The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/2040-8269.htm
MRR
45,10
1296
Received 21 March 2021
Revised 21 April 2021
19 October 2021
Accepted 15 November 2021
Management Research Review
Vol. 45 No. 10, 2022
pp. 1296-1322
© Emerald Publishing Limited
2040-8269
DOI 10.1108/MRR-03-2021-0225
Motivation to transfer soft skills
training: a systematic
literature review
Sumita Mishra and Malabika Sahoo
KIIT School of Management, KIIT Deemed to be University, Bhubaneswar, India
Abstract
Purpose – This paper aims to synthesize existing knowledge on trainee motivation to transfer (MTT) soft
skills training through a systematic literature review (SLR).
Design/methodology/approach – By applying a rigorous reproducible process, this SLR identified a
total of 33 peer-reviewed articles on MTT in soft skills training.
Findings – The systematic review offers several important findings. First, research on MTT has accelerated in
the recent past with studies conducted in varied geographic contexts. Second, MTT has been operationalized and
measured as an antecedent and mediator of training transfer as well as an outcome itself is sampled papers.
Third, MTT is recognized as critical in facilitating the transfer of soft skills. Finally, an investigation of empirical
studies helped locate gaps in research methodologies, measurement of MTT and finally its predictors.
Research limitations/implications – The study is limited by the search string and its choice of peer-
reviewed articles published in the English language only.
Originality/value – In the absence of systematic reviews on MTT in the context of soft skill, the study
contributes immensely by providing an updated, cogent summarization of extant work and potential
directions for future research/practice.
Keywords Human resource management, Human resource development, Systematic review,
Training transfer, Motivation to transfer, Soft skills training, Transfer motivation
Paper type Literature review
1. Introduction
Research on motivation to transfer training (MTT) or transfer motivation has grown
exponentially during the past 34 years, as its inception as a research construct by Noe (1986). It
was defined as “trainees’ desire to use knowledge and skills mastered in the training programme
to the job” (Noe, 1986, p. 743). Pivotal process theories of motivation (i.e. expectancy and goal-
setting theory) and the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) (Ajzen, 1991) have profoundly
influenced MTT’s understanding as a research construct. Its examination remained critical in
human resource development (HRD) research due to the “transfer problem” (or the failure of
applying/transferring training to the job) in organizations. The transfer problem was further
exacerbated in soft skills training. Soft skills refer to both intra and interpersonal skills that help
employees manage themselves and meaningfully associate with significant others (Laker and
Powell, 2011). These skills have become increasingly important in organizations in the past two
decades and complement the technical/functional skills necessary to implement a job. Though
majority studies on training transfer remain content-agnostic, there exist definite differences in
the transfer of soft versus hard skills training (Botke et al., 2018). Soft skills are harder to learn
and master in comparison to their technical counterpart as they require trainees to understand
abstract concepts as well as their application in practical spheres (Vandergoot et al., 2019). In
contrast to hard skills, they are also characterized by distal transfer due to trainee ambivalence
about their practical use and imprecision in application to the job (Laker and Powell, 2011). These Soft skills
ambiguities impede an objective assessment of their functional utility and undermine the training
credibility of soft skills training.
Against this backdrop, an optimal understanding of research on what motivates a
trainee to transfer soft skills training assumes tremendous importance. A thorough and
updated literature review is desirable to help this optimal understanding and set a direction
for the path ahead. Unfortunately, a systematized review of MTT related literature in the
domain of soft skills training is glaringly absent. The seminal integrative review by 1297
Gegenfurtner et al. (2009a) provided the first synthesis of research on MTT. Among more
recent studies, Botke et al. (2018) presented a systematic review of work-related factors
influencing the transfer of soft skills training. The research foci in their study remained
transfer of soft skills even though MTT was recognized as an essential factor influencing
transfer. To address the lack of an updated review herein, our paper aims to synthesize the
relevant body of knowledge by posing the following research questions:

Q1. What are the current trends in MTT related publications of soft skills training?
Q2. How has MTT been operationalized and measured in soft skills training?
Q3. What individual, training related and workplace environment factors influence
MTT of soft skills training?
Q4. What are potential vistas of future study to augment the understanding of MTT of
soft skills training?
From a theoretical perspective, the paper will elucidate the varied operationalizations of
MTT in training literature, its measurement and most importantly its relationship with
training transfer in soft skills training. Secondly, an evidence-based report on antecedents of
MTT will not only help examine research focus but also expose understudied research
trajectories to interest future researchers. From a managerial lens, the paper will help HRD
practitioners and training professionals to understand studied best practices for bolstering
MTT of soft skills training in organizations.

2. Methodology
To answer the research questions posited, we used a systematic literature review (SLR)
approach. SLRs can be defined as a rigorous process of identifying, evaluating and
interpreting multiple research studies relevant to the research questions posed, area of study
or a phenomenon of interest (Tranfield et al., 2003). Following subsections highlight the
processual scheme of the SLR conducted.

2.1 Data collection

2.1.1 Initial search process. Data collection was structured in accordance with the preferred
reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (Moher
et al., 2009). Noe’s (1986) studies on MTT were considered as a starting reference point for
the literature search. Consequently, the identification of relevant literature was concerned
with papers published between 1986 and September of 2020. Two of the largest online
bibliometric databases of management research (i.e. Web of Science and Scopus) were used
in the initial search process. These databases were chosen due to their manifest stability on
certain key research metrics (i.e. publications, citations, h index and hI, annual). Moreover,
these databases have displayed constant growth for both publications and citations across
five major disciplines – humanities, social sciences (inclusive of management), sciences,
MRR engineering and life sciences (Harzing and Alakangas, 2016). Keywords used for searching
45,10 topic and title were “motivation to transfer”, “transfer motivation”, “intention to transfer”,
“desire to transfer” and “training transfer”. We deliberately used “training transfer” as a
keyword to broaden our search as MTT has often been researched in studies pertaining to
transfer. The search terms within each set were separated by the operator “OR”. The initial
search yielded a total of 2,532 publication records (Web of Science = 1,114 and Scopus =
1298 1,418).

2.2 Inclusion and exclusion criteria

We determined rigorous inclusion and exclusion criteria for all four rounds of screening of
the initial search results.
2.2.1 Articles eliminated in the 1st and 2nd round of screening based on title and
abstracts. In the first round, publications in both databases were filtered independently on
their title and abstract using the following inclusion criteria:

Studies with a research focus on MTT.

Peer-reviewed articles to maintain appropriate quality thresholds.

Papers are written in English.

Based on these criteria, a total of 163 publications (i.e. n = 74, Web of Science and n = 89,
Scopus) were retained. Among them, 47 papers were removed as duplicates. A sample of 116
publications was entered in the second round. Mindful of the research questions posed,
studies in the second round of screening were of relevance if they examined transfer
motivation/MTT empirically. In total, 22 papers were removed from the sample as they
constituted literature reviews, conceptual papers and meta-analytic studies. In the final
analysis, 94 publications entered the third round of screening basis examination of full texts.
2.2.2 Articles eliminated in the 3rd and 4th round of screening based on full texts. The
inclusion criteria in the third round on examination of full texts used:

More granular understanding of MTT as extant literature reveals an interchangeable
and confusing use of similar terms such as “training motivation”, “intention to transfer”,
“desire to transfer” in describing MTT. We used Noe’s (1986) definition of MTT as a
filter to retain publications. Thus, studies on intentions to transfer (Al-Eisa et al., 2009;
Cheng et al., 2015) were retained as the construct described a trainee’s intent in applying
the training to an appropriate workplace context. On the other hand, papers on training
motivation (Clark et al., 1993) were excluded as the construct focused on a trainee’s
motivation to learn (MTL) the training content, rather than transfer it to the workplace.

Employee samples within an organizational setting. Hence, studies using student
samples, farmers and sports performance were excluded.

