and
‘A lot of training’. In addition, I measure actual hours of training received on average per week.
Because hours of training have different meanings across industries and jobs, the research uses
the perceptual scale as the primary basis for comparison; the following section, however,
provides a limited validation test of the perceptual scale against actual job training hours
reported. Erdogan et al. (2011) argue that perceptual measures are best for such research, and
Guest (2011) highlights the desirability of perceptual measures in HRM research.

Job readiness A single item asks employees the extent to which they felt their knowledge,
skills and abilities made them ready for the job at the time they started, on a 0–100-point

HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL 25 NO 4, 2015 483

© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Training match and mismatch

TABLE 1 Variables and means

Variable M

In-role behaviours
Adequately completes assigned duties 80.6
Fulfils responsibilities specified in job description 80.7
Performs tasks that are expected of him/her 82.0
Meets formal performance requirements of the job 81.1
Engages in activities that will directly affect his/her performance evaluation 75.3
Organisational citizenship behaviours (OCB)
Helps others who have been absent 69.3
Helps others who have heavy workloads 69.5
Assists supervisor with his/her work (when not asked) 65.1
Takes time to consider co-workers’ problems and worries 63.8
Goes out of way to help new employees 68.3
Takes personal interest in other employees 66.6
Passes along information to co-workers 73.7
Attendance at work is above the norm 79.6
Gives advance notice when unable to come to work 81.4
Conserves and protects organisational property 80.6
Adheres to informal rules to maintain order 75.4
Training
Required training 2.8
Actual training 2.6
Counterproductive workplace behaviours
Neglects aspects of the job that he/she is not obliged to perform 34.8
Fails to perform essential duties 29.0
Takes undeserved work breaks 30.0
Great deal of time spent with personal phone conversations 30.6
Complains about insignificant things at work 31.7
Training satisfaction
Overall, I have enjoyed training sessions I have had since I joined this job. 71.5
I am satisfied with my level of learning from the training sessions I have had since 72.3
joining this job.
The training sessions I have had since starting the job have met my expectations. 73.8
Controls
Age 32.9
Tenure 64.1
Gender (male = 1) 0.5
Education (graduate or higher = 1) 0.5
No. of dependents 2.7
Job readiness: Consider when you first entered this job. Please indicate how complete you 63.0
feel your set of knowledge, skills and abilities were at that time for the requirements
of the job.

semantic differential sliding scale from poor to excellent. This may help control for the joining
status of the employee as opposed to the training they experienced on the job.

Training satisfaction I use the three item scale from Marler et al. (2006), on a 0–100 slider scale
anchored with five points from strongly disagree to strongly agree.

484 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL 25 NO 4, 2015

© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

 Gregory John Lee

Demographic controls The survey also measures age, tenure, gender, highest level of
education, marital status and number of dependents, which comprise control variables. Age,
tenure and education may help control for non-training-related accumulation of human capital.
Marital status and number of dependents may affect performance, career aspirations and the
potential for work–family conflict which, as discussed previously, may explain some effects.

Factor structure, reliability and validation tests

I use confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to test factor structure of the multi-item behavioural
outcome scales, simultaneously testing whether the positive IRB items, negative items
indicating CWB and items measuring organisational citizenship form three distinct factors as
per the allocations by Williams and Anderson (1991). As is usual CFA practice, cross-loads are
set to zero and factors allowed to covary. I also test a four factor solution in which the
individual and organisation-focused OCB items are separate.
The initial solutions show adequate fit, however with multivariate normality of higher than
10 due to some items with high kurtosis. Several authors (e.g. Bandalos and Finney, 2001; Little
et al., 2002) discuss the use of parcelling, that is, combination of indicators into ‘parcels’ based
on criteria such as intercorrelation and item content, specifically for use in such cases. This
approach was followed by combining three pairs of items in the same factor that have high
intercorrelation and similar wording. This improves fit and normality to acceptable levels.
Initial analyses suggest fit superiority of the three-factor solution over the four-factor one,
and separate OCB factors also have high intercorrelations. Therefore, the three-factor model is
preferred. The final solution fits well overall, with χ2 = 289.44(67), standardized root mean
squared residual (SRMSR) = 0.03, 90% root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)
confidence interval = 0.06–0.08, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.97, non-normed fit index
(NNFI) = 0.96 with no large residuals, and smallest standardised path and R2 statistic = 0.78 and
0.67, respectively. As such, I create factor scores from the CFA using the SAS PROC SCORES
(SAS Institute, North Carolina, United States) routine to create final aggregate scores for each
behavioural dimension.
In addition, as a test of reliability, Table 2 shows the Cronbach alphas of all multi-item scale
dimensions, as seen there all are acceptable.
Finally, as a partial validation of the perceived actual training scale versus that of the
reported number of training hours, I run an ordinal logistic regression testing the proposition
that training hours is associated with the general perception of amount of training delivered by
the organisation. The regression finds strong evidence for such a link, with Wald test = 280.87
(p < 0.01), pseudo R2 = 0.63, B = −2.35 (p < 0.01), eB = 0.096 (the negative parameter exists here
because the referent level of training is ‘none’). Therefore, at least some limited cross-validation
evidence exists for the perceptual ‘actual training’ variable.

