Final word: Response to adams

Final Word: ResDonse to Adams Richard K. Capto, Mary Cianni We thank HRDQ for selecting our manuscript as the featured article in this issue. We also thank Dr. Doris Adams for her thoughtful and provocative reflections. Adams correctly notes that the article could have benefited from a richer consideration of the social context, such as the relevant legislative changes occurring during the study period. What was going on in “the economy . . . of the world,” however, seems too far beyond the scope of our paper. Fortunately, many contextual issues pertaining to women’s increased labor market participation in general and to education and training in particular are covered elsewhere. In regard to labor market conditions, for example, our article cites related sources for the interested reader. We concur with the merits of a historical sociological perspective on women’s relationship with the workplace. However, our purpose was much more modest and our focus more specific in light of our interest in identifying proximate factors associated with job training. As a result, we let the related literature guide our research questions. To the extent that others, like Adams, identify additional, related areas that our research addresses or fails to address, the knowledge base of women’sjob training experiences will be expanded. Adams cites a major limitation of the study-our model did “not include significant individual and institutional influences on women’s income.” She mentions occupational sex segregation, which, we concur, is an important factor. As noted in the article, however, we had no comparable data on men, and the occupation-related variables in the data file were not such that they could be reliably mapped by sex differences. Adams cites related research and she summarizes related issues. Her implication that further study in the areas of organization characteristics and sex is warranted by our study’s limitationsin part imposed by the data files we used-is well taken. Adams raised several issues in regard to the effects of early childbearing and marriage on labor force participation and training. She correctly notes that time out of the labor force (OLF) was not part of this study. Again, this is a limitation of the data file. The OLF experience of respondents was not captured in a manner that completely paralleled that of weeks worked. In most survey years, the related question referred to the number of weeks OLE but in others

vol. 8 . no 3, Fall 1997 HUMAN RL~OURCE D t v i i x w m L QUARTFRLI,

0 Jossey-Bass Publishers

225

226

Caputo, Cianni

the question referred to the number of weeks since last worked. Because there was no way to capture accurately the number of weeks OLF between survey years and because weeks worked, by extension, also accounts for weeks not worked, we decided to omit the OLF variable. We realize that weeks not worked includes those where people were not working but looking for work, as well as those OLE Assuming an accurate and reliable measure were available, we concur with Adams that OLF should be included in models seeking to account for job training experiences of women. We also agree that income is only one factor signifying women’s career advancement. Adams mentions fulfilling work, goal achievement, and quality of life in the work environment-all are important aspects of measuring career success. However, we view income as an appropriate indicator of career advancement. Also, considered from a cost-benefit perspective, if women are committing time and, perhaps, money to enhance their skill set, then benefits derived in terms of income gained need to be assessed. Human capital factors such as investment in training is one framework often considered in examining salary inequities between men and women. Measuring the ROI for women in terms of salary gains attributed to their investment in training appears to us to be a worthwhile endeavor. We do not, however, suggest that HRD professionals use income as a measure of productivity as Adams states. Our study assessed individual-level outcomes, not organizational ones. Other variables Adams mentions that would have strengthened our study, had we included them, were self-esteem and size of firm. Both are noteworthy, and we agree that such factors warrant inclusion in studies of the workplace. Self-esteem, however, was not included in the data file, while survey questions about firm size produced data that were less straightforward than they first appeared. There were two survey questions regarding firm size, one referring to the number of people employed in the whole company, and the other to the number employed in the same plant or office. Although potentially more informative in tight of the issue Adams raised, an employee’s knowledge of the size of the whole company seemed to us to be the less reliable of the two related variables. As Adams notes, larger companies often have the resources to provide more training for their employees than smaller firms, but these resources may not be located at the immediate site of the respondent’s employment. Although a respondent’s knowledge of the size of the plant or office in which she worked was in all likelihood reliable, using data obtained from this particular question might have been misleading. The concept of “office”can range from one room within a larger organizational structure to the entire organization or “plant” itself. In our view, there was too much ambiguity built into the question to warrant inclusion in our study. Hence, firm size would have had only limited, and perhaps misleading, use in our study had we included related variables available in the data file. We agree with Adams that both macro-level and micro-level variables are needed in a model of

Final Word

~

.

_

_

_

~-

227

women’s career experiences to paint an accurate portrayal. Nonetheless, our study, while incomplete, goes beyond the extant literature and thereby adds to our knowledge of women’s experiences during critical historical periods in women’s labor force participation. Although we acknowledge the changes occurring in the position of the HRD practitioner, our findings have relevance for those engaged in more traditional training and development roles as well as those assuming the more current role of performance consultant. We highlight the following lessons gleaned from our study First, as women aged and worked over time, their capacity to complete training efforts increased. Commitment to professional development thus appears to grow over time. Whether this learning occurs in the more formal ways presented in our study or through the self-directed learning advocated in today’s workplace, devoting time to midlevel employees has merit and benefits both the individual and the organization. Organizations do not have the luxury in today’s competitive market to waste talent. Second, whether attending to formal training or to performance enhancement, worldfamily issues continue to be a dominant influence on employees’ lives. Our findings reveal that family status may influence training outcomes. Performance consultants would be well served to take a holistic approach to their clients. Understanding the external pressures on employees places HRD in a systemic framework, working in concert with others facets of human resource management, including worldfamily initiatives. Third, if HRD practitioners are cognizant of the restricted training opportunities that members of this cohort of women may have experienced, it may remind them to avoid stereotyping women employees based on past training experiences. Lower access to training and overrepresentation in clerical training programs may have channeled black women into jobs not commensurate with ability. Judging performance in terms of competencies, as currently advocated, may remedy prior discrimination, which channeled women in general and black women in particular into low-paying and low-skilled jobs. HRD practitioners in their role as performance consultants may be in a position to realign employee talents with work opportunities. Finally, HRD practitioners need to understand the implications of external training programs, including postsecondary education, on the ability to recruit and retain personnel with requisite job competencies. Occasions are rapidly increasing to join with other private as well as public sector organizations to address the complex issues facing the American workplace. For example, to resolve the problem caused by the current shortage of trained computer programmers required for the year 2000, a concerted effort is needed by educational, governmental, community, and corporate entities. Taking a proactive role in external training programs helps ensure that our workforce has relevant job skills. Attending to performance issues is one aspect of HRD.

228

Caputo, Cianni

Richard K. Caputo is professor, school of social work, Barry University, Miami Shores, Florida. Mary Ciunni is associate professor of management, Sigmund Weiss School of Business, Susquehannu University, Selinsgrove, Pennsylvania.

a