In the trainer's voice: A study of training transfer practices. Performance Improvement Quarterly

Research on training transfer continues to intri-gue scholars andworkplace practitioners inter-ested in discovering how best to support the application of new learning. As organizations attempt to maximize human capital investments, leveraging knowledge fromtraining andother performance inter-ventions is critical to maintaining a competitive ad-vantage. Training and other learning investment expenditures (measured in U.S. companies) approx-imate over $100 billion of firm budget allocations each year (Paradise, 2007);however,most reportsof training transfer indicate only a small amount of new learning is actually applied on the job. In a review of evaluation benchmarking data conducted by Knowledge Advi-sors, a human capital metrics firm, organizations reported that trainees had applied less than 40 % of their knowledge and skills from training experiences when measured 90 days after training. The remaining 60 % is considered "scrap learning " (Berk, 2008, p. 46), a term used to describe knowledge—and thus invest-ments in learning—that is wasted. This high "scrap" ratio, which is commensurate with other transfer re-ports (Fitzpatrick, 2001; Newstrom, 1986; Saks & Belcourt, 2006), raises concerns about the efficacy of training as a perfor-mance improvement intervention. Training transfer is not a new phenomenon to human resource devel-opment (HRD) and performance improvement practitioners or scholars. Of the learning anddevelopment issues that typically plagueorganizations, how to support learners in using their new knowledge and skills to enhance performance is a constant challenge. Research suggests that organizations must address cognitive, psychological, behavioral, and cultural aspects of work performance to enhance training application (Holton, Bates, &Ruona