IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Continuous Training, Job Satisfaction and Gender: An Empirical Analysis Using German Panel Data

  • Claudia Burgard
  • Katja Görlitz

Using data from the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP), this paper analyzes the relationship between training and job satisfaction focusing in particular on gender differences. Controlling for a variety of socio-demographic, job and firm characteristics, we find a difference between males and females in the correlation of training with job satisfaction which is positive for males but insignificant for females. This difference becomes even more pronounced when applying individual fixed effects. To gain insights into the reasons for this difference, we further investigate training characteristics by gender. We find that financial support and career-orientation of courses only seems to matter for the job satisfaction of men but not of women.

If 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.

File URL: http://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.377433.de/diw_sp0394.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) in its series SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research with number 394.

as
in new window

Length: 22 p.
Date of creation: 2011
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:diw:diwsop:diw_sp394
Contact details of provider: Postal: Mohrenstraße 58, D-10117 Berlin
Phone: xx49-30-89789-671
Fax: xx49-30-89789-109
Web page: http://www.diw.de/en/soep
Email:


More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
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.:

as in new window
  1. Konings, Jozef & Vanormelingen, Stijn, 2010. "The Impact of Training on Productivity and Wages: Firm Level Evidence," IZA Discussion Papers 4731, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  2. Philip Oreopoulos & Kjell G. Salvanes, 2009. "How large are returns to schooling? Hint: Money isn't everything," NBER Working Papers 15339, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  3. Richard Blundell & Lorraine Dearden & Costas Meghir & Barbara Sianesi, 1999. "Human capital investment: the returns from education and training to the individual, the firm and the economy," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 20(1), pages 1-23, March.
  4. Alois Stutzer & Bruno S. Frey, 2004. "Reported Subjective Well-Being: A Challenge for Economic Theory and Economic Policy," Schmollers Jahrbuch : Journal of Applied Social Science Studies / Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, vol. 124(2), pages 191-231.
  5. Parent, D., 1995. "Wages and Mobility: the Impact of Employer-Provided Training," Cahiers de recherche 9507, Universite de Montreal, Departement de sciences economiques.
  6. Jorn-Steffen Pischke, 1996. "Continuous Training in Germany," NBER Working Papers 5829, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  7. Lorraine Dearden & Howard Reed & John Van Reenen, 2006. "The Impact of Training on Productivity and Wages: Evidence from British Panel Data," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 68(4), pages 397-421, 08.
  8. Anna Cristina D'Addio & Tor Eriksson & Paul Frijters, 2007. "An analysis of the determinants of job satisfaction when individuals' baseline satisfaction levels may differ," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(19), pages 2413-2423.
  9. Keith A. Bender & Susan M. Donohue & John S. Heywood, 2005. "Job satisfaction and gender segregation," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 57(3), pages 479-496, July.
  10. Melanie K. Jones & Richard J. Jones & Paul L. Latreille & Peter J. Sloane, 2009. "Training, Job Satisfaction, and Workplace Performance in Britain: Evidence from WERS 2004," LABOUR, CEIS, vol. 23(s1), pages 139-175, 03.
  11. Clark, A.E., 1995. "Job Satisfaction and Gender: Why Are Women so Happy at Work?," DELTA Working Papers 95-10, DELTA (Ecole normale supérieure).
  12. Clark, Andrew E. & Oswald, Andrew J. & Warr, Peter B., 1994. "Is job satisfaction u-shaped in age ?," CEPREMAP Working Papers (Couverture Orange) 9407, CEPREMAP.
  13. Andrew E. Clark and Andrew J. Oswald, . "Satisfaction and Comparison Income," Economics Discussion Papers 419, University of Essex, Department of Economics.
  14. Harley Frazis & Mark A. Loewenstein, 2005. "Reexamining the Returns to Training: Functional Form, Magnitude, and Interpretation," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 40(2).
  15. Gert Wagner & Jan Göbel & Peter Krause & Rainer Pischner & Ingo Sieber, 2008. "Das Sozio-oekonomische Panel (SOEP): Multidisziplinäres Haushaltspanel und Kohortenstudie für Deutschland – Eine Einführung (für neue Datennutzer) mit einem Ausblick (für erfahrene Anwender)," AStA Wirtschafts- und Sozialstatistisches Archiv, Springer, vol. 2(4), pages 301-328, December.
  16. Gerfin, Michael, 2004. "Work-Related Training and Wages: An Empirical Analysis for Male Workers in Switzerland," IZA Discussion Papers 1078, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  17. Saziye Gazioglu & Aysit Tansel, 2006. "Job satisfaction in Britain: individual and job related factors," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(10), pages 1163-1171.
  18. Melanie K. Jones & Paul L. Latreille & Peter J. Sloane, 2008. "Crossing the Tracks? Trends in the Training of Male and Female Workers in Great Britain," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 46(2), pages 268-282, 06.
  19. Gert G. Wagner & Joachim R. Frick & Jürgen Schupp, 2007. "The German Socio-Economic Panel Study (SOEP): Scope, Evolution and Enhancements," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 1, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
  20. Michael R. Pergamit & Jonathan R. Veum, 1999. "What is a promotion?," Industrial and Labor Relations Review, ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 52(4), pages 581-601, July.
  21. Rafael Di Tella & Robert MacCulloch, 2006. "Some Uses of Happiness Data in Economics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(1), pages 25-46, Winter.
  22. Edwin Leuven & Hessel Oosterbeek, 2008. "An alternative approach to estimate the wage returns to private-sector training," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(4), pages 423-434.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is featured on the following reading lists or Wikipedia pages:

  1. SOEP based publications

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:diw:diwsop:diw_sp394. See general 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: (Bibliothek)

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.