Based on these criteria, 24 papers were rejected while 70 records entered the fourth and final
round of screening. Studies, in this round, bore relevance only if the training focused on soft
skills. We used Kantrowitz’s (2005) exhaustive classification of soft skills to retain
publications [1]. In this round, 25 papers remained while 45 papers were rejected.
2.2.3 Articles included based on backward and forward snowballing. To augment the
SLR process, backward and forward snowballing iterations were conducted on the 25 papers
retained. For backward snowballing, we screened the reference section of all the 25 papers
while forward snowballing was conducted by examining the citations of a specific paper [2]. On
applying all the inclusion/exclusion criteria, a total of four papers were added to the final
sample from the backward search. From the forward search, an additional five papers were
identified for retention. But as we were unable to obtain the full text for a publication – Franke Soft skills
and Felfe (2012), a total of four papers were included. In summation, the final number of articles training
selected for this SLR was 33. Figure 1 provides a diagrammatic flowchart of the search process.

2.3 Data extraction

We designed a data extraction template to record information from the final sample. The
template included information on the author, year of publication, journal, type of soft skills,
duration of the training, temporality of measuring MTT, operationalization of MTT,
1299
measurement scales, rating source (i.e. self/supervisors/peers) sample size and research
context, research methodologies, antecedents, outcome measures of sampled publications
and finally mechanistic vis-à-vis dynamic models of MTT. We classified papers based on
Blume et al.’s (2019) theorization on the dynamic transfer model (DTM). DTM reinforces the
influence that change in people, context and situations over time may bring forth on ability
and motivation of trainees to transfer the training. Thus, mechanistic models of training

Records from Scopus,

Records from Web of
N=1418
science, N=1114
Identification

Total publication identified, N=2532

1-Records excluded as
duplicates, N=47
1st& 2nd round of screening 2-Records excluded as
Records screened on initial criteria reviews, meta-analysis and
Screening

n=163 (N=74, Web of science, N=89, conceptual studies, N=22

Scopus)

3rd &4th round of screening

1-Records excluded due to
Full text assessed for eligibility, N= description of MTT and non-
94 employee samples, N=24
Eligibility

2-No focus on soft skill, N=45

Final articles included after the 4th

round N= 25

Additional papers through backward

and forward search, N= 8
Inclusion

Figure 1.
PRISMA flow
Studies included in SLR, N=33 diagram based on
Moher et al. (2009)
MRR transfer noted impacts of antecedents on training outcome measures (such as MTT) in a single
45,10 time whereas dynamic models examined these impacts in differing time periods (Blume et al.,
2019). A summarized data extraction template is detailed in Appendix Table A1.

3. Findings
The following sections present the findings of the review in three subsections as per the
1300 research questions posed at the outset.

3.1 Trends in motivation to transfer training related publications

Our findings herein report the distribution of the final sample of publication records over
time, source (i.e. the journal), research context, type of soft skills training and research
methodologies used.
3.1.1 Distribution of publications over time. The distribution of articles through the years
is presented in Figure 2. Within our 34-year (1986–2020) search period, none of the papers
were published before 1996. Figure 2 depicts a clear ascending trend where a maximum
number of publications (n = 11) occurred between 2016 and 2020.
3.1.2 Distribution of publications by the journal. The 33 publications selected in the final
sample were drawn from a variety of peer-reviewed journals (n = 14). Maximum number of
articles (i.e. n = 8) was published in the International Journal of Training and Development
while Human Resource Development International and Human Resource Development
Quarterly emerged as the second prominent source of publication by covering four of the
selected articles. Table 1 presents the list of journals included in the study along with the
number of articles published in them.
3.1.3 Distribution of publications by research context. In terms of geographic
distribution, the majority of the studies were conducted in Europe (n = 12) and Asia (n = 10).
Figure 3 presents the distribution of publications by their context. Examining MTT in soft
skills training has had an international appeal with studies being conducted in 16 countries
(refer to Table A1 for details). Majority of studies in Europe were from Germany (n = 9).
Studies in the Asian context had a wider base of geographic distribution and were situated
in 10 countries. A single study (Yaghi and Bates, 2020) used multi-country data to conduct
their study and report findings.

Journals Papers

Human Resource Development International 4

Human Resource Development Quarterly 4
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 1
International Journal of Human Resource Management 1
International Journal of Selection and Assessment 2
International Journal of Training and Development 8
Journal of European Industrial Training 2
Journal of Vocational Education and Training 1
Management Decision 1
Management Research Review 2
Performance Improvement Quarterly 2
Table 1. Personnel Review 3
Distribution of South Asian Journal of Human Resource Management 1
publications by Vocations and Learning 1
journals Grand total 33
3.1.4 Type of soft skills training. Sampled studies focused on a wide variety of soft skills in Soft skills
training programmes. Figure 4 depicts the distribution of publications according to the soft training
skills focused upon. Several publications (n = 15) covered training programmes focusing on
more than one soft skill (refer to Table A1 for details). Leadership emerged as the most popular
soft skill taught in training programmes (n = 18). Reflexivity, stress management and
professional development were among the least focused soft skills (Figure 4).
3.1.5 Research methodologies adopted by publications. Quantitative research was the
predominant methodology adopted in sampled publications (n = 31). Only two papers
1301
(Culpin et al., 2014; Vandergoot et al., 2020) used a mixed-method research design. Culpin
et al. (2014) used both mailed questionnaires and an open-ended question via email to
understand the consequences of employee participation in training and their intention to use
training at work. Vandergoot et al. (2020) studied the influence of selected individual and
organizational factors on transfer in managerial leadership programmes through surveys
and semi-structured telephonic interviews. A single study by Kastenmüller et al. (2012) used
an experimental design in observing the influence of perceived openness of climate on MTT.

Figure 2.
Temporal
distribution of
publications

Figure 3.
Region-wise
distribution of
publications

Figure 4.
Soft skills focused on
training
MRR 3.2 Operationalization and measurement of motivation to transfer training
45,10 MTT’s varied operationalizations help explicate its position in the nomological network of
constructs pertaining to the training transfer of soft skills. The nomological network
describes empirical observable relationships between antecedents and outcomes to validate
constructs and advance theory development (Cronbach and Meehl, 1955). Table 2 provides a
summary of operationalizations of MTT, a hypothesized direction to MTT’s relationship
1302 with training transfer outcomes and finally empirical support to hypotheses purported.
3.2.1 Motivation to transfer training as an antecedent to training transfer of soft skills.
MTT was operationalized as an antecedent to transfer in 14 publications. Of these, maximum
publications (n = 11) posited direct positive relationships of MTT with training transfer. The
remaining three publications aimed to illustrate boundary conditions for the motivation-
transfer relationship by assessing the role of supervisory support (SS) and pre-training

Hypothesized direction with

training transfer/perceived
Operationalization No. of transferable skills/training
of MTT papers* Sources generalization and maintenance Findings

