Effect of Training on the Performance of University Administrative staff in Nigeria

Several studies have been carried on the effect of training on employees’ performance in firms. However, the effect of training on the performance of universities’ administrative staff in Nigeria has not been adequately assessed. This paper identified the training types mostly used by the Administrative staff of The Federal University of Technology Akure (FUTA), Ondo State, Nigeria, examined the factors affecting effective training and assessed the effect of training on the performance of the staff. The paper sought answers to research questions by employing survey design and purposive sampling technique to collect data from 68 respondents with the help of a 17-item structured questionnaire. The respondents consisted of the administrative staff of FUTA. Data for this study were analyzed using descriptive statistics such as percentage, mean score, standard deviation, mean ranking, and chi-square was used to test the hypothesis posed for the research at 5% significant level. Reliability test was carried out with Cronbach Alpha, while the validation of the research instrument was carried out by a senior lecturer in the Department of Business Administration, FUTA. The study revealed that training (On the Job and Off the Job) had a significant effect on the respondents’ performance; however, management did not release enough funds towards adequate training of the administrative staff. The paper, therefore, recommended more investment in training the staff in current skills and methods in order to cope with frequent changes in this contemporary world.


Background
The competitiveness in the current business world and the fast pace global and technological advancement being faced by firms pose a lot of difficulties and demand high-quality human resource and highly trained labour force for firms to succeed. Employees endowed with great knowledge, high innovative skills and experience are now required to withstand the daily challenges being encountered by employees at their workplaces. Realizing this, organizations in the globe now invest in employee training and education with a view to improving the quality of employees' work (Nel et al., 2004;Naveed et al., 2014). In consequence, workers have become vital assets of every organization. Being vital assets, it is necessary for them to be treated as human capital. A huge sum of capital is being invested incessantly in developing their capabilities and keeping them up to date with current information, knowledge, skills and aptitude necessary to perform their duties and create a competitive advantage for their firms. Their boosted behaviour and skills make their organizations to have a competitive edge (Kum et al., 2014).
Training is a formal and systematic modification of behaviour through learning by means of instruction, education, premeditated experience and development (Armstrong, 2000). It is "a planned effort to facilitate the learning of job-related knowledge, skills, and behaviour by employees" (Noe et al. 2003) and "the planned intervention that is designed to enhance the determinants of individual job performance" (Chiaburu and Tekleab, 2005). It involves a systematic achievement of concepts or rules, attitude, and skills that result in the enhancement of job performance (Goldstein, 1993). Employees' training provides them with improved skills, professional advancement opportunities and novel behaviour which enhance their performance (Amin et al., 2013;Elnagal and Imran, 2013). These skills help them to be more productive and efficient in carrying out their jobs (Thomas, 1997;Onyango, and Wanyoike, 2014) and prepare them to carry out more compound jobs (Onyango, and Wanyoike, 2014). Trained human resources are key to upholding a company's competitive advantage (Schonewille, 2001). Training helps to furnish employees with specific skills or correct the deficiencies in their performance (Reed and Vakola, 2006). Therefore, training is effected when skill inadequacy is detected in a worker or when an organization makes some changes in its system and requires employees to obtain new skills to be able to adapt to these changes (Roberson, Culik, and Pepper, 2001). Junevicius and Seniunaite (2007) are of the opinion that performance is generally linked with popular "3 E" (economy, efficiency and effectiveness). They referred to 'performance' as the relationship between minimal and effective cost ("economy"), between effective cost and output attained ("efficiency") and between input and outcome achieved ("effectiveness). Effectiveness can be measured by comparing actual performance outcomes with some set standards against which employees' performance is measured. Several authors have carried out researches on the effect of training on employees' performance and they have come out with diverse conclusions. While Oribabor (2000), Jagero et al., 2012, Elnaga1 and Imran (2013), Kum et al. (2014), Onyango and Wanyoike (2014) among others concluded that, employees' training is essential to continuously upgrade their knowledge and skills in preparedness to cope with the ever-changing competitive business world, other scholars (Ginsberg, 1997;Robbins et al., 2003) see employees' training as an expense and the responsibility of the school system to train them on their various expertise. Hence employees' training is a waste of an organization's capital. The main objective of this study, therefore, is to evaluate the effect of training on employees' performance using the administrative staff of The Federal University of Technology Akure (FUTA), Ondo State, Nigeria, as a case study. The theory underpinning this study is Armstrong (2009) framework for systematic training in an organization. This framework is appropriate for this study because it clarified how training improves employees' performance and leads to increased organisational performance.