Analytical techniques
The core predictor of job behaviour in this study is the difference between actual and required
training. There are various approaches to such data. The more simple approaches treat the
difference as one variable. In this approach, there are furthermore two approaches. Using the
raw difference (in this case, making the predictor variable Difference = Actual Score – Required
Score) implies a model where the behavioural outcome would be maximised at one extreme
(say overtraining) with increasingly lower scores occurring on the behavioural outcome as the
difference moves away from this extreme (e.g. towards more undertraining). In such a model,
match between actual and required training would imply middling behaviours, not a
maximum.

HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL 25 NO 4, 2015 485

© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

 486
Training match and mismatch

TABLE 2 Correlations and descriptive statistics

M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1. Required training 2.77 0.76 1.00

2. Actual training 2.64 0.82 0.25*** 1.00
3. Required – actual 0.13 0.97 0.57*** −0.66*** 1.00
4. Required – actual 0.71 0.68 0.04 −0.07* 0.09** 1.00
5. (Required – actual)2 0.96 1.39 0.01 −0.02 0.02 0.90*** 1.00
6. IRB −0.00 0.06 −0.05 0.07* −0.09** −0.14*** −0.14*** (0.88)
7. OCB 0.00 0.05 −0.04 0.03 −0.05 −0.13*** −0.12*** 0.84*** (0.70)
8. CWB 0.00 0.03 0.03 −0.00 0.03 0.05 0.04 −0.19*** −0.24*** (0.93)
9. Readiness 63.03 22.17 −0.28*** 0.01 −0.22*** −0.08** −0.05 0.05 0.04 0.05 1.00
10. Satisfaction −0.00 0.04 0.09** 0.54*** −0.38*** −0.16*** −0.11*** 0.16*** 0.09** 0.04 0.16*** (0.95)

Notes: Correlations for demographics available on request. Where applicable, Cronbach alphas in parentheses on diagonal.
*** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05, * p < 0.10.
IRB, in-role behaviours; OCB, organisational citizenship behaviour; CWB, counterproductive workplace behaviours; M, mean; SD, standard deviation.

© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL 25 NO 4, 2015
 Gregory John Lee

The second of the simple difference score approaches allows the behavioural outcome to be
maximised or minimised at match between actual and required training. In such models,
increasing undertraining or overtraining leads to increasingly good or bad behavioural
outcomes. This is achieved by simply taking the absolute value or square of the raw difference
above.
A varied third set of approaches allows various more complex unconstrained approaches
treating actual and required levels differently in various ways (e.g. simply entering them as
separate variables). Edwards (1993, 2002) discusses these more complex models in detail.
The hypotheses in this article do suggest the match is optimal and that increasing
undertraining or overtraining will potentially lead to increasingly poor behaviours. This
suggests models using either absolute or squared values of the raw difference between actual
and required training as a predictor of employee performance. However, I compare these
expected models with all other models suggested by Edwards (1993, 2002), paralleling Fine and
Nevo’s (2011) suggestions for non-linear research in this particular area of skills study.
The following section describes the results of the tests. These include correlational analysis
and the difference score regression analyses.