MTT as an 14 Axtell and Maitlis (1997), Direct, positive (n = 11) Supported

antecedent Bates et al. (2007); Chiaburu Direct and indirect, (n = 12)
et al. (2010), Nijman et al. positive (n = 2) Not
(2006); Devos et al. (2007), El- Indirect, positive supported
said et al. (2020); Holton et al. (n = 1) (n = 2)
(2000), Hutchins et al. (2013);
Kim et al. (2019), Lau and
McLean (2013); Lee et al.
(2014), Liebermann and
Hoffmann (2008) and
Vandergoot et al. (2019, 2020)
MTT as a 7 Cheng et al. (2015), Chiaburu Positive Supported
mediator and Lindsay (2008); Grohmann
et al. (2014), Massenberg et al.
(2015); Seiberling and Kauffeld
(2017),
van der Locht et al. (2013) and
Yaghi and Bates (2020)
MTT as an 15 Al-Eisa et al. (2009); Arefin – –
outcome and Islam (2019), Culpin et al.
(2014); El-Said et al. (2020),
Gegenfurtner et al. (2020);
Kastenmüller et al. (2012); Lau
and McLean (2013), Lee et al.
(2014); Liebermann and
Hoffmann (2008), Massenberg
et al. (2017); Rowold (2007),
Sahoo and Mishra (2019);
Smith et al. (2008), Ruona et al.
(2002) and Yamnill and
McLean (2005)
MTT as a control 1 Govaerts et al. (2018)
Table 2. variable
Operationalization of
MTT in publications Note: *Four papers operationalized MTT as an antecedent and outcome in the same study
performance as moderators (El-Said et al., 2020; Lee et al., 2014, respectively) and training Soft skills
cognition as a mediator (Chiaburu et al., 2010). Of 14 publications, the majority (n = 12) support training
the hypothesized positive influence of MTT on training transfer outcomes (Table 2). Notable
two publications record negligible or no influence of MTT on transfer. Lee et al. (2014) reported
an insignificant direct impact of MTT on transfer and stated that pre-training performance
moderated the MTT-transfer relationship. MTT bore a positive influence on transfer in the
lower performing group. Similarly, Lau and McLean (2013), reported the negligible influence of
MTT (i.e. 2.4% of the variance) on transfer. Their study noted the importance of MTL and 1303
training methods in predicting transferrable skills.
3.2.2 Motivation to transfer training as a mediator in training transfer of soft skills. A
total of seven publications operationalized and assessed MTT as a mediator in training
transfer of soft skills. All of them predicted and empirically supported a positive influence of
MTT in mediating the association between chosen antecedents and training transfer. The
potential of MTT in mediating the training transfer process reinforces similar assumptions
from major theoretical frameworks like the systemic model of learning transfer
(Kontoghiorghes, 2004) and the most recent DTM (Blume et al., 2019).
3.2.3 Other operationalizations of motivation to transfer training. Maximum
publications (n = 15) of the 33 in the final sample operationalized MTT as an outcome. Of
these four papers (El-Said et al., 2020; Lau and McLean, 2013; Lee et al., 2014; Liebermann
and Hoffmann, 2008) operationalized MTT both as an antecedent and outcome in the same
study. A single study by Govaerts et al. (2018) identified MTT as a control variable in
examining the role of different types of SS on training transfer.

3.3 Measuring motivation to transfer training in sampled publications

A total of 14 different measures and two self-designed scales were used to measure MTT in
sampled publications. A frequently used scale found in eight publications was the second
version of the learning transfer system inventory (LTSI) by Holton et al. (2000). LTSI-II
consisted of 69 items designed to measure 16 factors affecting training transfer (Holton et al.,
2000). Noe and Schmitt’s (1986) six-item scale was the second most preferred measure of
MTT used in five publications. Four of the publications-(Grohmann et al., 2014; Massenberg
et al., 2015; Massenberg et al., 2017; Seiberling and Kauffeld, 2017) used the German version
of the LTSI-II (GLTSI) (Kauffeld et al., 2008) to measure MTT as most of the studies were
conducted in Germany (Table A1). The original version of LTSI (Holton, 1996) and its latest
version – LTSI-IV (Bates et al., 2012) also found use in two publications each for measuring
MTT. Scales developed by Machin and Forgarty (1997) and Noe (1986) were among the
lesser-used measures. Two publications (Axtell and Maitlis, 1997; Nijman et al., 2006)
developed their own scales to measure MTT. In addition, majority publications (n = 30)
measured MTT through self-reports (trainee level) while studies by Axtell and Maitlis (1997)
and Nijman et al. (2006) collected data from both trainees and their supervisors. Massenberg
et al. (2015) conducted a multilevel study through data from individual trainees and the
teams they belonged to.
In total, 22 publications used mechanistic models measuring all variables (inclusive of
MTT) at a single instance in time. In total, 11 publications measured MTT using dynamic
models. Table A1 records the time of measurement of MTT in all studies.

3.4 Individual, training related and organizational factors influencing motivation to transfer
training
Gegenfurtner et al.’s (2009a) framework were used to broadly classify antecedents of MTT
into individual, training related and organizational in 22 publications (15 publications
MRR operationalizing MTT as an outcome and seven examining its primacy as a mediator in the
45,10 training transfer process). Table 3 provides a summary of antecedents, intermediate
measures (mediators/moderators) and outcomes.
3.4.1 Individual level antecedents. In total, 17 of the 22 sampled publications focused on
varied individual-level antecedents influencing MTT. The most frequently examined
individual antecedent was self-efficacy (SE) (n = 9). Trainee SE was univocally identified as
1304 a positive direct predictor of transfer motivation in seven out of nine publications (Al-Eisa
et al., 2009; Arefin and Islam, 2019; Chiaburu and Lindsay, 2008; Chiaburu et al., 2010;
Gegenfurtner et al., 2020; Massenberg et al., 2017; Sahoo and Mishra, 2019). A single
publication- Lee et al. (2014) operationalized SE as a control variable. In another study by
Smith et al. (2008), an indirect impact of SE was examined on transfer intentions mediated
by trainee goal intentions. Sampled publications herein have examined both pre-training SE
(or a trainee’s confidence in his/her abilities to master the content of training) and post-
training SE (or a trainee’s confidence in his/her abilities to apply the learned skills on to the
job post the training) as precursors to MTT. These dichotomous forms of SE were
intimately linked as pre-training SE helped predict a trainee’s post-training SE.
Trainee MTL was another prominently examined antecedent of MTT in four sampled
publications (El-Said et al., 2020; Lee et al., 2014; Sahoo and Mishra, 2019; van der Locht
et al., 2013). MTL reflected the desire of the trainee to learn the content of the training (Al-
Eisa et al., 2009). While three of these publications attested to the positive impact of MTL on
MTT, a single study by Lee et al. (2014) reported an insignificant direct impact on MTT.

