Journal of Distribution Science (유통과학연구)

Korea Distribution Science Association (한국유통과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment and Effect of HRD in Logistics Industry

  • KIM, Boine (Associate Professor, Department of Global Commerce, Hoseo University) ;
  • KIM, Byoung-Goo (Associate Professor, Division of Global Business, Hanshin University)
  • Received : 2020.02.15
  • Accepted : 2020.04.05
  • Published : 2020.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: This exploratory research is to give managerial implication to sales personal management. This study focused on antecedents of job satisfaction and organizational commitment specially in HRD programs and system by participation and effect toward job. Research design, data and methodology: This research focuses on relationship analysis among job satisfaction, organizational commitment and HRD programs of logistics and sales personnel in Korea. HRD program consider two parts one is participation and other is effect toward job. And three HRD program is included education & training, system and self-directed Learning. This study used 7th HCCP data from KRIVET and 748 employee data is analyzed. SPSS18 is used and frequency, reliability, correlation and regression analysis are conducted. Results: Result shows that job satisfaction is positively affected by education & training participation, HRD system participation and HRD system effect toward job. Organizational commitment is positively affected by education & training participation, HRD system participation, education & training effect toward job and HRD system effect toward job. However self-directed Learning participation negatively affect organizational commitment. Lastly job satisfaction partially mediates between HRD and organizational commitment. Conclusions: Based on the results, this paper provide implication to academic, practical HRD and suggest feature research.

Keywords

1. Introduction

In this information society, employees‘ knowledge, technology, experience and ability act as key success factor of firm‘s competitive advantage (Tharenou, Saks, & Moore 2007; Drucker, 2012). According to Resource-Based Theory, one of organizational competitive advantage is based on the job related abilities of organization members. Ability of organization member is impossible to imitate and replaceable therefore act as a driving force of continuous competitive advantage (Torraco & Swanson, 1995; Adhikari, 2010). Researchers have continuously tried to analyze factors affecting employees job related ability and education, training and experience emphases as importance factor which improve job related ability (Tharenou, Saks, & Moore 2007; Costen & Salazar, 2011; Dong & Phuong, 2018). Also according to social exchange theory, interactive relation act as organization offer opportunity and benefit to employee and in return employee fulfill their desire and try to keep this exchange relation. Therefore, in many organizations offer diverse type of program to develop human resource; human resource development (HRD). Organizations offer diverse type of HRD program and operate system in education and training to organization members so that they could improve job ability (Kraiger, McLinden, & Casper 2004; Tharenou, Saks, & Moore 2007;Costen & Salazar, 2011; Islam et al., 2016). In exchange, of cause firms interest is continuously focused on financial performance as objective indicator. However empirical studies have shown that improvement of non-financial performance is emphasized as antecedent of financial performance (Prieto & Revilla, 2006; Tharenou, Saks, & Moore 2007). As employee aspect of return, job satisfaction and organizational commitment seem to be closely connected to financial performance. And studies focus analyzing relation HRD to improve job ability, job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Previous empirical researches have shown that improvement of employees‘ job ability affects positively to non-financial performance and financial performance (Prieto & Revilla, 2006; Tharenou, Saks, & Moore 2007; Costen & Salazar, 2011).

This research suggested two research questions. One is, what influence job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Existing research generally showed providing opportunities of HRD (Tharenou, Saks, & Moore 2007; Costen & Salazar, 2011) or investment in HRD (Bartel, 2000) give positive effect and increases job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Does it means providing many opportunities and large investment good? And is HRD opportunity participation same as HRD effect toward job. Therefore, in this study divided HRD participation and HRD effect toward job separately. Answer to this question could give implication to offering or participating many necessary? Which is connected to cost of business. Two, there is question of mediating role of participation, effect toward job and job satisfaction variables. Existing studies have showed some of mediating effect of HRD type and system increase of job ability (Wilson, 2014; Yoon et al., 2019) and firms education increase of job ability (Kraiger, McLinden, & Casper 2004; Tharenou, Saks, & Moore 2007; Costen & Salazar, 2011; Jalal, Zeb, & Fayyaz, 2019). And other studies show mediating effect of job satisfaction (Costen & Salazar, 2011). However, there is still gap of study mediating role of participation, effect toward job and job satisfaction to organizational commitment. Answer of these two research could give implication to academic and practical HRD management.

This exploratory research used 7th Human Capital Corporate Panel (HCCP) data from Korea Research Institute for Vocational Education & Training (KRIVET). Especially in this low-growth era, sales are absolutely crucial to business survival. Therefore, managing and caring sales personal is critical in managing business. Therefore, in this study focus on sales personnel in manufacturing industry including logistics industry.

