Does Training Generally Work? The Returns to In-Company Training
AbstractThis paper applies the familiar theoretical distinction between general and specific training to the empirical task of estimating the returns to in-company training. Given the theoretical prediction that employees who receive general training are more likely to quit, the productivity effects of general training should be lower than those of specific training. Using a firm-level dataset which distinguishes between general and specific training, we test for the relative effects of the two types of training on productivity growth. We find, contrary to expectations, that although general training has a statistically positive effect on productivity growth, no such effect is observable for specific training. This positive effect of general training remains when we control for changes in work organization and corporate restructuring. Moreover, the impact of general training varies positively with the level of capital investment.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers in its series CEPR Discussion Papers with number 1879.
Date of creation: Jun 1998
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Centre for Economic Policy Research, 77 Bastwick Street, London EC1V 3PZ
Phone: 44 - 20 - 7183 8801
Fax: 44 - 20 - 7183 8820
Other versions of this item:
- Alan Barrett & Philip J. O'Connell, 2001. "Does training generally work? The returns to in-company training," Industrial and Labor Relations Review, ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 54(3), pages 647-662, April.
- Barrett, Alan & O'Connell, Philip J., 1999. "Does Training Generally Work? The Returns to In-Company Training," IZA Discussion Papers 51, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- J24 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Human Capital; Skills; Occupational Choice; Labor Productivity
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Sandra E. Black & Lisa M. Lynch, 1997.
"How to Compete: The Impact of Workplace Practices and Information Technology on Productivity,"
NBER Working Papers
6120, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Sandra E. Black & Lisa M. Lynch, 2001. "How To Compete: The Impact Of Workplace Practices And Information Technology On Productivity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 83(3), pages 434-445, August.
- Lisa M Lynch & Sandra E Black, 2002. "How to Compete: The Impact of Workplace Practices and Information Technology on Productivity," Working Papers 02-04, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
- S Black & L Lynch, 1997. "How to Compete: The Impact of Workplace Practices and Information Technology on Productivity," CEP Discussion Papers dp0376, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
- Lynch, Lisa M, 1992. "Private-Sector Training and the Earnings of Young Workers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(1), pages 299-312, March.
- Casey Ichniowski & Kathryn Shaw & Giovanna Prennushi, 1995. "The Effects of Human Resource Management Practices on Productivity," NBER Working Papers 5333, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Lisa M. Lynch & Sandra E. Black, 1995.
"Beyond the Incidence of Training: Evidence from a National Employers Survey,"
NBER Working Papers
5231, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Lisa M Lynch & Sandra E Black, 2002. "Beyond the Incidence of Training: Evidence from a National Employers Survey," Working Papers 02-05, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
- Black, Sandra E & Lynch, Lisa M, 1996. "Human-Capital Investments and Productivity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(2), pages 263-67, May.
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page. reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ().
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.