Mediators/
Antecedents moderators Outcomes

Individual Training Organizational

Self-efficacya Learninga Supervisor supporta Mediators Training
Motivation to learn Transfer designa Opportunity to perform Motivation to transfer/
Career commitment Trainer Subjective norms learn transfer
Awareness of strategic linkage performance Perceived organizational Training behaviourb
Accountability Identical elements support cognition
Attitudes Training needs Peer support Perception of
Perceived behavioural control analysis Openness of climate openness of
Normative beliefs Training attitudes Organization learning climate
Control beliefs support Prevailing
Expected utility Supervisor sanctions transfer climate
Perceived content validity Performance coaching Goal intentions
Trainee reactions Transfer climate Moderators
Learner readiness Pre-training
Positive and negative outcomes performance of
Personal capacity trainees
Performance and outcome
expectations
Big five traits
Table 3. Internal work motivation
Summary of Goal intentions and orientation
Utility reactions
antecedents,
Training instrumentality
mediators/
moderators and Notes: aMost frequently studied antecedent; bOutcome measures of the seven publications with MTT as
outcomes mediator
Publications studied personality traits such as learning goal orientation (Chiaburu et al., Soft skills
2010); openness to change (Massenberg et al., 2017) and the Big Five traits (Rowold, 2007) in training
their direct or indirect impact on transfer motivation. The purported positive impact of
favourable post-training reactions (inclusive of effect, content and utility) was also
investigated and found support in sampled publications (Liebermann and Hoffmann, 2008;
Ruona et al., 2002).
Theoretical underpinnings of MTT in expectancy, goal setting theories and TPB have
influenced the selection of its individual-level antecedents as publications examined the role 1305
of performance and outcomes expectations (Massenberg et al., 2017); goal intentions (Smith
et al., 2008); training instrumentality (Chiaburu and Lindsay, 2008); perceived behavioural
control (Cheng et al., 2015) and normative and control beliefs (Gegenfurtner et al., 2020) on
MTT. Trainee career and organizational commitment remained the least studied
antecedents. Arefin and Islam (2019) reported a non-significant relation between trainee
career commitment and MTT and Lee et al. (2014) used trainee organizational commitment
as a control variable.
3.4.2 Training-related antecedents. Training-related antecedents of MTT were the focus
of the minimum number of publications (n = 7). While four studies examined the direct
influences of these antecedents on MTT, the remaining three noted their indirect influences
on training transfer mediated through MTT. The impact of transfer design (Grohmann et al.,
2014), trainer performance (Seiberling and Kauffeld, 2017) and identical elements (van der
Locht et al., 2013) on training transfer were studied operationalizing MTT as a mediator.
Learning and transfer design were the most frequently examined antecedents appearing in
two publications each.
Among other antecedents studied, Sahoo and Mishra (2019) examined and established
the direct positive impact of training reputation and training need analysis (TNA) on MTT.
The indirect impact of identical elements (van der Locht et al., 2013) and trainer performance
(Seiberling and Kauffeld, 2017) on training transfer mediated by MTT too are noteworthy
additions to the extant repertoire of training related antecedents in Gegenfurthmer et al.’s
(2009a) model. Identical elements retain specific importance in the context of soft skills
training as they involve generating training situations vastly similar or identical to the
trainee’s work scenario (Saks and Belcourt, 2006). As the application of soft skills are often
imprecise and contingent upon the context of use, trainers need to invest time into building
identical elements in training to increase trainee MTT and subsequent transfer (van der
Locht et al., 2013).
3.4.3 Organizational level antecedents. In total, 13 out of 22 publications in our sample
studied the influence of various organizations’ related antecedents of MTT. SS was the most
frequently studied social support variable influencing MTT (n = 12). It manifested in
various forms and one of our sampled publications -Govaerts et al. (2018) established nine
such forms of SS. Basing on this study, Table 4 provides details of the type of SS examined
in sampled publications at different time periods in the training experience along with their
hypothesized relationship with MTT. Of the 12 publications examining SS, the majority (n =
10) provided empirical support to its importance in inducing MTT. Remaining two studies
(Massenberg et al., 2017; Nijman et al., 2006) reported insignificant direct relationships
between SS and MTT. Peer support (PS) was another prominent social support variable as
identified in seven of the sampled publications. Yaghi and Bates (2020) reported a stronger
impact of PS vis-a-vis SS on MTT and transfer in university contexts. Notable two
publications (Kastenmüller et al., 2012; Nijman et al., 2006) provided empirical credence to
the positive influence of climate on MTT. Opportunities to use the training gained were also
identified as a relevant post-training organizational antecedent of MTT (Arefin and Islam,
MRR Hypothesized
45,10 relationship with
Publication Type of supervisory support MTT

Pre-training During training Post-training

Al-Eisa et al. (2009) Favourable Coaching and feedback Direct, positive.
attitude Indirect positive
1306 Involvement mediated through
and motivation to learn
accountability
Arefin and Islam (2019) Favourable Coaching and feedback Direct positive
attitude
Chiaburu et al. (2010) Coaching and feedback Direct positive
Role modelling and
facilitation
Lee et al. (2014) Coaching and feedback Direct positive.
Indirect positive
moderated by pre-
training
performance
Liebermann and Involvement Coaching and feedback Direct positive
Hoffmann (2008) and
accountability
Massenberg et al. (2015) Coaching and feedback Direct positive
Massenberg et al. (2017) Coaching and feedback Direct positive
Seiberling and Kauffeld Involvement Coaching and feedback Indirect effect on
(2017) and training transfer
accountability with MTT as a
mediator
Yaghi and Bates (2020) Role modelling and Indirect effect on
facilitation training transfer
with MTT as a
mediator
El-Said et al. (2020) Favourable Coaching and feedback Supervisory
attitude support as a
Table 4. moderator between
Types of supervisory MTT and training
support studied in transfer
sampled publications Nijman et al. (2006) Coaching and feedback Direct and positive

2019; Massenberg et al., 2017). Such opportunities are represented in the most frequently
focused upon SS in the post-training environment i.e. coaching and feedback (Table 4).
Organizational learning support was the least researched antecedent featured in a single
publication (Lee et al., 2014). This study concluded that organizational learning support
influenced a trainee’s MTT when moderated by pre-training performance. Low performers
were motivated to transfer training better when they perceived organizational support to
personal learning (Lee et al., 2014).
3.4.4 Mediators/moderators. Only a single publication by Lee et al. (2014) explored pre-
training performance as a moderator for inducing MTT. Studies on mediators of MTT
provided a better scope (Table 3). Trainee MTL was featured as an important mediating
variable in two publications (Al-Eisa et al., 2009; Rowold, 2007). Al-Eisa et al.’s (2009) study
reported a partial mediation by MTL on the impact of both SE and SS on trainee transfer
intentions. A similar effect of MTL was noted by Rowold (2007) in explaining the influence
of two personality traits (i.e. introversion and instability) on transfer motivation. Other Soft skills
noteworthy mediators were transfer climate (Nijman et al., 2006); perceived openness of training
climate (Kastenmüller et al., 2012) and training cognition (Chiaburu et al., 2010).
Table 3 also presents outcome measures in sampled publications. While MTT itself has
been an outcome in 15 publications, a total of 7 publications measured MTT as a mediator.
Training transfer was the dominant outcome measure of all those publications

4. Discussion and recommendations for future research

1307
The resultant findings help us propose three major directions for future research.

4.1 Balancing research methodologies

While quantitative methods have helped in the generalization of empirical findings with
caution in sampled publications, qualitative methods are welcome due to “personalization”
of the transfer experience in training whereby individuals retain agency of choices made to
discard or apply the training at work (Blume et al., 2019). Blume et al. (2019) expect
personalization to be more in the case of open skills (for example, soft skills) where there are
several ways to enact and use the skills at work. For example, Yelon et al. (2014) in their
qualitative study stated that trainees within two to three years of the training had
broadened the use of knowledge gained beyond direct application on the job. Hence, these
findings can help further examinations into decisions made by trainees to apply a certain
knowledge gained while discarding others. Similarly, Choi and Roulston (2015) in
qualitative interviews of discovered that the professional identities of trainees and prior
positive or negative perceptions towards training influenced both MTL and MTT.
Qualitative methods could yield rich insights into the MTT-transfer relationship and most
importantly bridge the gap between trainees and the researcher.