RESULTS

Table 2 shows descriptive statistics and correlations for the major study variables. There are
modest, statistically significant evidence of correlation between the core training variables,
including various forms of differences (algebraic, absolute and squared), and behavioural
outcomes. Algebraic differences (Required – Actual Training) has practically negligible
correlations with behaviours, while absolute and squared differences have higher, significant,
but still modest bivariate correlations with IRB (r = −0.16 and −0.15, p < 0.001, respectively) and
with OCB (r = −0.13, p < 0.001). Regressions will allow for partial effects and more complex
models.
As discussed in the methodology, the focus of the research is on difference score regressions.
I run all models on the factor scores derived from the CFA.
The first step requires comparison of all possible alternative difference models (as discussed
in the analytical section above, the model using the raw difference where match is not optimal,
the absolute or squared raw difference allowing match to be optimal, and the more complex
models treating actual and required training as separate, totalling 10 regression models in total).
To conserve space, comparisons of fit for the 40 different regressions this entails are available
on request and not included here. Comparisons of models for IRB and organisational
citizenship suggest superiority for the constrained absolute differences model (R2 = 0.28, 0.29
respectively and all information criteria lowest for the constrained absolute model, suggesting
that the absolute difference variable adds significantly to model fit). The model for CWB is
weaker in overall fit but still favours the constrained absolute model over the base model
(R2 = 0.06, all information criteria but one favouring this model).
Table 3 shows the specific parameters and graphical representation of the constrained
absolute difference models on the various dimensions of employee behaviour. As seen in
Table 3, the coefficient of the absolute differences variable on IRB is negative and modest in size
(β = −0.13, p < 0.01), and suggests that positive IRB decline with either underprovision or
overprovision in training. The model for organisation citizenship has similar results (β = −0.12,
p < 0.01). The first panel of Figure 1 represents the shape of the relationship for IRB and
citizenship.

HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL 25 NO 4, 2015 487

© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Training match and mismatch

TABLE 3 Absolute difference model parameters

IRB OCB CWB

β p β p β p

Age 0.04 0.393 0.08 0.100 −0.06 0.249

Tenure 0.08* 0.088 0.08* 0.085 0.12** 0.011
Gender 0.01 0.763 0.02 0.697 0.09** 0.034
Education 0.13*** 0.002 0.14*** 0.001 0.05 0.275
Marital status −0.01 0.857 −0.02 0.586 0.06 0.196
No. of dependents −0.08* 0.069 −0.12*** 0.010 −0.08* 0.087
Readiness 0.02 0.624 0.02 0.672 0.11** 0.012
Satisfaction 0.10** 0.013 0.06 0.173 0.03 0.488
Absolute difference −0.15*** 0.001 −0.13*** 0.003 0.10** 0.016

Notes: β = standardised parameters. OCB here refers to organisation-focused citizenship. Regressions conducted on
factor scores derived from the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Dummies: Reference categories are female for
gender, pre-university for education, non-single for marital status.
*** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05, * p < 0.10.
IRB, in-role behaviours; OCB, organizational citizenship behaviour; CWB, counterproductive workplace behaviours.

Figure 1 Graphs of absolute difference models

Organisaonal cizenship (OCBO)

workplace bhaviours (CWB)

Task performance (IRB)

Counterproducve

Undertraining <- Match -> Overtraining Undertraining <- Match -> Overtraining

Finally, Table 3 and the second panel of Figure 1 show the results for CWB. The absolute
difference coefficient (β = 0.10, p < 0.05) is analogous in size to the prior results. As expected, the
positive coefficient associates lowest CWB with matched training and requirements, and that
increasing mismatch is associated with higher CWB.
Despite the CFA having grouped all citizenship items into one factor, a further set of
regressions were run for organisation-focused and individual-focused citizenship as originally
conceived by Williams and Anderson (1991). The organisation-focused citizenship
subdimension has main results almost identical in magnitude to those of the overall OCB factor,
while training match/mismatch has no association with individual-focused citizenship. The
next sections discuss this finding further.
The above findings provide support for all three hypotheses because under controlled
conditions match is associated with better behaviours than either underprovision or
overprovision.

