A critical issue associated with assessing training needs concerns who within an organization is in a position to assess those needs most objectively. Of particular concern is the relative utility of assessments by job incumbents and their supervisors (McEnery & McEnery, 1987). A possible alternative to self- or supervisory assessment of training needs is an 'Us' assessment, an assessment by job incumbents of the training needs of their entire work group. A second primary purpose of this study was to test a proposed model of training needs assessment Subjects were 121 entry level police patrol officers and their supervising sergeants. Patrol officers completed self and Us assessment questionnaires designed to measure attitudes concerning job area difficulty, performance, cause of performance, effectiveness of training, supervisor/subordinate communication, and training needs for eight job areas. Sergeants completed a similar supervisory assessment questionnaire, and a second normative questionnaire rating difficulty, performance necessary at entry, importance, time spent, opportunity to observe, and degree to which job area performance distinguishes overall levels of job performance. Data relating to demographic variables, such as sex, race, and age of respondents was also collected Results indicated moderate agreement between self and 'Us' ratings, but very little agreement between supervisory ratings and the two other types. Self-ratings tended to be the most lenient, followed by Us ratings. Neither supervisor/subordinate communication, nor degree of supervisor opportunity to observe appeared to moderate interrater agreement to any significant degree. Less halo was found for Us ratings than for either supervisory or self-ratings. Although all three rater groups tended to attribute performance level to causes internal to job incumbents, Us ratings tended to be more external than either supervisory or self-ratings. Performance and difficulty to learn ratings were most predictive of need for training, but each of the five hypothesized predictors explained a significant portion of need for training variance in at least two of the eight job areas. Partial support was found for hypothesized moderating effects of perceptions of training efficacy and level of job performance necessary at job entry / acase@tulane.edu
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:TULANE/oai:http://digitallibrary.tulane.edu/:tulane_24605 |
| Date | January 1991 |
| Contributors | Faucett, John Milton (Author), Sulzer, Jefferson L (Thesis advisor) |
| Publisher | Tulane University |
| Source Sets | Tulane University |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Rights | Access requires a license to the Dissertations and Theses (ProQuest) database., Copyright is in accordance with U.S. Copyright law |
Page generated in 0.0014 seconds