4.2 Refining the measurement of motivation to transfer training

Sampled publications in our SLR used majorly LTSI-II (Holton et al., 2000) and Noe and
Schmitt’s (1986) scales to measure MTT. While popular, these scales do not capture the
multidimensionality associated typically with a motivational construct such as transfer
motivation. Gegenfurtner et al.’s (2009b) study are one of its kind measuring two forms of
MTT i.e. controlled and autonomous. Both forms of motivation were extrinsic in nature and
while controlled MTT was regulated by external sanctions such as rewards, autonomous
MTT had an internal locus of control where the transfer was self-driven governed by an
internal value system. It is worthwhile to consider using Gegenfurtner et al.’s (2009b) scales
to measure both forms of transfer motivation in the context of soft skills to understand
differences (if any) in their antecedents and overall effect on training transfer.
Sampled publications also measured MTT through self-reports. Self-reports raise
validity questions as they are prone to social desirability bias and memory distortions
(Chiaburu et al., 2010). These biases can be critical in the case of soft skills that adhere to
more subjective performance norms (Botke et al., 2018). Moreover, the complexity of MTT is
better understood by multilevel research at the individual and team levels. Given the
impressive advancements in multilevel modelling, the direct and indirect influences on MTT
as well as the MTT-transfer link can be examined at multiple levels in a single model.
Finally, our findings indicate that still, most sampled publications (i.e. 22) measured MTT at
a single instance in time while only 11 of them used dynamic models or longitudinal
research designs. Given the importance of dynamic models, we encourage more instances of
longitudinal research on MTT to gauge the salience of its varied antecedents at different
points of time in soft skills training.
MRR 4.3 Expanding research on antecedents of motivation to transfer training
45,10 Our findings also help us in proposing new directions for research to expand the network of
MTT related antecedents in the context of soft skills training.
4.3.1 Individual level. We propose four interesting outlets for future research focusing on
these antecedents. Firstly, potential studies can examine media-didactical SE (or a person’s
self-belief in implementing digital media in training to aid learning) in the backdrop of
1308 increased digital training initiatives in organizations. Media didactical SE and its influence
on training outcomes have found little focus in adult training (Bonnes et al., 2020). Secondly,
relevant research has leaned towards cognitive components in trainees (such as SE) rather
than their emotions (Blume et al., 2019). A single sampled publication (Vandergoot et al.,
2019) examined the influence of emotional intelligence (EI) on transfer behaviour in
managerial leadership programmes. Research on leadership effectiveness and interpersonal
expertise attest to the importance of EI (Vandergoot et al., 2019). An examination of EI on
trainee MTT in soft skills training can, therefore, offer insightful findings. Thirdly, the
study of personality traits was limited to three sampled publications. Rowold’s (2007)
publication in our sample is particularly interesting as it presents incisive findings on the
congruency of Big Five personality traits with MTT. Hence, future research can look at the
influence of varied personality traits such as locus of control, narcissism and core self-
evaluation on trainee MTT. Finally, trainee career and organizational commitment were
among the least examined antecedent. Hence, future research might investigate this
antecedent as Hurrell (2016) in an in-depth qualitative analysis pointed out that lowered
levels of organization commitment led to a withdrawal of soft skills in trainees.
4.3.2 Training level. As antecedents in this category were unfortunately among the least
researched, we propose five potential areas of research.
Firstly, framing of training programmes through the provision of a realistic preview and
establishing their status (i.e. voluntary/mandatory) is an important pre-training antecedent
to ensure positive trainee attitudes (Gegenfurtner et al., 2009a). An overly positive preview
can be highly detrimental given the ambiguities and lack of prescription for use of soft
skills. Researchers have also been divided in their findings of the influence of the status of a
training programme on training outcomes such as MTT. Earlier classic studies by Baldwin
et al. (1991) stated that mandated training represented its importance to trainees while recent
studies (Curado et al., 2015) reinforced voluntary trainee participation for better training
outcomes. Further research efforts may focus more on understanding these influences in a
backdrop of soft skills training. Secondly, an assiduous examination of training needs
tremendously benefits soft skills training as higher degrees of subjectivity associated with
these skills pose difficulties for deciding on training content and design. (Laker and Powell,
2011). In the absence of a well-documented TNA, trainers might overwhelm the trainee with
content and impede actual learning (Laker and Powell, 2011). A single sampled publication
(Sahoo and Mishra, 2019) studied the direct influence of TNA on MTT. Hence, more such
research efforts are required to systematically this causal linkage. Thirdly, identical
elements represent valuable predictors of training transfer (van der Locht et al., 2013).
Originally introduced as a theory by Woodworth and Thorndike (1901), it implied that
training transfer was influenced by the degree to which stimuli and responses in training
were identical to those at the trainee’s work. As its examination was confined to a single
sampled publication, future research might focus more on uncovering its prediction in the
specific context of soft skills. Fourthly, research requires an address into the unique features
offered by social media, mobile technologies and technology-aided training on learning and
MTT (Bell et al., 2017). Finally, in sampled publications an examination of relapse
prevention interventions during training was nil. As soft skills training remains beset by
reduced levels of trainee MTT and the transfer problem, potential research efforts on relapse Soft skills
prevention stratagems (like examining the influence of both proximal and distal training training
goals) assume top priority (Botke et al., 2018).
4.3.3 Organizational level. To strengthen potential research efforts herein, we propose
five research directions.
While publications identified the criticality of SS as a social support variable in
influencing MTT, they are yet to address its multidimensionality. Coaching and feedback
were the most frequently studied post-training SS (Table 4). None of the publications studied 1309
the impact of during training SS (such as participation of supervisors in training/training
design) on MTT or transfer. Hence, future research efforts need to target the gamut of
supervisory behaviours as described by Govaerts et al. (2018). Secondly, HRD research is
inconclusive about the relative importance of SS and PS on MTT and provides contradictory
evidence (Yaghi and Bates, 2020). While our sampled publications attest to the importance
of both varieties of support for transfer motivation, potential research may wish to address
the contradictions in extant research. Thirdly, organizations are also turning to external
coaching to improve upon the transfer problem in training. Spencer (2011) in an insightful
qualitative phenomenological study noted that coaching not only improved the chances of
transfer but also contributed to better design of training programmes. As none of the sample
publications explored the potential of external coaching on MTT and transfer of soft skills,
it is an organizational antecedent worthy of examination. Fourthly, our findings point to the
lack of studies examining the influence of rewards (both extrinsic and intrinsic) on trainee
MTT. Research in the recent past identified lack of rewards as one of the most prevalent
obstructions to MTT and training transfer (Ahmed et al., 2015). Finally, future research may
also address a thoroughly under-researched organizational antecedent-organizational
learning support. Our findings reported its influence on MTT in a single publication by Lee
et al. (2014).
While sampled publications investigated a range of mediators, research on moderators
remained sparse. Potential research can examine new boundary variables/moderators such
as national culture in the relationship between MTT and its antecedents/outcomes. Cultural
factors influence the content, the pedagogical methods, trainers are chosen and trainee
characteristics as learning can also be culture-specific (Brion, 2020).

5. Implications for theory and practice

In the absence of any SLR on the topic, our work helps in explaining the MTT-transfer
relationship, the mediating role of MTT in the transfer of soft skills, predictors of MTT
along boundary conditions. We hope that through this review, future researchers can
identify what is known and unknown on MTT in soft skills training. Our proposed
directives can help researchers design more robust research designs and discover relevant
and timely predictors of MTT.
For practitioners and HRD professionals, this review also offers important insights.
Firstly, by identifying numerous antecedents (training-related and organizational), our
review helps in pointing out best practices suited for augmenting trainee MTT. Adoption of
best practices can also provide a fillip to individual-level antecedents of MTT that are
primarily internal to trainees. For example, achievement of proximal goals post-training
might help build SE in trainees, which, in turn, would increase the possibilities of MTT and
transfer (Botke et al., 2018). Secondly, training-related antecedents might help HRD
professionals/trainers design better training programmes with inbuilt interventions to
sustain the learning of soft skills. Finally, supervisors are the most critical players in a
trainee’s post-training environment as they influence the reward/recognition mechanism for
MRR trainees successfully transferring training to the job. As our findings discuss the continuum
45,10 of SS in sampled publications, organizations might ideate on developing stratagems to
inculcate contextually relevant forms of this support to provide optimal training
experiences.

6. Conclusion
1310 Guided by specific research questions, the paper attempted to gain a structured and updated
view of the state of research existing on MTT in soft skills training. The SLR noted the
increase of publications focusing on MTT during the time of 1986–2020. Published research
was conducted in varied geographical contexts further reinforcing the importance of Noe’s
(1986) conceptualization of MTT in HRD research. Given the multidimensional nature of
MTT, it has been operationalized as an antecedent and mediator of training transfer.
Maximum publications in the SLR operationalized MTT as an outcome of training and LTSI
(V1-V4) was the most frequently used scale to measure MTT. Bulk publications used
quantitative methodologies and measured MTT at a single instance in time. The SLR
discovered important antecedents to MTT in the soft skills domain and exposed lesser
researched predictors. SE and trainee MTL were frequently studied individual-level
antecedents while learning and transfer design emerged as popular training-related
antecedents of MTT. At the organizational level, studies focused on the importance of SS in
promoting MTT. Results herein helped us in proposing new outlets to strengthen future
research efforts in understanding the “what” and “how” of motivating employees to transfer
soft skills.
The review was limited by our search strings, the databases chosen and papers
published in English. To maintain a quality threshold the SLR included only peer-reviewed
articles, thus excluding conference proceedings, book chapters and practitioner-oriented
excepts. While the SLR significantly enhances the understanding of MTT in soft skills
training, the inclusion of a greater variety of research may benefit further reviews.

Notes
1. Kantrowitz (2005) developed 10 clusters of soft skills, namely, communication, leadership, self-
management, decision-making/problem-solving skills, management skills, organization skills,
interpersonal skills, political skills, analysis/creativity skills and selling skills.
2. The forward search was conducted within the database from which the original article was
obtained.