488 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL 25 NO 4, 2015

© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

 Gregory John Lee

Figure 2 Mean performance levels at levels of match/mismatch

0.02

0.01

Performance factor score

0

–0.01

–0.02

–0.03

–0.04

–0.05
Match Difference = 1 Difference = 2 Difference = 3
IRB OCB CWB
ANOVA Fs
IRB = 4.25*** OCB = 3.41*** CWB = 3.11***
Match has significantly higher performance than all levels of under or overtraining
(except Difference = 2 in the CWB model)

The absolute difference model does have the downside of reducing the training
match/mismatch data to only four levels, which may suppress coefficient size and power. As
noted by an anonymous reviewer, further tests are desirable to confirm findings. I also run
generalised linear analysis of covariance models with the same covariates as used in the
ordinary least squares regressions, and with the levels of the absolute differences used as a focal
factor. Figure 2 shows the graphical results of this means-based analysis, depicting LS adjusted
means. Here we can see that match between required and actual training leads to the best
outcomes, with mostly steady declines in behavioural outcomes as increasing mismatch occurs.
The differences in means are statistically significant for all three outcomes (F = 4.18, 3.85 and
3.14 for IRB, citizenship and CWB respectively, p < 0.01 in all cases). Match is statistically
significantly superior in outcomes to all levels of mismatch in every comparison but one as
indicated in Figure 2.

DISCUSSION

This research makes several unique and valuable contributions, including a focus on training
rather than general qualification (which is of specific value to post-hire human resource
decisions), a focus on multiple dimensions of key employee behaviours whereas prior research
has tended to focus on isolated elements, and incorporation of a full range of difference score
analyses, which for the first time explicitly test the relative behavioural effects of match versus
mismatch between training requirements and provision.
The results support all three hypotheses, namely that a match between actual and required
job training may be associated with improved workplace behaviours and that increasing
mismatch is associated with increasingly worse outcomes, whether the direction of the
discrepancy is undertraining or overtraining. This relationship seemingly exists for three key
dimensions of employee behaviour, namely in-role organisational behaviours, organisational
citizenship and CWB. Effect sizes are modest but in line with prior findings and in each of these
cases add significantly to model fit.
Negative associations between undertraining and key behaviours were expected based on
many areas of theory. Employees who lack the requisite skills for their jobs may suffer from job

HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL 25 NO 4, 2015 489

© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Training match and mismatch

demands–abilities mismatch as proposed in person–job fit theory (Edwards, 1991).

Psychologically, they may see undertraining as deprivation of merited job inducements, a
psychological contract violation with associated feelings of injustice (e.g. Coyle-Shapiro and
Kessler, 2000), and may react to establish relative equity by reducing positive job inputs.
With regard to overtraining, theory reviewed earlier in this article suggested presented some
contradictory views as to whether the effects on employee behaviours might be positive or
negative, although Hypothesis 3 reflected a predominant view for negative effects. This article
indeed finds consistent negative effects of overtraining on IRB and organisational citizenship as
well as positive associations with CWB. Possible reasons may include knock on effects
stemming from the kinds of negative attitudes commonly paralleled in overqualification theory.
Once again, relative deprivation and equity theories may explain these, as overtrained and
therefore possibly better qualified individuals may deserving of better jobs or job conditions
than they currently receive, with negative affect (Edwards, 1991). Related findings may support
this, such as increased cynicism from overqualification stemming from overtraining (Luksyte
et al., 2011), perhaps because overskilled employees are enabled to see limitations in their job
design but unable to effect changes. The current research would therefore seem to provide
support for these theories as opposed to the alternative that overskilling equates to higher task
performance and better behavioural outcomes due to skills excellence.
As discussed in the results, the one subdimension of performance essentially unaffected by
training mismatch is individual-focused citizenship. This may be explained by Liu and Wang’s
(2012: 14) suggestion that such citizenship helps to build an employee’s image with specific
individuals helped (notably co-workers and supervisors); therefore, even employees disaffected
by a skills mismatch may not reduce such citizenship because they do not wish to harm their
longer-term networks. Chen (2009), in their overqualification study, similarly find no
association between mismatch and individual-focused citizenship contrasted with a negative
association between mismatch and organisation-focused citizenship. This article parallels their
finding while extending it to training as a specific arena, in addition taking into account
undertraining, which these prior studies do not do.
Indirectly, this research may add to the literature regarding the effects of overqualification.
Although ‘qualification’ is a complex variable incorporating education, experience and other
inputs, this research controls for the applicant’s job readiness and therefore may in some limited
way capture proximal and job-specific development of skills mismatch. The narrowing of the
more general construct to more immediate work-related skills issues is a necessary and
welcome development (e.g. Mahmud et al., 2014).