2. Theoretical Background and Hypotheses Setting

2.1. Literature Review

Research on human resource development has been steadily carried out. It has been defined in various ways by scholars on human resource development. Nadler and Nadler (1989) defined human resource development as a planned and organized activity to change behavior over a period of time to teach workers, or the organization, the ability to function and personal growth, according to the purpose of the organization. Watkins (1989) suggests that human resources development includes training, career development and organizational development as the field of research and practice responsible for promoting long-term work-related learning capabilities at the individual, group, and organizational level. The key to human resource development is behavioral changes, and most of all, they are more likely to develop employees based on the needs of employers. Mondy and Noe (1990) defined human resource development as planned and ongoing activities to improve
the level of workers‘ ability and organizational performance through education, training and development programs.

The purpose of human resource development is to make changes in organization and performance improvement, and thus to grow enterprises. Nadler and Wiggs (1986) called it "making a difference." Learning activities, career development systems, performance improvement activities, and change promotion improve the performance of tasks, reduce costs, improve quality, and strengthen the competitiveness. The importance of human resource development is becoming more important as having competent workers is perceived as corporate competitiveness. Based on strategies, organizational learning and individual development activities achieve the goals of the organization through organic links, which gives organizations as well as individuals a competitive advantage (Yang & Tasnuva, 2013). The sources of corporate competitiveness used to be capital, factories and land, but have now changed to new knowledge and ideas. Securing and nurturing talented people who can create infinite knowledge and ideas has become the era of determining the existence of companies .

Human resource development brings benefits to both organizations and individuals (Mathis & Jackson, 2011; Salman, 2013). Administrators and employees with appropriate experience and skills improve organizational competitiveness and ability to adapt to changing environments. Human resource development is conducted from a long-term perspective compared to education and training, and focuses on improving the ability and potential to deal with various tasks beyond the capabilities required by the current job. On the other hand, education and training tends to focus more on new employees and those who perform new tasks. Development involves the enhancement of an individual's personal portfolio of knowledge, skills and abilities (Mankin, 2009).

Some of the typical job-related attitudes include job satisfaction and organizational involvement, and research in this field is also actively underway (Yang et al., 2015). Job Satisfaction refers to a pleasant and positive emotional state that an individual obtains as a result of an assessment of his or her job experience (Lock, 1976; Kim et al., 2019). A job satisfaction defined by Loke (1976) is a state of pleasure or positive emotion in which an individual assesses his or her job or experiences from it, reflecting the degree to which he believes that an individual is actually provided with what he or she is hoping for in his or her job. Szilagyi and Wallace (1983) noted that job satisfaction is a series of attitudes that individuals have toward job-related factors such as job itself, salary and supervision, and is composed of cognitive, emotional, and behavioral trends. Also, Smith (1955) defined job satisfaction as an attitude resulting from the generalization of all emotions experienced by each individual in relation to his or her job, or the balance of these sentiments.

The importance of job satisfaction is divided into the organizational and member aspects. From an organization's perspective, a person with high job satisfaction usually performs his or her duties in a way that enhances the performance of the organization and speaks favorably of the organization he or she belongs to, thereby having an indirect promotional effect. People who like their jobs maintain a smooth human relationship not only outside of the organization but also inside the organization. If job satisfaction is high, turnover and absenteeism rate are reduced and productivity increase and effect can be gained.

Research on human resource development and work attitude has been actively conducted. Previous studies have shown that human resource development has a positive effect on employees' work-related attitudes. Weng et al. (2010) found that career growth factors influence commitment. Malkani, Pandey, and Bhagwati (2007) argued that employee development was crucial to creating and maintaining the workforce needed to capture business opportunities.

2.2. HRD Programs to Improve Job Ability: Education & Training, System and Selfdirected Learning

Job ability is one of the result from HRD which Piskurich and Sanders (1998) said job ability is internal capability exposed as job behavior. Jacobs and Park (2009) said job ability is shown as job behavior with internal capability which stimulates job implementation. And also said job ability is overall aspect of knowledge or technology, capability or problem solving thinking, leadership, etc. In which specific job require relevant ability. Previous studies highlight positive correlation between job ability, learning (studying) and experience (Tharenou, Saks, & Moore 2007; Jacobs & Park, 2009). And Yamoah (2014) review research find that strong link between human resource capacity buiding and employee job performance. Also Ahmad, Farrukh, and Nazir (2015) study show that capacity building of and indiviual employee leads to enhance empoyee performance. According to Kraiger, McLinden and Casper (2004) study compare to unsuccessful organization, successful organization invest more to organization education. This organization education let employee learn job related knowledge and technology and smooth their job and improve job performance which lead to job performance (Ng & Feldman, 2009). To measure performance of education, among organizational effectiveness, job satisfaction and organizational commitment is used (Porter et al., 1974; Dirani, 2009; Costen & Salazar, 2011; Lee, 2019). Following hypothesis is formulated based on above literature review.

Hypothesis 1: HRD participation increase HRD effect toward job.