References
Ahmed, U., Abdul, M., A.H., Mohd Zin, M.L., Phulpoto, W. and Umrani, W.A. (2015), “Role and impact
of reward and accountability on training transfer”, Business and Economics Journal, Vol. 7 No. 1,
pp. 1-6.
Ajzen, I. (1991), “The theory of planned behavior”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 179-211.
Al-Eisa, A.S., Furayyan, M.A. and Alhemoud, A.M. (2009), “An empirical examination of the effects of
self-efficacy, supervisor support and motivation to learn on transfer intention”, Management
Decision, Vol. 47 No. 8, pp. 1221-1244.
Arefin, M.S. and Islam, N. (2019), “A study on the motivation to transfer training in the banking
industry of Bangladesh”, South Asian Journal of Human Resources Management, Vol. 6 No. 1,
pp. 45-72.
Axtell, C. and Maitlis, S. (1997), “Predicting immediate and longer-term transfer of training”, Personnel Soft skills
Review, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 201-213.
training
Baldwin, T.T., Magjuka, R.J. and Loher, B.T. (1991), “The perils of participation: effects of choice of
training on trainee motivation and learning”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 51-65.
Bates, R., Holton, I.I.I., E.F. and Hatala, J.P. (2012), “A revised learning transfer system inventory:
factorial replication and validation”, Human Resource Development International, Vol. 15 No. 5,
pp. 549-569.
Bates, R., Kauffeld, S. and Holton, E.F. III (2007), “Examining the factor structure and predictive ability
1311
of the German version of the learning transfer system inventory”, Journal of European Industrial
Training, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 195-211.
Bell, B.S., Tannenbaum, S.I., Ford, J.K., Noe, R.A. and Kraiger, K. (2017), “100 years of training and
development research: what we know and where we should go”, Journal of Applied Psychology,
Vol. 102 No. 3, pp. 305-323.
Blume, B.D., Ford, J.K., Surface, E.A. and Olenick, J. (2019), “A dynamic model of training transfer”,
Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 270-283.
Bonnes, C., Leiser, C., Schmidt-Hertha, B., Rott, K.J. and Hochholdinger, S. (2020), “The relationship
between trainers’ media-didactical competence and media-didactical self-efficacy, attitudes and
use of digital media in training”, International Journal of Training and Development, Vol. 24
No. 1, pp. 74-88.
Botke, J.A., Jansen, P.G.W., Khapova, S.N. and Tims, M. (2018), “Work factors influencing the transfer
stages of soft skills training: a literature review”, Educational Research Review, Vol. 24 No. April,
pp. 130-147.
Brion, C. (2020), “The role of culture in the transfer of training”, International Journal of Training and
Development, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 384-393.
Cheng, E.W., Sanders, K. and Hampson, I. (2015), “An intention-based model of transfer of training”,
Management Research Review, Vol. 38 No. 8, pp. 908-928.
Chiaburu, D.S. and Lindsay, D.R. (2008), “Can do or will do? The importance of self-efficacy and
instrumentality for training transfer”, Human Resource Development International, Vol. 11 No. 2,
pp. 199-206.
Chiaburu, D.S., Van Dam, K. and Hutchins, H.M. (2010), “Social support in the workplace and training
transfer: a longitudinal analysis”, International Journal of Selection and Assessment, Vol. 18
No. 2, pp. 187-200.
Choi, M. and Roulston, K. (2015), “Learning transfer in practice: a qualitative study of medical
professionals’ perspectives”, Human Resource Development Quarterly, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 249-273,
doi: 10.1002/hrdq.21209.
Clark, C.S., Dobbins, G.H. and Ladd, R.T. (1993), “Exploratory field study of training motivation:
influence of involvement, credibility, and transfer climate”, Group and Organization
Management, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 292-307.
Cronbach, L.J. and Meehl, P.E. (1955), “Construct validity in psychological tests”, Psychological Bulletin,
Vol. 52 No. 4, pp. 281-302.
Culpin, V., Eichenberg, T., Hayward, I. and Abraham, P. (2014), “Learning, intention to transfer and
transfer in executive education”, International Journal of Training and Development, Vol. 18
No. 2, pp. 132-147.
Curado, C., Lopes Henriques, P. and Ribeiro, S. (2015), “Voluntary or mandatory enrollment in raining
and the motivation to transfer training”, International Journal of Training and Development,
Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 98-109.
Devos, C., Dumay, X., Bonami, M., Bates, R. and Holton, E.I.I. (2007), “The learning transfer system
inventory (LTSI) translated into French: internal structure and predictive validity”, International
Journal of Training and Development, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 181-199.
MRR El-Said, O.A., Al Hajri, B. and Smith, M. (2020), “An empirical examination of the antecedents of
training transfer in hotels: the moderating role of supervisor support”, International Journal of
45,10 Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 32 No. 11, pp. 3391-3417.
Franke, F. and Felfe, J. (2012), “Transfer of leadership skills”, Journal of Personnel Psychology, Vol. 11
No. 3, pp. 138-147, doi: 10.1027/1866-5888/a000066.
Gegenfurtner, A., Knogler, M. and Schwab, S. (2020), “Transfer interest: measuring interest in training
content and interest in training transfer”, Human Resource Development International, Vol. 23
1312 No. 2, pp. 146-167.
Gegenfurtner, A., Veermans, K., Festner, D. and Gruber, H. (2009a), “Motivation to transfer training: an
integrative literature review”, Human Resource Development Review, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 403-423.
Gegenfurtner, A., Festner, D., Gallenberger, W., Lehtinen, E. and Gruber, H. (2009b), “Predicting
autonomous and controlled motivation to transfer training”, International Journal of Training
and Development, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 124-138.
Govaerts, N., Kyndt, E. and Dochy, F. (2018), “The influence of specific supervisor support types on
transfer of training: examining the mediating effect of training retention”, Vocations and
Learning, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 265-288.
Grohmann, A., Beller, J. and Kauffeld, S. (2014), “Exploring the critical role of motivation to transfer in
the training transfer process”, International Journal of Training and Development, Vol. 18 No. 2,
pp. 84-103.
Harzing, A. and Alakangas, S. (2016), “Google scholar, scopus and web of science: a longitudinal and
cross-disciplinary comparison”, Scientometrics, Vol. 106 No. 2, pp. 787-804.
Holton, E.F. III, (1996), “The flawed four-level evaluation model”, Human Resource Development
Quarterly, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 5-21.
Holton, E.F.I.I.I., Bates, R.A. and Ruona, W.E. (2000), “Development of a generalized learning transfer
system inventory”, Human Resource Development Quarterly, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 333-360.
Hurrell, S.A. (2016), “Rethinking the soft skills deficit blame game: employers, skills withdrawal and
the reporting of soft skills gaps”, Human Relations, Vol. 69 No. 3, pp. 605-628.
Hutchins, H.M., Nimon, K., Bates, R. and Holton, E. (2013), “Can the LTSI predict transfer performance?
Testing intent to transfer as a proximal transfer of training outcome”, International Journal of
Selection and Assessment, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 251-263.
Kantrowitz, T.M. (2005), “Development and construct validation of a measure of soft skills
performance”, Doctoral dissertation, Georgia Institute of Technology.
Kastenmüller, A., Frey, D., Kerschreiter, R., Tattersall, A.J., Traut-Mattausch, E. and Fischer, P. (2012),
“Perceived openness of climate during training and transfer motivation: Testing two short and
simple interventions”, Journal of Vocational Education and Training, Vol. 64 No. 2, pp. 211-225.
Kauffeld, S., Bates, R., Holton, I.I.I., E.F. and Müller, A.C. (2008), “Das deutsche Lerntransfer-System-
Inventar (GLTSI): psychometrische überprüfungder deutschsprachigen version”, Zeitschrift Für
Personalpsychologie, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 50-69.
Kim, J., Bates, R.A. and Song, J.H. (2019), “Validation of the learning transfer system inventory (LTSI) in
the Korean corporate context”, Human Resource Development International, Vol. 22 No. 3,
pp. 217-234.
Kontoghiorghes, C. (2004), “Reconceptualizing the learning transfer conceptual framework: empirical
validation of a new systemic model”, International Journal of Training and Development, Vol. 8
No. 3, pp. 210-221.
Laker, D.R. and Powell, J.L. (2011), “The differences between hard and soft skills and their relative
impact on training transfer”, Human Resource Development Quarterly, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 111-122.
Lau, P.Y.Y. and McLean, G. (2013), “Factors influencing perceived learning transfer of an outdoor
management development programme in Malaysia”, Human Resource Development
International, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 186-204.
Lee, C., Lee, H., Lee, J. and Park, J. (2014), “A multiple group analysis of the training transfer model: Soft skills
exploring the differences between high and low performers in a Korean insurance company”,
The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 25 No. 20, pp. 2837-2857.
training
Liebermann, S. and Hoffmann, S. (2008), “The impact of practical relevance on training transfer:
evidence from a service quality training program for German bank clerks”, International Journal
of Training and Development, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 74-86.
Machin, M.A. and Forgarty, G.J. (1997), “The effects of self-efficacy, motivation to transfer, and
situational constraints on transfer intentions and transfer of training”, Performance 1313
Improvement Quarterly, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 98-115.
Massenberg, A.C., Schulte, E.M. and Kauffeld, S. (2017), “Never too early: learning transfer system
factors affecting motivation to transfer before and after training programs”, Human Resource
Development Quarterly, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 55-85.
Massenberg, A.C., Spurk, D. and Kauffeld, S. (2015), “Social support at the workplace, motivation to
transfer and training transfer: a multilevel indirect effects model”, International Journal of
Training and Development, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 161-178.
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J. and Altman, D.G. (2009), “Preferred reporting items for systematic
reviews and Meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement”, PLoS Medicine, Vol. 6 No. 7, doi: 10.1001/
jama.2015.3656.
Nijman, D.J.M., Nijhof, W.J., Wognum, A.A.M., (Ida). and Veldkamp, B.P. (2006), “Exploring differential
effects of supervisor support on transfer of training”, Journal of European Industrial Training,
Vol. 30 No. 7, pp. 529-549.
Noe, R.A. (1986), “Trainees’ attributes and attitudes: neglected influences on training effectiveness”,
The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 736-749.
Noe, R.A. and Schmitt, N. (1986), “The influence of trainee attitudes on training effectiveness: test of a
model”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 497-523.
Rowold, J. (2007), “The impact of personality on training-related aspects of motivation: test of a
longitudinal model”, Human Resource Development Quarterly, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 9-31.
Ruona, W.E.A., Leimbach, M., F. Holton Iii, E. and Bates, R. (2002), “The relationship between learner
utility reactions and predicted learning transfer among trainees”, International Journal of
Training and Development, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 218-228.
Sahoo, M. and Mishra, S. (2019), “Effects of trainee characteristics, training attitudes and training need
analysis on motivation to transfer training”, Management Research Review, Vol. 42 No. 2,
pp. 215-238.
Saks, A.M. and Belcourt, M. (2006), “An investigation of training activities and transfer of training in
organizations”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 45 No. 4, pp. 629-648.
Seiberling, C. and Kauffeld, S. (2017), “Volition to transfer: mastering obstacles in training transfer”,
Personnel Review, Vol. 46 No. 4, pp. 809-823.
Smith, R., Jayasuriya, R., Caputi, P. and Hammer, D. (2008), “Exploring the role of goal theory in
understanding training motivation”, International Journal of Training and Development, Vol. 12
No. 1, pp. 54-72.
Spencer, L. (2011), “Coaching and training transfer: a phenomenological inquiry into combined training-
coaching programmes”, International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, Vol. 5
No. special issue, pp. 1-18.
Tranfield, D., Denyer, D. and Smart, P. (2003), “Towards a methodology for developing evidence-
informed management knowledge by means of systematic review”, British Journal of
Management, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 207-222.
van der Locht, M., van Dam, K. and Chiaburu, D.S. (2013), “Getting the most of management training:
the role of identical elements for training transfer”, Personnel Review, Vol. 42 No. 4, pp. 422-439.
MRR Vandergoot, S., Sarris, A. and Kirby, N. (2019), “Factors that influence the transfer generalization and
maintenance of managerial-leadership skills: a retrospective study”, Performance Improvement
45,10 Quarterly, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 237-263.
Vandergoot, S., Sarris, A., Kirby, N. and Harries, J. (2020), “Individual and organizational factors that
influence transfer generalization and maintenance of managerial-leadership programs”,
Performance Improvement Quarterly, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 207-246.
Woodworth, R.S. and Thorndike, E.L. (1901), “The influence of improvement in one mental function
1314 upon the efficiency of other functions”, Psychological Review, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 247-261.
Yaghi, A. and Bates, R. (2020), “The role of supervisor and peer support in training transfer in
institutions of higher education”, International Journal of Training and Development, Vol. 24
No. 2, pp. 89-104.
Yamnill, S. and McLean, G.N. (2005), “Factors affecting transfer of training in Thailand”, Human
Resource Development Quarterly, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 323-344.
Yelon, S., Ford, J.K. and Bhatia, S. (2014), “How trainees transfer what they have learned: toward a
taxonomy of use”, Performance Improvement Quarterly, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 27-52.