CONCLUSION

Improvements in key employee behaviours, and therefore ultimately productivity, is

presumably the core aim of organisational training. In finding that a mismatch between
required and delivered job training may damage dimensions of key individual behaviours, this
current research addresses issues of both theoretical and practical importance. The research
supports careful needs analysis, possibly adds information on how training works and provides
extra evidence that overtraining may not be desirable.
The primary managerial implication of such findings may be that organisations should place
training needs analysis at a premium because optimal matching of skills to individual job
requirements may maximise the impact of training (Taylor et al., 1998). Generally, such a finding
may provide support for the use of the instructional design process of training planning
(Tannenbaum and Yukl, 1992).

490 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL 25 NO 4, 2015

© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

 Gregory John Lee

In addition, organisations providing extensive training with a risk of possible overprovision

should be aware of the need to provide avenues for implementation and transfer of such
training. Failing such opportunities, those employees for which such levels are perceived as
overtraining may feel underemployed and perhaps react negatively as discovered here. In
addition, post-training evaluation may include monitoring of worker and manager perceptions
of the extent to which training continues to match the requirements of the job, combining these
considerations with analysis of the individual’s broader qualifications as usually dealt with by
overqualification theory (e.g. Dubois, 1993; Erdogan et al., 2011). For those who seemingly
become overskilled, career development through expressed promotion or transfer paths may be
one option for matching an overtrained worker to more conducive work. However, not all
training or organisations lend themselves to an immediate consideration of promotion, which
involves a far wider consideration of leadership and other potentials. For many overtrained
employees, job redesign or provision of resources such as more advanced technology may
facilitate the opportunity to extend new skills to the current position, perhaps ameliorating
negative effects (e.g. Thompson et al., 2012).
This research suggests that undertraining is damaging to key behaviours. Therefore, similar
organisational research and post-training evaluations to the above that uncover a perception of
undertraining among certain workers should also engender constructive managerial responses,
especially for employees in key jobs. Managers could counter a perception of undertraining by
delivering or promising future training, although this may of course depend on adequate
budgets. Because damaging effects of undertraining are partly expected to stem from an
inadequate match between skills and job demands (Edwards, 1991), another alternative for
managers may be to re-adjust job design to reduce skills requirements through tactics such as
simplifying processes, making tasks more routine, introducing technological aids, and the like.
Another option may be re-adjusting perceptions of required training if manager and employee
perceptions of these differ. Finally, offering alternate compensating job elements may be
possible for those who feel undertrained (e.g. Coyle-Shapiro and Kessler, 2000).
The potential importance of training match/mismatch suggests organisational research into
these issues. HR metrics could incorporate analyses of employee turnover by relative skills and
training levels, and exit interviews should perhaps explicitly investigate issues of training
match/mismatch to establish whether these issues are related to turnover. Research surveys
should investigate the varied psychological, sociological and other effects, and attempt to
disentangle the relative positive versus negative effects of overtraining especially (for instance,
establish within the particular organisation’s environment whether, indeed, work–family
conflict exists in such situations as suggested by Culbertson et al., 2011).
The current research does have several limitations with attendant opportunities for
improvements in future research. This study provides a cross-sectional snapshot of data,
requiring perceptual, recall measures of training and performance variables. Cross-sectional
data are inherently incapable of testing true causality; therefore, inferences made regarding
associations in this article should be considered in the light of this and replication or
longitudinal or experimental alternatives would be desirable.
Recall and perceptual measures in themselves may be flawed to the extent that current
perceptions are flawed, which may occur for various reasons such as halo effects from other
proximal events in the firm. However, perception ultimately guides individual behaviour;
accordingly, measures such as those utilised here in fact may be more accurate predictors of
performance (e.g. Guest, 2011). In addition, this research goes some limited way towards
validating the employee’s perception of training provision against hours of training, perhaps
providing some added nomological support.

HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL 25 NO 4, 2015 491

© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Training match and mismatch

The training data have certain limitations. The relatively low number of measurement levels
in the training data creates possible power and range issues. Although ameliorated by a
comparison of means approach here, multi-item scales with greater numbers of measurement
levels may add to future research. Secondly, as noted by a reviewer, the training measures focus
more on quantity than quality. The research controls for perceived quality through the
satisfaction, but future research could build quality directly into the match/mismatch measure.
A wide range of proposed moderators and mediators may influence these relationships (e.g.
Erdogan et al., 2011; Liu and Wang, 2012) that this article could not test due to the already large
number of analytical comparisons. As noted by an anonymous reviewer, many variables may
affect the kind of behavioural outcomes and processes measured here, including work design
issues such as teamwork as well psychological variables other than satisfaction issues. Future
studies that incorporate these would control for more behavioural antecedents.
This research only focuses on individual behaviours. Many organisations also pay
substantial attention to group processes, which the current research addresses partly through
items in the OCB scales. However, more deliberate measures of entire teams in the context of
training mismatch may be a route for future investigation (Liu and Wang, 2012).
Ultimately, this article may help to add greater specificity and depth to training literature.
Hopefully, such contributions may stimulate training studies that take into account the
wide-ranging tradition of match-type thinking.

Acknowledgement
This article is based on work supported financially by the National Research Foundation of
South Africa.

REFERENCES
Adams, J. (1963). ‘Towards an understanding of inequity’. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology,
67: 5, 422–436.
Bandalos, D.L. and Finney, S.J. (2001). ‘Item parceling issues in structural equation modeling’, in G.A.
Marcoulidie and R.E. Schumacker (eds), New Developments and Techniques in Structural Equation
Modeling, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bartel, A.P. (1994). ‘Productivity gains from the implementation of employee training programs’.
Industrial Relations, 33: 4, 411–425.
Bartel, A.P. (2000). ‘Measuring the employer’s return on investments in training: evidence from the
literature’. Industrial Relations, 39: 3, 502–524.
Bishop, J.H. (1994). ‘The impact of previous training on productivity and wages’, in L. Lynch (ed.),
Training and the Private Sector: International Comparisons, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago
Press.
Black, S.E. and Lynch, L.M. (1996). ‘Human-capital investments and productivity’. American Economic
Review, 86: 2, 263–267.
Blundell, R., Dearden, L., Meghir, C. and Sianesi, B. (1999). ‘Human capital investment: the returns
from education and training to the individual, the firm and the economy’. Fiscal Studies, 20: 1,
1–23.
Burke, L.A. and Hutchins, H.M. (2007). ‘Training transfer: an integrative literature review’. Human
Resource Development Review, 6: 3, 263–296.
Chen, Y. (2009). ‘Associations of perceived underemployment with in-role and organizational
citizenship behaviors: the beneficiary perspective’. Global Business and Economics, 11: 3, 3–4,
317–331.
Coyle-Shapiro, J. and Kessler, I. (2000). ‘Consequences of the psychological contract for the
employment relationship: a large scale survey’. Journal of Management Studies, 37: 7, 903–930.
Crosby, F. (1976). ‘A model of egoistical relative deprivation’. Psychological Review, 83: 2, 85–113.