Empirical Literature
Onyango and Wanyoike (2014) stated that training is mainly imparted in two ways: These include: On the job training which is made available to employees within their daily working environment and off the job training method which is made available to employees outside their working environment, for example, conferences, seminars, workshops, among others. Elnaga and Imran (2013) disclosed that training could be imparted via diverse methods such as peers' cooperation, coaching and mentoring and participation by the subordinates. On the other hand, Banjoko (1996) opined that there are three major types of training and development methods. These methods include: On the job training method, off the job training method and simulation. He further cited some examples of each of these training methods as shown in table 1 below. Source: Banjoko (1996) In agreement with Onyango and Wanyoike (2014), Flynn et al. (1995) affirmed that on the job training decreases cost and saves time. While Afaq and Khan (2008) asserted that employees who have more on the job experience perform better since this experience assists them in attaining an upturn in both capabilities and skills. On the job training assists employees to gain knowledge of and comprehend their jobs in a better mode (Deming, 1982). Katcher and Snyder (2003) stated that it is necessary for employees to be trained because training increases their ability to adapt to change; trained employees have more ability to use up-to-date equipment optimally and therefore upturn their productivity. Hence, when employees' skills are upgraded it contributes to full personal advancement of the employees and the socio-economic improvement of the nation at large. On the other hand, Rothwell and Kazanas (2006) categorized the reasons for training as (i) to fill a "performance gap" discovered in the course of performance management process; and (ii) to fill up a "growth gap", that is, an open position in an organization. Elnaga1 and Imran (2013) summed it up by saying that the overall benefits attained from employee's training include: increased motivation, reduced employee turnover, increased job satisfaction and morale, increased financial gain, increased capability to adopt novel technologies and methods, increased efficiencies in processes and increased innovation in strategies and products. new skills, do not believe that they will receive rewards from learnt skills, do not value the rewards that will be attained from learning such skills nor do they believe that transfer of learning from the classroom to the job will take place; (ii) When individuals have little or no freedom to change what they do because of tight control over their job tasks, then the knowledge and skills derived from training can never be put to use unless the task controls are unstiffened; (iii) When the supervisor of a learner is not in favour of training, then there is little or no possibility that a learner will be making use of newly learnt skills, because supervisors exert great influence over their subordinates' behaviour, since they control rewards and punishment; (iv) When a trainee comes back to his project field to discover that his coworkers are sceptical at receiving new ideas, training will not be effectively conveyed. Also, many employers see training as an expense (Ginsberg, 1997;Robbins et al., 2003), as the responsibility of employers, which is difficult to convince shareholders to approve. Therefore, employers feel that the responsibility to train employees falls on the school system, not on firms. Thus, training is the duty of the employees, to learn how to do their jobs (Robbins et al., 2003). Similarly, Ginsberg (1997) perceived training as expensive. He, however, stated that effective training can save money for an organization through efficiency. While Flynn et al., (1995) opined that though it is expensive to train employees, in the long run, training gives recoups for organizations more than it takes.

Factors that affect Training and Development in an Organization
Cascio (2005)  poor performance is related to factors such as the job design, motivation and reward systems, which are unrelated to training. Then training will be worthless. Thirdly, when there is an absence of objectives to make available focus and direction, training will surely not thrive.
Researchers also admitted that if training is too costly when compared to its short-term return on investment, firms may perceive it to be a failure and unacceptable. Nonetheless, the long-term pay-off may be rewarding (Kum et al., 2014). Each time training is seen as a sole event, the likelihood of behaviour change is little, and training is moreover probable to fail if partakers in the training are not held answerable and responsible for the results (Kleiman, 2003;Kum et al., 2014). Usually, employees are not held answerable to the use of the contents of their training at their places of work. Also, the training efforts will be in vain if it is not supported by line management. Failure by direct supervisors or managers to support the training of their subordinates will result in the employees resisting applying the new knowledge and skills attained during their training programme. The commitment of top executive is also crucial for a training programme to be successful because top management will need to apportion resources and participate in designing the process of the training. Furthermore, training and development will be unsuccessful if feedback is not provided. When firms fail to assess training by making feedback unavailable, employees will be unable to assess their progress and the organizers will not be able to know the extent of success of their programmes (Kum et al., 2014). Also, if after training employees fail to transfer what they have learnt to their working environment, in order to improve performance, the training will be valueless (Kum et al., 2014).