Further reading
Jackson, C.B., Brabson, L.A., Quetsch, L.B. and Herschell, A.D. (2019), “Training transfer: a systematic
review of the impact of inner setting factors”, Advances in Health Sciences Education, Vol. 24
No. 1, pp. 167-183.
 Appendix
Time of
Duration of Sample Rating measuring Models of Study
Citation Type of skills training size source MTT Antecedents Outcome MTT context
Individual Training Org

Al-Eisa et al. Negotiation 3–5 days 287 Self End of SE þ MTL – SS TI Mechanistic Saudi
(2009) session1; Arabia
end of the
training
Arefin and Leadership Unclear 275 Self End of SE þ career – SS þ OU MTT Mechanistic Bangladesh
Islam (2019) training commitment þ
strategic
linkage þ
accountability
Axtell and Interpersonal Unclear 75 Self-þ T1 = end SE þ MTT Course SS þ TT Dynamic Unclear
Maitlis (1997) manager of training; relevance autonomy
T2 = I
month PT;
T3 = 1-
year PT
Cheng et al. Management Unclear 132 Self 1–2 years Attitude þ – Subjective TT Mechanistic Hong Kong
(2015) skills PT perceived norms
behavioural
control
Chiaburu and Professional Unclear 254 Self I year PT SE þ training – – TT Mechanistic USA
Lindsay development instrumentality
(2008)
Chiaburu Service Unclear T1 = Self T1 = in SE þ learning Training POS þ SS TT Dynamic USA
et al. (2010) improvement 372, T2 training; goal cognition
= 223 T2 = 1- orientations þ
and T3 month PT; MTT
= 111 T3 = 2–
3 months
PT
(continued)

template
Data extraction
1315

Table A1.
training
Soft skills
 MRR
45,10

1316

Table A1.
Time of
Duration of Sample Rating measuring Models of Study
Citation Type of skills training size source MTT Antecedents Outcome MTT context
Individual Training Org