2.3. Job Satisfaction

Job satisfaction is abstract and subjective emotional state concerning job. It is personal satisfaction of their job or work which include attitude or cognition of job involved elements. Job satisfaction has been studied since in early 1990 to foresee absenteeism or move of job (Costen & Salazar, 2011; Mushtaq et al., 2014; Kim et al., 2015; Jung et al., 2017). Definition of job satisfaction is diverse.
Generally, employee assessing their, job, work, working condition and organization having positive emotional is job satisfaction. Hawthone‘s research stared interest of job satisfaction later by Taylor‘s scientific management. Focus of job satisfaction can be divide in two ways, comprehensive and sectional. Comprehensive is overall job satisfaction and sectional divide diverse forces of job such as reward and promotion opportunity (Yang et al., 2015; Dastane & Lee, 2016; Kim, 2018). And motivation of job satisfaction considers intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Intrinsic include achievement, aiming of goal, etc and extrinsic include reward, policy of company, management style, etc. Job satisfaction activate organization function and motivate employee to develop which is important element of organizational develop therefore efforts has been continued to measure and analyze (Dirani, 2009; Costen & Salazar, 2011).

According to Georgellis and Lange (2007) study, On-the-Job-Training (OJT) in organization influence job satisfaction. Chen, Chang, and Yeh (2003) found that the gap between career development programs to satisfy career desires and career desires increases job dissatisfaction, and this effect is particularly significant in career-building periods, which are between the ages of 30 and 45. Chen, Chang, and Yeh (2004) study show that high satisfaction personnel with career development programs and high job satisfaction, professional development and productivity. Following hypotheses are formulated based on above literature review.

Hypothesis 2-1: HRD participation increase job satisfaction.

Hypothesis 2-2: HRD effect toward job increases job satisfaction.

Hypothesis 2-2: HRD effect toward job mediates between HRD participation and job satisfaction.

2.4. Organizational Commitment

Organizational commitment is employee‘s attitude toward organization which shows quantity element of organization effectiveness (Porter et al., 1974; Dirani, 2009; Suma & Lesha, 2013). Study of definition of organizational commitment divided into two ways one is unification of person and organization which is practice aspect other is positive perspective of organization like trust it is psychological aspect. First for unification of person and organization which is practice aspect, organizational commitment comes from employees inherited feeling of unification, sense of belonging, loyalty (Dirani, 2009). Suma and Lesha(2013) define organizational commitment as link between organization member and organization that unification of employee and organization lead employee to actively participate to organizational problem. Second for positive perspective and trust of organization, Porter et al. (1974) define organizational commitment with concept of recognition and trust of organization goal and value, voluntary give effort accomplishes organization goal and strong desire to continue organizational membership.

Increasing organizational commitment is one of the important issues in managing sustainable HR. According to Younis, Akram, and Naseeb (2013) study of human resource strategies and organizational commitment, result showed that planning, training and development, pay and reward increase organizational commitment. Bulut &and Culha (2010) study revealed that training positively affect commitment of hotels operating in Izmir, Turkey. Hanaysha (2016) analysis confirm that employee training has a significant positive effect on organizational commitment. Paul and Anantharaman (2004) study in India reveal that HRM practices such as career development, comprehensive training show significant positive relationship with organizational commitment. Following hypotheses are formulated based on above literature review.

Hypothesis 3-1: HRD participation increase organizational commitment.

Hypothesis 3-2: HRD effect toward job increase organizational commitment.

Hypothesis 3-3: HRD effect toward job mediate between HRD participation and organizational  commitment.

Studies of job satisfaction and organizational commitment as dependent variable continuously have shown correlation between two (Porter et al., 1974; Dirani, 2009). Many studies have studies have shown job satisfaction as antecedent of organizational commitment (Meyer et al., 2002; Suma & Lesha, 2013). Also studies show job satisfaction mediate between education (Rose, Kumar, & Pak, 2009), job ability and organizational commitment (Lok & Crawford, 2001).

Hypothesis 4: Job satisfaction mediates between HRD (participation and effect toward job) and organizational commitment.

3. Methodology

3.1. Research Model and Measurement

This research focuses on relationship analysis among HRD participation (Education & Training, HRD System and Self-directed Learning), HRD effect toward Job (Education & Training, HRD System and Self-directed Learning), job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Research model is summarized in Figure 1.

OTGHB7_2020_v18n4_27_f0001.png 이미지

Figure 1: Research Model

As shown in Figure 1, this research includes four aspects, demographic, HRD by participation and effect toward job and employee performance. First, demographic include five demographic characteristic of employee; gender (0 Female, 1 Male), age, rank (1 Staff, 2 Low-level Manager, 3 Middle-level Manager, 4 High-level Manager), employment year, job characteristic (1 Daily & Repeated job, 2 Sometimes Exceptional Circumstances job, 3 Often Exceptional Circumstances job, 4 Everyday Novelty job). Second and third include three HRD section; education & training, HRD system and self-directed learning. Education & training include 7 programs, HRD system includes 13 programs and self-directed learning includes 4 programs. Each programs were asked by two questions whether they participate or not and how did it effect toward job. Participation is measured as total program participation number by each section. Effect toward job was asked whether each program they participate help to improve effectiveness of their job, 5 point Likert scale; 1 not at all helpful to 5 very helpful. And effect toward job variable is measured as total mean of effect toward job to total program participation number. Finally, employee performance includes two variable job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Job satisfaction is surveyed with four items; employees satisfaction with their current job, wage, relationship and overall job. Organizational commitment is surveyed with four items; will consider turnover if better condition comes, feel organization problem as my own, leaving cost much and worth loyal to organization. Both job satisfaction and organizational commitment was asked 5 point Likert scale (1 not agree at all to 5 very agreed) and variable is measured as total mean of four items. Reliability analysis of scale result showed that Cronbach α of job satisfaction is 0.830 and organizational commitment is 0.754. Both are higher than 0.6 which are highly acceptable and analysis could be continued.