492 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL 25 NO 4, 2015

© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

 Gregory John Lee

Culbertson, S.S., Mills, M.J. and Huffman, A.H. (2011). ‘Implications of overqualification for
work–family conflict: bringing too much to the table?’. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 4:
2, 252–255.
Dekker, R., de Grip, A. and Heijke, H. (2002). ‘The effects of training and overeducation on career
mobility in a segmented labour market’. International Journal of Manpower, 23: 2, 106–125.
Dubois, D.D. (1993). Competency-Based Performance Improvement: A Strategy for Organizational Change,
Amherst, MA: HRD Press.
Edwards, J.R. (1991). ‘Person–job fit: a conceptual integration, literature review, and methodological
critique’, in C.L. Cooper and I.T. Robertson (eds), International Review of Industrial and
Organizational Psychology, Vol. 6, Oxford: John Wiley and Sons.
Edwards, J.R. (1993). ‘On the use of polynomial regression equations as an alternative to difference
scores in organizational research’. Academy of Management Journal, 36: 6, 1577–1613.
Edwards, J.R. (2002). ‘Alternatives to difference scores: polynomial regression analysis and response
surface methodology’, in F. Drasgow and N. Schmitt (eds), Measuring and Analyzing Behavior in
Organizations, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Ehrhardt, K., Miller, J.S., Freeman, S.J. and Hom, P.W. (2011). ‘An examination of the relationship
between training comprehensiveness and organizational commitment: further exploration of
training perceptions and employee attitudes’. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 22: 4,
459–489.
Elliot, A.J. and Devine, P.G. (1994). ‘On the motivational nature of cognitive dissonance: dissonance
as psychological discomfort’. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67: 3, 382–394.
Erdogan, B. and Bauer, T.N. (2009). ‘Perceived overqualification and its outcomes: the moderating
role of empowerment’. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94: 2, 557–565.
Erdogan, B., Bauer, T.N., Peirò, J.M. and Truxillo, D.M. (2011). ‘Overqualified employees: making the
best of a bad situation for individuals and organizations’. Industrial and Organizational Psychology:
Perspectives on Science and Practice, 4: 2, 215–232.
Feldman, D.C. (1996). ‘The nature, antecedents and consequences of underemployment’. Journal of
Management, 22: 3, 385–407.
Festinger, L. (1957). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson.
Fine, S. and Nevo, B. (2011). ‘Overqualified job applicants: we still need predictive models’. Industrial
and Organizational Psychology, 4: 2, 240–242.
Frazis, H. and Loewenstein, M.A. (2005). ‘Reexamining the returns to training functional form,
magnitude, and interpretation’. Journal of Human Resources, 40: 2, 453–476.
Greenberg, J. (1990). ‘Organizational justice: yesterday, today and tomorrow’. Journal of Management,
16: 2, 399–432.
Guest, D.E. (2011). ‘Human resource management and performance: still searching for some
answers’. Human Resource Management Journal, 21: 1, 3–13.
Hung, C.Y. (2008). ‘Overeducation and undereducation in Taiwan’. Journal of Asian Economics, 19: 2,
125–137.
Huselid, M.A. (1995). ‘The impact of human resource management practices on turnover,
productivity, and corporate financial performance’. Academy of Management Journal, 38: 3, 635–672.
Johnson, G.J. and Johnson, W.R. (1996). ‘Perceived overqualification and psychological well-being’.
Journal of Social Psychology, 136: 4, 435–445.
Johnson, W.R., Morrow, P.C. and Johnson, G.J. (2002). ‘An evaluation of a perceived overqualification
scale across work settings’. Journal of Psychology, 136: 4, 425–442.
Jones, D.C., Kalmi, P. and Kauhanen, A. (2012). ‘The effects of general and firm-specific training on
wages and performance: evidence from banking’. Oxford Economic Papers, 64: 1, 151–175.
Kalleberg, A.L. (2006). The Mismatched Worker, New York: W.W. Norton.
Kalleberg, A.L. (2008). ‘The mismatched worker: when people don’t fit their jobs’. Academy of
Management Perspectives, 22: 1, 24–40.
Kalleberg, A.L. and Sørensen, A.B. (1973). ‘The measurement of the effects of overtraining on job
attitudes’. Sociological Methods and Research, 2: 2, 215–238.

HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL 25 NO 4, 2015 493

© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Training match and mismatch