Culpin et al. Leadership 4 days 338 Self T1= Day 1 – Learning – TI and TT Dynamic Germany
(2014) of training;
T2 = Day
4; T3= I
month PT
Devos (2007) Stress 1–3 days T1 = Self T1= I Perceived Transfer SS þ PS þ OU TT Dynamic Belgium
management 328 and week PT; content validity Design þ supervisor
and others T2 = T2 = 1– SE þ learner sanctions þ
106 3 months readiness þ performance
PT expectations þ coaching
content validity
þ MTT
Gegenfurtner Leadership Unclear 203 self unclear SE þ normative – – TI Mechanistic Germany
et al. (2020) and others þ control
beliefs þ
expected utility
Govaerts Leadership, 1 day- 111 self T1= I SE þ MTT þ Training SS TT Dynamic Belgium
et al. (2018) assertiveness 9 weeks week BT; MTL retention
and time T2 =
management 2 weeks
PT; T3 =
3 months
PT
Grohmann Interpersonal Unclear S1 = Self 7– Perceived Transfer – TT Mechanistic Germany
et al. (2014) 252 and 24 months content validity design
S2 = PT
391
Hutchins Leadership Unclear 235 Self PT SE þ learner Transfer SS þ PS þ OU TI Mechanistic USA
et al. (2013) readiness þ design
(continued)
 Time of
Duration of Sample Rating measuring Models of Study
Citation Type of skills training size source MTT Antecedents Outcome MTT context
Individual Training Org

expectations þ
content validity
Kastenmüller Communication/ 1 day 147 Self BT and – – Openness of MTT Dynamic Germany
et al. (2012) leadership PT climate
Lee et al. Leadership Unclear 400 Self PT SE þ MTL þ – Organization Mechanistic South
(2014) organizational learning Korea
commitment support þ SS
þ PS
Liebermann Service Quality Unclear 265 Self 12 weeks Trainee Learning SS TT Mechanistic Germany
and PT reaction þ
Hoffmann practical
(2008) relevance
Massenberg Reflectivity I day 194 Self and 6 weeks – SS þ PS TT Mechanistic Germany
et al. (2015) workers team PT
and 34
teams
Massenberg Management 4 days 353 Self 2 weeks Learner Transfer SS þ PS þ OU TT Dynamic Germany
et al. (2017) and BT and readiness þ design þ supervisor
interpersonal PT positive and sanctions þ
negative performance
outcomes þ coaching
personal
capacity þ
content validity
þ performance
and outcome
expectations þ
openness to
change þ SE þ
MTT
Rowold Service 1 day 94 Self T1 = General – – MTT Dynamic Unclear
(2007) management 4 weeks attitudes þ
BT; T2 = MTL þ Big 5
1-week traits
(continued)
1317

Table A1.
training
Soft skills
 MRR
45,10

1318

Table A1.
Time of
Duration of Sample Rating measuring Models of Study
Citation Type of skills training size source MTT Antecedents Outcome MTT context
Individual Training Org

BT; T3 =
end of
training
Sahoo and Self- 2 days 389 Self I year PT Individual Training – MTT Mechanistic India
Mishra (2019) management trainee attitudes þ
characteristics TNA
Seiberling Leadership 2 days 287 Self T1 = after Trainer SS TT Dynamic Germany
and Kauffeld training; performance
(2017) T2 =
8 weeks
PT
Smith et al. Self- Half a day- 90 Self Phase 1 = Expectancy þ – – TI Dynamic Unclear
(2008) development 2 days BT; Phase valence þ SE þ
and others 2 = PT goal
orientations þ
goal intentions
(phase 1) þ
trainee
reactions (phase
2)
Van der locht Leadership/ 2–10 days 595 Self PT Expected utility Identical – TT Mechanistic The
et al. (2013) communication þ MTL elements Netherlands
Vandergoot Leadership Programme 36 Self BT; SE þ MTL þ TNA þ OU þ TT Dynamic Unclear
et al. (2020) A = 1 day- 3 months MTT þ Voluntary organizational
6 months and transfer participation support þ
Programme 4 months implementation þ multiple social and goal
B = 5 days PT intentions delivery setting cues þ
methods þ POS
feedbackþ
face-to-face
meeting þ
(continued)
 Time of
Duration of Sample Rating measuring Models of Study
Citation Type of skills training size source MTT Antecedents Outcome MTT context
Individual Training Org

multiple
sessions þ
hard and soft
skills content
Yaghi and Leadership Unclear 263 Self I year PT – – SS þ PS TT Mechanistic Jordan,
Bates (2020) UAE,
Egypt and
Morocco
Yamnill and Leadership and Unclear 1,029 Self 2 months Learner Transfer SS þ PSþ OU TT Mechanistic Thailand
McLean others PT readiness þ design þ supervisor
(2005) positive and sanctions þ
negative performance
outcomes þ coaching
personal
capacity þ
content validity
þ performance
and outcome
expectations þ
openness to
change þ SE þ
MTT
Forward snowballing
(papers identified)
El-Said et al. Service quality Unclear 302 Self I year PT MTT þ MTL – OS TT Mechanistic Sultanate of
(2020) Oman
3 days 191 Self PT – Mechanistic Malaysia
(continued)
1319

Table A1.
training
Soft skills
 MRR
45,10

1320

Table A1.
Time of
Duration of Sample Rating measuring Models of Study
Citation Type of skills training size source MTT Antecedents Outcome MTT context
Individual Training Org

Lau and Leadership and MTL þ MTT þ SS þ PS þ Transferable

McLean team SE þ content performance skills
(2013) development validity coaching þ
continuous
learning
culture
Kim et al. Leadership Unclear 753 Self 3 months Learner Transfer SS þ PS þ OU TT Mechanistic South
(2019) PT readiness þ design þ supervisor Korea
positive and sanctions þ
negative performance
outcomes þ coaching
personal
capacity þ
content validity
þ performance
and outcome
expectations þ
openness to
change þ SE þ
MTT
Vandergoot Leadership Unclear 147 Self PT Org – OU þ OS þ TT Mechanistic Unclear
et al. (2019) commitment þ social and goal
MTT þ MTL þ setting cues þ
SE þ intrinsic support and
motivation þ barriers
EI
Backward snowballing (papers identified)
Holton et al. Leadership Unclear 1,616 Self PT Learner Transfer SS þ PS þ OU TT Mechanistic Unclear
(2000) among many readiness þ design þ supervisor
others positive and sanctions þ
negative performance
outcomes þ coaching
personal
capacity þ
(continued)
 Time of
Duration of Sample Rating measuring Models of Study
Citation Type of skills training size source MTT Antecedents Outcome MTT context
Individual Training Org

content validity
þ performance
and outcome
expectations þ
openness to
change þ SE þ
MTT
Bates et al. Communication, Unclear 579 Self 3 months Learner Transfer SS þ PS þ OU TT Mechanistic Germany
(2007) teamwork, PT readiness þ design þ supervisor
leadership and Positive and sanctions þ
others negative performance
outcomes þ coaching
Personal
capacity þ
content validity
þ performance
and outcome
expectations þ
openness to
change þ SE þ
MTT
Nijman et al. Social/ Unclear 179 Trainees 3 months- Trainee Transfer Transfer TT Mechanistic Unclear
(2006) managerial þ 2 years PT characteristics design climate þ SS
skills managers þ MTT þ
intervention
fulfilment
Ruona et al. Leadership Unclear 1,616 Self PT Utility reactions – – TT Mechanistic Unclear
(2002) among others

Note: BT = before training; PT = post-training; TT = training transfer; TI = training intent; OU = opportunity to use
1321

Table A1.
training
Soft skills
MRR About the authors
45,10 Dr Sumita Mishra is an Associate Professor, OB/HRM, KIIT School of Management. With 14 years of
academic experience, she has published several papers in refereed journals, such as Asian Case
Research Journal, Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, Management Review, International Journal
of Indian Culture and Business Management, Journal of Human Values and Management Research
Review. Her interests are in organizational culture, group culture, organization design and social
psychology. Sumita Mishra is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: sumita.mishra@
1322 ksom.ac.in
Ms Malabika Sahoo is a Faculty Associate in OB/HRM at the KIIT School of Management. She has
six years of academic experience. She also is a soft skills trainer and has conducted nearly 2,500
training programmes covering about 90 organizations across the country such as NTPC, NALCO,
Aditya Birla, Coca-cola, TSIL, TRL, Aditya Aluminium, JSPL, Vodafone and L and T. She has
published in reputed journals like Management Research Review, Management and Labour studies.

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com