3.2. Research Sample

To verify research questions, this study used 7th HCCP (the Human Capital Corporate Panel) data from Korea Research Institute for Vocational Education & Training (KRIVET) which includes 10,005 employees. This study is focused on analysis of sale personnel of manufacturing industry, therefore 748 sale person is included and demographic characteristic is summarized in Table 1.

Table 1: Demographic Characteristic

OTGHB7_2020_v18n4_27_t0002.png 이미지

Table 1: Correlation results

OTGHB7_2020_v18n4_27_t0001.png 이미지

Note: **< 0.01, * <0.05 1 Gender, 2 Age, 3 Rank, 4 Employment Year, 5 Job Characteristic, 6 Education Training Participation, 7 HRD System Participat ion, 8 Self-directed Learning Participation, 9 Education Training Effect toward Job, 10 HRD System Effect toward Job, 11 Self-directed Learning Effect toward Job, 12 Job Satisfaction, 13 Organizational Commitment

4. Analysis Results 

4.1. Correlation Analysis

Correlation analysis is conducted before regression and result is summarized in Table 2. The highest correlation is 0.790 between age and rank.

Table 2: Regression results of HRD Participation and Effect toward Job

OTGHB7_2020_v18n4_27_t0004.png 이미지

Note: ⁑ < 0.01, * <0.05 Emp Y.-Employment Year, Job Ch.-Job Characteristic, Par-Participation, EtJ-Effect toward Job, E&T-Education & Training, HRDs.-HRD system, SelfSelf-directed Learning

4.2. Regression Analysis

This research suggested two research questions. One is, what influence job satisfaction and organizational commitment. HRD participation? HRD effects toward job? Two, there is question of mediating role of participation variables on effect toward job variables and effect toward job variables between participation variables and job satisfaction also between participation variables and organizational commitment. Answer of these two research could give implication to academic and practical HRD management. 

To answer the first research question, two dependent variables are used job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Regression results are summarized in Table 3. Both job satisfaction and organizational commitment regressions were taken by stepwise regression analysis as of adding independent variables. Both include 4 steps, first step (M1) include only demographic variables, second step (M2) include demographic variables and participation (Education & Training, HRD System and Self-directed Learning), third step (M3) include demographic variables and effect toward job (Education & Training, HRD System and Self-directed Learning) and forth step (M4) include demographic variables and both participation (Education & Training, HRD System and Self-directed Learning) and effect toward job (Education & Training, HRD System and Self-directed Learning). And for organizational commitment there is fifth step (M5) which includes job satisfaction with all the other variables.

As for job satisfaction, as shown in Table 3, explanation (△R²) increased from 3.4% (M1), 7.0% (M2) to 14.9% (M3) however to 13.8% (M4) which means HRD participation and effect toward job does give significant and meaningful influence to job satisfaction.

First for demographic, which is control variable, M1 result shows that employee age and job characteristics significantly influence job satisfaction. Employee age (-.141) decrease job satisfaction. Which means older the employee less satisfied in their job. Job characteristics (.168) increase job satisfaction. This means job satisfaction increase from employee job getting more daily & repeated to exceptional & novelty.

Second for participation, M2 result shows that participation of education & training (.146) and HRD system (.075) significantly increase job satisfaction. However self-directed learning was not significant. Results mean as employee participate more in education & training and HRD system more satisfied with their job. These cause of the phenomenon could be explained by exchange theory, interactive relation, as employee participate more which involve more time energy of their own and in return they are satisfied with their job.

Third for effect toward job, M3 result shows that only HRD system effect toward job (.283)  significantly influence job satisfaction. Which means as employee perceive HRD system more helpful to their job effectiveness increase more satisfied with job. And this HRD system effect toward job (.293) is critical element to improve job satisfaction as shown in M4 it is the only significant variable. If so, to improve job satisfaction one must improve HRD system effect toward job. Then there comes the question of mediating role of effect toward job variables between participation variables and job satisfaction. To answer this question additional analysis has conducted and result is shown in Table 4. Results of job satisfaction therefore H2-1 and H2-2 are partially supported (rejected).

As for organizational commitment, as shown in Table 3, explanation (△R²) increased from 8.2% (M1), 10.1% (M2), 24.6% (M3), 25.2% (M4) to 44.2% (M5) like as job satisfaction, HRD participation and effect toward job does give significant and meaningful influence to organizational commitment. And job satisfaction is meaningful and critical influencer to organizational commitment.