Kristof-Brown, A.L., Zimmerman, R.D. and Johnson, E.C. (2005). ‘Consequences of individuals’ fit at
work: a meta-analysis of person–job, person–organization, person–group, and person–supervisor
fit’. Personnel Psychology, 58: 2, 281–342.
Lee, C.H. (2005). ‘A study of underemployment among self-initiated expatriates’. Journal of World
Business, 40: 2, 172–187.
Lee, G.J. (2012). ‘Firm size and the effectiveness of training for customer service’. International Journal
of Human Resource Management, 23: 12, 2597–2613.
Little, T.D., Cunningham, W.A., Shahar, G. and Widaman, K.F. (2002). ‘To parcel or not to
parcel: exploring the question, weighing the merits’. Structural Equation Modeling, 9: 2, 151–
173.
Liu, S. and Wang, M. (2012). ‘Perceived overqualification: a review and recommendations for research
and practice’. Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, 10: 1, 1–42.
Luksyte, A., Spitzmueller, C. and Maynard, D.C. (2011). ‘Why do overqualified incumbents deviate?
Examining multiple mediators’. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 16: 3, 279–296.
McKee-Ryan, F.M., Virick, M., Prussia, G.E., Harvey, J. and Lilly, J.D. (2009). ‘Life after the layoff:
getting a job worth keeping’. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30: 4, 561–580.
Mahmud, S., Alam, Q. and Härtel, C. (2014). ‘Mismatches in skills and attributes of immigrants and
problems with workplace integration: a study of IT and engineering professionals in Australia’.
Human Resource Management Journal, 24: 3, 339–354.
Marescaux, E., De Winne, S. and Sels, L. (2013). ‘HR practices and affective organisational
commitment: (when) does HR differentiation pay off?’. Human Resource Management Journal, 23: 1,
329–345.
Marler, J.H., Liang, X. and Dulebohn, J.H. (2006). ‘Training and effective employee information
technology use’. Journal of Management, 32: 5, 721–743.
Maynard, D.C. and Parfyonova, N.M. (2013). ‘Perceived overqualification and withdrawal
behaviours: examining the roles of job attitudes and work values’. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 86: 3, 435–455.
Maynard, D.C., Joseph, T.A. and Maynard, A.M. (2006). ‘Underemployment, job attitudes, and
turnover intentions’. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27: 4, 509–536.
Peirò, J.M., Agut, S. and Grau, R. (2010). ‘The relationship between overeducation and job satisfaction
among young Spanish workers: the role of salary, contract of employment, and work experience’.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40: 3, 666–689.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003). ‘Common method biases in
behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies’. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 88: 5, 879–903.
Porter, L.W. and Steers, R.M. (1973). ‘Organizational, work, and personal factors in employee
turnover and absenteeism’. Psychological Bulletin, 80: 2, 151–176.
Robinson, S.L. (1996). ‘Trust and breach of the psychological contract’. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 41: 4, 574–599.
Rousseau, D.M. (1989). ‘Psychological and implied contracts in organisations’. Employee Responsibility
and Rights Journal, 2: 2, 121–139.
Salas, E. and Cannon-Bowers, J.A. (2001). ‘The science of training: a decade of progress’. Annual
Review of Psychology, 52: 1, 471–499.
Santos, A. and Stuart, M. (2003). ‘Employee perceptions and their influence on training effectiveness’.
Human Resource Management Journal, 13: 1, 27–45.
Shore, L.M. and Tetrick, L.E. (1994). ‘The psychological contract as an explanatory framework in the
employment relationship’, in C.L. Cooper and D.M. Rousseau (eds), Trends in organizational
behavior, vol 1: Oxford: John Wiley & Sons, 91–109.
Smits, W. (2007). ‘Industry-specific or generic skills? ‘Conflicting interests of firms and workers’.
Labour Economics, 14: 3, 653–663.
Spector, M.J., Merrill, D.M., Elen, J. and Bishop, M.J. (2013). Handbook of Research on Educational
Communications and Technology, New York: Springer.

494 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL 25 NO 4, 2015

© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

 Gregory John Lee

Statistics South Africa (2013). Statistics in Brief, Pretoria: Statistics South Africa.
Tannenbaum, S.I. and Yukl, G. (1992). ‘Training and development in work organizations’. Annual
Review of Psychology, 43: 1, 399–441.
Taylor, P.J., Driscoll, M.P.O. and Binning, J.F. (1998). ‘A new integrated framework for training needs
analysis’. Human Resource Management Journal, 8: 2, 29–50.
Thompson, K.W., Shea, T.H., Sikora, D.M., Perrewé, P.L. and Ferris, G.R. (2012). ‘Rethinking
underemployment and overqualification in organizations: the not so ugly truth’. Business Horizons,
56: 1, 113–121.
Verhaest, D. and Omey, E. (2006). ‘The impact of overeducation and its measurement’. Social
Indicators Research, 77: 3, 419–448.
Warr, P. (1987). Work, Unemployment, and Mental Health, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Williams, L.J. and Anderson, S.E. (1991). ‘Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as
predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors’. Journal of Management, 17: 3,
601–617.

HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL 25 NO 4, 2015 495

© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Copyright of Human Resource Management Journal is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and
its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.