Effect of Training on Employees' Performance
Becker (1975) to an improvement in the quality of goods they produce and the services they render. Rothwell and Kazanas (2006) affirmed that training does not only have influence on outcome, but it is also essential for saving cost. There are findings that trained employees are more proficient in executing different tasks (Jagero et al., 2012). Training of employees inspires growth within the employees and the entire organization (Katcher and Snyder, 2003). Armstrong (2000) affirmed that employees who are trained usually work better as teams since they are all cognizant of expectations from them, therefore, they can attain these expectations smoothly together. Employees who receive consistent training are more inclined towards accepting change and coming up with novel ideas. Also, employees who go through appropriate training have the tendency to keep their jobs longer than those who do not (Elnaga1 and Imran, 2013).
Employees' training programs serve as a solution to covering performance issues like filling the gap between set standard and actual performance (Swart et al., 2005). Training may help employees to reduce their anxiety or frustration, occasioned by work demands, which they are not conversant with, and are deficient in the skills required to handle them effectively (Chen et al., 2004). Training has a direct relationship with employees' performance (Armstrong, 2000;Naveed et al., 2014, Harrison (2000. There is a positive correlation between effective training program and employee's productivity (Bartel, 1994

Study Area
Established

Method
The survey design was used for this study.   Table 3 presents a summary of the training types mostly used for the administrative staff in the study area.

Training Types mostly used for the Administrative staff in the Study Area
The table disclosed that "On the Job" and "Off the Job" training methods are used almost equally, for training staff in the study area. Regarding on the Job training, Committee Assignment was ranked highest with means score of 3.75, followed by Understudy/Apprenticeship with mean score 3.19. The third and fourth on the rank were Job Rotation (mean score 2.99) and Coaching (mean score 2.34) respectively.
While in respect of Off the Job training, Workshop was ranked highest with means score of 3.54, followed by Seminar with mean score 3.46. The third, fourth and fifth on the rank were, conference (mean score        Falola et al. (2014). and Nkosi (2015) who concluded that raining has a direct relationship with employees' performance. There is a positive correlation between effective training program and employee's productivity (Bartel, 1994). Also, (Kum et al. (2014) who affirmed that training makes available to employees, skills that increase their performance and Jagero et al. (2012) who opined that trained employees are more proficient in executing different tasks. Similarly, Kum et al.

Factors Affecting Effective Training of the Respondents in the Study Area
(2014) agreed that training can make employees become more loyal to the firm and improve their job satisfaction, while Armstrong (2000) affirmed that employees who are trained usually work better as teams since they are all cognizant of expectations from them, therefore, they can attain these expectations smoothly together.
Furthermore, the findings of this study are similar to those of Bartel (1994) and Delery and Doty (1996) who agreed that training results in an improvement in employee's performance and organizational productivity, Obisi (2001), Guest (1997), Peteraf (1993) and Oguntimehin (2001), who concluded that training and development programs affect the quality of the workers' attitude, competence, skills and knowledge and results in greater employees' performance. Also, Valle et al. (2000) asserted that effective training plays an essential role in building and maintaining competencies at the individual and organizational level, and hence partakes in the process of organizational change. Similarly, Usman (2014) confirmed that training assists firms to attain a competitive advantage by developing capabilities and particular skill sets, stimulating innovation and producing new knowledge. While Tai (2006)  However, although less absenteeism, improved job security and fewer accidents were the least ranked items, their mean scores were still high (over 3.00). This implies that training of the respondents in total had a significant effect on the respondents' performance. Nevertheless, unlike the findings of Oguntimehin (2001) less absenteeism was scored lower than most factors that training affects in the study area, while unlike Cascio (2005)'s submission that job security is one of the main reasons why employees need training was also scored lower than other factors in this study.

Conclusion
The study revealed that a combination of "On the Job" training and "Off the Job" training were the most frequently used methods of training staff in the study area. The study disclosed that the factors that most affected effective training of the respondents were management's complaint about lack of funds for training and lack of incentives to attend training. The implication of this is that staff may find it difficult to adapt to changes that may occur as a result of changes that may take place in the working environment, due to lack of training. This would put them at a disadvantaged position among their colleagues in institutions of learning in other parts of the world and also affect their level of competence, efficiency and effectiveness. In the long run, this would have an adverse effect on the attainment of the goal of the institution. In addition, the study revealed that the Heads of units and management are receptive to new ideas and support training and development of the staff in the study area, however, they are hindered by inadequate capital allocated to the institution by the Government. The findings of the study also revealed that training improved the member of staff' skills, competencies, knowledge, attitude, quality of work and increased their ability to acquire and use information. The study, therefore, concluded that training had a significant effect on the