First for demographic, which is control variable, M1 result shows that employee gender, employee year and job characteristics significantly influence organizational commitment. Gender (.131) and employee year (.096) is positively affect organizational commitment. Which means, compare to female, male show higher organizational commitment and longer employed employee show higher organizational commitment. Job characteristics (.150) increase organizational commitment. This means organizational commitment increase from employee job getting more daily & repeated to exceptional & novelty.

Second for participation, M2 result shows that participation of Education & Training (.095) and HRD system (.072) increase organizational commitment significantly. Results mean as employee participate more in education & training and HRD system more committed to their organization. Like in job satisfaction, these phenomena also could be explained by social exchange theory, as organization give chance to participate which is investment in return employee are committed to their organization. As for self-directed learning, it was not significant in M1 however in M4 and M5 show significant negative (–.133 and –.120) influence to organizational commitment. This means increase of self-directed learning decrease organizational commitment. Which implies that even though it is self-directed, participating self-directed learning could be considered extra burden to employee. Because usually there is mandatory HRD that employee must attend then there is selective HRD like self-directed learning which is voluntary yet still require extra effort to attend. Working itself is hard, doing extra could lead to negative feeling even though it started with good intention.

Third for effect toward job, M3 result shows that except self-directed learning, effect toward job of Education & Training (.252) and HRD system (.169) significantly influence organizational commitment. Which means as employee perceive Education & Training and HRD system more helpful to their job effectiveness increase commitment to organization. And these effect toward job of Education & Training (.228) and HRD system (.194) is critical element to improve organizational commitment as shown in M4. If so, to improve organizational commitment one must improve recognition of employee‘s effect toward job of Education & Training and HRD system. Then there is also question of mediating role of effect toward job variables, like job satisfaction, between participation variables and organizational commitment. To answer this question additional analysis has conducted and result is shown in [Table 4]. Results of organizational commitment therefore H3-1 and H3-2 are partially supported (rejected).

Lastly forth in M5 result shows that job satisfaction (.475) give positive influence on organizational commitment. Result also show that job satisfaction is the biggest significant element increasing organizational commitment. Therefore, to increase organizational commitment increasing job satisfaction is critical.

To answer the second research question, the mediating role of participation variables between demographic and effect toward job variables, effect toward job variables between participation variables and job satisfaction also effect toward job variables between participation variables and organizational commitment. And lastly job satisfaction variable between HRD (participation and effect toward job) and organizational commitment. Result of [Table 3] seems that there is mediating effect between participation variables on effect toward job variables. However, to confirm the relation additional regression analysis is conducted and results are summarized in [Table 4].

Table 3: Regression results

OTGHB7_2020_v18n4_27_t0003.png 이미지

Note: ⁑ < 0.01, * <0.05, ⁺ <0.1
Emp Y.-Employment Year, Job Ch.-Job Characteristic, PAR-Participation, EtJ-Effect toward Job, E&T.-Education & Training, HRDs.-HRD system, SelfSelf-directed Learning, Job Sat.-Job satisfaction

According to Table 4 demographic explain Education & Training participation 3.6% and HRD system participation 4.1% however not significant for Self-directed Learning. Relationship between demographic and participation show that as job characteristic increase participation increase for both Education & Training (.120) and HRD system (.151). Which imply as job getting more Daily & Repeated to Everyday Novelty employees participate more or in other word they need more HRD like Education & Training and system to support them. For Education & Training participation, as age (-.246) increase Education & Training decrease however as rank (.150) and employment year (.141) increase Education & Training participation increase. For HRD system, gender (.083) give positive influence on HRD system participation. Which imply that male, compare to female, participate more HRD system.

Analysis of HRD effect toward job take two step regression, first (M1) include only demographic characteristic and second (M2) include demographic characteristic and each HRD participation. Results show that explanation rate increase bit from M1 to M2 for both Education & Training (5.3%, 5.7%) and HRD system (4.6%, 4.7%) however not significant for Self-directed Learning. Relationship result shows that as job characteristic increase effect toward job increase for both Education & Training (.162) and HRD system (.194). Which imply as job getting more Daily & Repeated to Everyday Novelty effect of HRD on job leverage. Gender (.123) give positive influence on Education & Training effect toward job. Which imply that male, compare to female, effect of Education & Training more on job. Age (-068) give negative influence on HRD system effect toward job. Which means that younger employee felt stronger effect of HRD system on job than older employee. As for participation, both Education & Training and HRD system were not significant for effect toward job. This result implies that participating many HRD does not guarantee increase of effectiveness on job.

Based on Baron and Kenny (1986) mediating analysis, Table 3 and Table 4, mediating role of participation, effect toward job and job satisfaction could be analysis. Result in Table 4 show that each Education & Training, HRD system, Self-directed Learning of participation have no significant influence on effect toward job. Which means that mediating role of participation nor effect toward job could not be validated. Therefore, H1 is rejected. However, mediating role of job satisfaction could be validated as shown in Table 3. Total 6 mediating role of job satisfaction could analyze, 3 relations between participation and organizational commitment and 3 relations between effect toward job and organizational commitment could be distinguish. Among 6 relations, 3 were not validated, 2 were fully mediating and 1 is partially mediating. 3 relations which are not validating is Self-directed Learning participation, Education & Training effect toward job and Self-directed Learning effect toward job due to those were not significant to job satisfaction. 2 relations which show full mediation of job satisfaction is Education & Training participation and HRD system participation. And lastly 1 relation which shows partial mediation is HRD system effect toward job. Therefore, H2-3 and H3-3 are partially supported (rejected).

5. Conclusions 

5.1. Result Summary

This research focuses on relationship analysis among HRD participation, HRD effect toward job, job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Three HRD were considered; Education & Training, HRD system, Selfdirected Learning. Result could be summarized into three parts. Firstly, job satisfaction, effect toward job of HRD system and participation of Education & Training and HRD system positively influence job satisfaction. Secondly organizational commitment, the biggest influence comes from positive effect of job satisfaction. Among effect toward job and participation, both HRD system and Education & Training positively influence organizational commitment. However participation of Self-directed Learning negatively influences organizational commitment. Lastly for mediating role of HRD participation, HRD effect toward job and job satisfaction, the only significant mediator was job satisfaction. Full mediation was shown in participation of education & training and HRD system and partial mediation in effect toward of HRD system.

5.2. Contribution and Implication

This research has a few academic contributions and managerial implications. As for academic contribution social exchange theory still valid between HRD and employee performance. Employee participation of HRD mostly increases job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Participating HRD means investment to both employee and organization, investment of time and money. And this investment needs cost and effect. Usually when there is cost, expect effect therefore this study expects positive relation between participation and effect toward job. However, result show no significant correlation and regression. This implicate cautious management is in need for HRD.

As for managerial implication, based on the result, two implications could be made. First, to increase organizational commitment, increasing job satisfaction is biggest effective. Therefore, managers need to consider employee job satisfaction in their mind. On the other hand, as Self-directed Learning participation show decrease of organizational commitment nor not significant in job satisfaction may be cut back programs or repeal could be considered. Also to increase organizational commitment let employee and encourage employee to participate Education & Training and HRD system. This also could be applied to job satisfaction too. Second, when let employee and encourage employee to participate Education & Training and HRD system, consider that increase of participation does not mean increase of effect toward job therefore choice of program based on additional effectiveness analysis is in need.

5.3. Limitation

There are few limitations. First in this study participation was measured as total sum and effect toward job was measured as mean by this calculation each program effect could not be analysis. However, if organization or manager want to make choice of which HRD program they want to continue or repeal than know additional analysis of each program need to be analyze. Second, this study analysis HRD participation, effect toward job, job satisfaction and organizational commitment in corresponding survey time line. However, there could be time gap between participation and effect toward job, job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Therefore, this may be in the future study autoregressive cross-lagged modeling could be analyzed (Hakanen et al., 2008; Supeli & Creed, 2015). Third, in this study only HRD is considered as antecedent and as for result variable job satisfaction and organizational commitment. However other antecedent like leadership, compensation, organizational culture and other result like turnover intention (Dirani, 2009; Costern & Slazar, 2011) could be consider in future study. Lastly forth, this study considered HRD and job satisfaction and organizational commitment in employee level however firm level need to be considered. Therefore, in future study financial aspect needs to be analyzed (Bartel, 2000).

This work was supported by Hanshin University Research Grant

References

  1. Adhikari, D. R. (2010). Human resource development(HRD) for performance management: the case of Nepalese organizations. International Jouranl of Productivity and Performance Managment, 59(4), 306-324. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410401011038883
  2. Ahmad, T., Farrukh, F., and Nazir, S. (2015). Capacity building boost employees performance. Industrial and Commercial Training, 47(2), 61-66. https://doi.org/10.1108/ICT-05-2014-0036
  3. Baron, R. M., & Keny, D. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distiction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
  4. Bartel, A. P. (2000). Measuring the employer's return on investment in training: evidence from the literature. Industrial Relations, 39(3), 502-524. https://doi.org/10.1111/0019-8676.00178
  5. Bulut, C., & Culha, O. (200). The effects of organizational traing on organizationla commitment. International Journal of Training and Development, 14(4), 309-322. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2419.2010.00360.x
  6. Chen, T. Y., Chang, P. L., & Yeh, C. W. (2003). The study of career needs, career development programmes and job satisfaction levels of R&D personnel: The case of Taiwan. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 14(6), 1001-1026. https://doi.org/10.1080/0958519032000106182
  7. Chen, T. Y., Chang, P. L., & Yeh, C. W. (2004). An investigation of career delopment programs, job satisfaction, professional development and productivity: the case of Taiwan. Human Resource Devopment International, 7(4), 441-463. https://doi.org/10.1080/1367886042000246049
  8. Costen, W. M., & Salazar, J. (2011). The impact of training and development on employee job satisfaction, loyalty, and intent to stay in the lodging industry. Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality & tourism, 10(3) 273-284. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332845.2011.555734
  9. Dastane, O., & Lee, W. Y. (2016). Korean Expatriates Adjustments and Job Satisfaction in Malaysia: Analysis of Corporate Cultural Asymmetry. Journal of Industrial Distribution & Business, 7(4), 33-45. https://doi.org/10.13106/ijidb.2016.vol7.no4.33.
  10. Dirani, K. M. (2009). Measuring the learning organization culture , organizatioanl commitment and job satisfaction in the lebanese banking sector. Human Rrsource Development International, 12(2), 189-208. https://doi.org/10.1080/13678860902764118
  11. Dong,L. N., & Phuong, N. N. (2018). Organizational Justice, Job Satisfaction and Organizational Citizenship Behavior in Higher Education Institutions: A Research Proposition in Vietnam. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 5(3), 113-119. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2018.vol5.no3.113
  12. Drucker, P. F. (1999). Management challenges for the 21st century. Routledge Press.
  13. Georgellis, Y., & Lange, T. (2007). Participation in continuous, on-the-job training and the impact on job satisction: longitudinal evidence from the German labour mardet, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(6), 969-985. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585190701321112
  14. Hakanen, J. J., Schaufeli, W. B., & Ahola, K. (2008). The job demands-resources model: a three-year cross-lagged study of burnout, depression, commitment, and work engagement. An International Journal of Work, Health & Organisations, 22(3), 224-241.
  15. Hanaysha, J. (2016). Examining the effects of employee empowerment, teamwork, and employee training on organizational commitment. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 229(1), 298-306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.07.140
  16. Islam, Z. U., Bangish, S. B., Muhammad, H., & Jehan, a. s. (2016). The Impact of HR Practices on Job satisfaction: A Case Study of Hotel Industry in Pakistan. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 3(1), 43-48. https://doi.org/10.13106/JAFEB.2016.VOL3.NO1.43
  17. Jacobs, R. L., & Park, Y. (2009). Aproposed conceptual framework of workplace learning: implications for theorybuilding and research in human resource development. Proceedings ofr the Annual Conference of the Academy of Human Resource Deveopment, Washington, DC: AHRD.
  18. Jalal, R. N., Zeb, N., & Fayyaz, U. E. (2019). The Effect of Personality Traits on Employee Job Satisfaction with Moderating Role of Islamic Work Ethics. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 6(2), 161-171. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2019.vol6.no2.161
  19. Jung. H. J., Park, D. S., & Lee, H. W. (2017). The Causality Analysis of the Impact of A Hotel Chief's Competency on Job Satisfaction and Customer Orientation. East Asian Journal of Business Economics, 5(4), 50-66. https://doi.org/10.20498/eajbe.2017.5.4.50
  20. Kim, B. I. (2018). Effect of Psychological Empowerment on Turnover Intention through Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment: focus on Korea, China, Japan Employees. East Asian Journal of Business Economics, 6(2), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.20498/eajbe.2018.6.2.1
  21. Kim, H. S., Hong, I. G., & Yang, H. C. (2019). The Impact of Value Inclination of SME Members on Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Focusing on the Role of Job Satisfaction and Perceived Organizational Support. Journal of Industrial Distribution & Business, 10(7), 29-37. https://doi.org/10.13106/ijidb.2019.vol10.no7.29
  22. Kim, J. J., Eom, T. K., Kim, S. W., & Youn, M. K. (2015). Effects of Ethical Management on Job Satisfaction and Turnover in the South Korean Service Industry. Journal of Industrial Distribution & Business, 6(1), 17-26. https://doi.org/10.13106/IJIDB.2015.VOL6.NO1.17.
  23. Kraiger, K., McLinden, D.. & Casper, W. J. (2004). Collaborative planning for training impact. Human Resource Management, 43(4), 337-351. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20028
  24. Lee, Y. S. (2019). A Study on the Effect of Authentic Leadership of Hospital Organization on Organizational Commitment and Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Focusing on Mediating Effect of LMX. Journal of Industrial Distribution & Business, 10(3), 73-83. https://doi.org/10.13106/IJIDB.2019.VOL10.NO3.73.
  25. Lock, E. A. (1976). The nature and cause of Job Satisfaction. In M. D. Dunnette(ed). Handbook of Industrial & Organizational Psychology, Chicago: Rand McNally.
  26. Lok, P., & Crawford, J. (2001). Antecedents of organizational commitment and the mediating role of job satisfaction. Journal of Managmerial Psychology, 16(8), 594-613. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006302
  27. Malkani, D., Pandey, J., & Bhagwati, A. B. (2007). The highperformance workforce study 2007: India. Mumbai, India: Accenture
  28. Mankin, D.(2009). Human resource management. Oxford University Press.
  29. Mathis, R. L., & Jackson, J. H.(2011). Human resource management (13th ed.). Mason, Ohio: Thomson South-Western.
  30. Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovich, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization: a meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61(1), 20-51. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.2001.1842
  31. Mondy, W. R., & Noe, R. M. (1990). Human resource management (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
  32. Mushtaq, A., Amjad, M. S., & Saeed, B. M. (2014). The Moderating Effect of Perceived Alternative Job Opportunities between Organizational Justice and Job Satisfaction: Evidence from Developing Countries. Journal of Business Economics and Environmental Studies, 4(1), 5-13 https://doi.org/10.13106/EAJBM.2014.VOL4.NO1.5.
  33. Nadler, L., & Wiggs, G. (1986). Managing human resource development: A practical guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  34. Nadler, L., & Nadler, Z. (1989). Developing human resources (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bas.
  35. Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2009). How broadly does education contribute to job performance? Personnel Psychology, 62(1), 89-134. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2008.01130.x
  36. Paul, A. K., & Anantharaman, R. N. (2004). Influence of HRM practices on organizational commitment: a study among sftware professionals in India. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 15(1), 77-88. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.1088
  37. Piskurich, G. M. & Sanders, E. S. (1998). ASTD models for learning technologies: roles, competencies, and outputs. VA: American Society for Training and Development
  38. Porter, L. W., Steers, R. M., Mowday, R. T., & Boulian, R. T. (1974). Organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and turnover among psychiatric technicians. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59(5), 603-609. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0037335
  39. Priet, I., & Revilla, E. (2006). Learning capability and business performance: a non-financial and financial assessement. The Learning Oranization, 13(2), 166-185. https://doi.org/10.1108/09696470610645494
  40. Rose, R. C., Kumar, N., & Pak, O. G. (2009). The effect of organizational learning on organizational commitment, jo satisfaction and work performance. Journal of Applied Business Research, 25(6), 55-66.
  41. Salman, A. (2013). Assessment of LMX as Mediator in Procedural Justice - Organizational Citizenship Behavior Relationship. East Asian Journal of Business Economics, 1(1), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.13106/eajbe.2013.vol1.no1.1
  42. Smith, H. C. (1955). Psychology of Industrial Behabior. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  43. Suma, S., & Lesha, J. (2013). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment: the case of Shkodra municipality. European Scientific Journal, 9(17), 41-51.
  44. Supeli, A., Creed, P. A. (2015). The longitudinal relationship between protean career orientation and job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and intention-to quit. Journal of Career Development, 43(1), 66-80. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894845315581686
  45. Szilagyi, A. D., & Wallace, M. J.(1983). Readings in organizational behavior and performance. Scott: Foresman Press.
  46. Tharenou, P., Saks, A. M., & Moore, C. (2007). A review and critique of research on training and organizational-level outcome. Human Resource Management Review, 17(3), 251-273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2007.07.004
  47. Torranco, R. J., & Swanson, R. A. (1995). The strategic roles of human resource development. Human Resource Planning, 18(4), 10-21.
  48. Yamoah, E. E. (2014). The link between human resource capacity building and job perfpormane. International Journal of Human Resources Studies, 4(3), 139-146. https://doi.org/10.5296/ijhrs.v4i3.5938
  49. Yang, H. C., Cho, H. Y., & Lee, W. D. (2015). Multi-dimensional Emotional Intelligence Effects on Intrinsic/Extrinsic Motivation and Job Satisfaction: Analysis Using Laborer Perceived Organizational Support. Journal of Business Economics and Environmental Studies, 5(4), 13-18. https://doi.org/10.13106/EAJBM.2015.VOL5.NO4.13.
  50. Yang, H. C., Sun, I. S., & Park, S. H. (2015). Perceived Employment Instability Effect on Psychological Well-being and Job Satisfaction: Resilience and Character Strength as Mediator. Journal of Business Economics and Environmental Studies. 5(4), 29-35. https://doi.org/10.13106/EAJBM.2015.VOL5.NO4.29.
  51. Yang, H. C., Tasnuva, K. (2013). Issues of Workplace in Korea: How to Inspire Temporary Workers? Journal of Business Economics and Environmental Studies, 3(1), 23-27.
  52. Yoon, K. H., Kim, B. Y., & Eom, J. G. (2019). The Effects of Job Crafting on Career Success of Multinational Corporations' Employees. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 6(4), 213-225. https://doi.org/10.13106/JAFEB.2019.VOL6.NO4.213
  53. Younis, N., Akram, A., & Naseeb, R. A. K. (2013). Career development and organizational commitment: case study of a pharmaceutical organizational in United Kingdom. International Jouranl of Scientific and Resarch Publications, 3(12), 1-4.
  54. Watkins, K. E. (1989). Business and industry. In S. Merriam & P. Cunningham (Eds.), Handbook of Adult and Continuing Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  55. Weng, Q., McElroy, J. C., Morrow, P. C., Liu, R. (2010). The relationshp between career growth and organizational commitment. Jouranl of Vocational Behavior, 77(3), 391-400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2010.05.003
  56. Wilson, J. (2014). International human resource deveopment: learning, education and training for individuals and organisations(3rd ed.). Deveopment and Learning in Oranizations, 28(2), 2014-2024.

Cited by

  1. Customer Satisfaction Management and Service Quality According to the DISC Behavior Type vol.18, pp.12, 2020, https://doi.org/10.15722/jds.18.12.202012.79