Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vjeb20
Download by: [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] Date: 11 January 2016, At: 20:44
Journal of Education for Business
ISSN: 0883-2323 (Print) 1940-3356 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjeb20
The Effects of Part-Time MBA Programs on
Students: The Relationships Between Students and
Their Employers
Melvin Prince, David J. Burns & Chris Manolis
To cite this article: Melvin Prince, David J. Burns & Chris Manolis (2014) The Effects of Part-Time MBA Programs on Students: The Relationships Between Students and Their Employers, Journal of Education for Business, 89:6, 300-309, DOI: 10.1080/08832323.2014.900470 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2014.900470
Published online: 03 Sep 2014.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 132
View related articles
View Crossmark data
The Effects of Part-Time MBA Programs on
Students: The Relationships Between Students
and Their Employers
Melvin Prince
Southern Connecticut State University, New Haven, Connecticut, USA
David J. Burns and Chris Manolis
Xavier University, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
The authors explore how the relationship between part-time master of business administration (MBA) students and their employers changes as students proceed through their MBA program by examining the degree to which students are integrated into their employer organizations. Significant positive relationships observed between students’ progress through their MBA program and the integration factors of coworker support and future prospects with their employers suggest that an MBA education can have a positive effect on employee–employer integration levels. Consequently, in addition to increasing business knowledge and skills, an MBA degree appears to assist with integrating employees and employers.
Keywords: coworker support, graduate education, MBA education, part-time MBA students, training
Increasing attention is being placed on the effectiveness of master of business administration (MBA) programs in pro-viding value to not only students, but to the organizations that employ them. Increasing costs of MBA programs and growing questions about their effectiveness have become primary impetuses for this concern. Most research examin-ing the effectiveness of MBA programs has examined how the programs can be adapted to provide more value to stu-dents and their present/future employers (Muff, 2012). This line of research has identified numerous ways by which the structure and/or content of MBA programs can be adapted to possibly improve effectiveness and/or efficiency. Addi-tional research has examined the preparation of students entering MBA programs to identify students who are most likely to benefit from an MBA education (Sharbatoghlie, Mosleh, & Emami, 2011). Consequently, the admission requirements at several graduate business schools have changed.
An issue that has received little research attention, how-ever, involves how the relationship between MBA students and their employers changes as students proceed through their MBA programs. It is logical to expect that the rela-tionship between student-employees and their employers will change as a result of student involvement in an MBA program, but this important area has received little research attention.
An area that may be of particular interest to both employers and educators is the degree to which an MBA education may affect students’ integration into their employers’ organizations. The degree to which employees are integrated into employers’ organizations can provide advantages to both employers and employees (e.g., Saeed, Abu Mansor, Siddique, & Anis-ul-Haq, 2012; Saks, Ugger-slev, & Fassina, 2007). If the integration is perceived by part-time MBA students with their employers’ organiza-tions to increase while progressing through an MBA pro-gram, evidence can be provided which may indicate an additional positive outcome of an MBA education (increased integration) which is often overlooked.
The focus of this study is to begin to examine the level of integration perceived by part-time MBA students with
Correspondence should be addressed to David J. Burns, Xavier Univer-sity, Department of Marketing, 307 Smith Hall, 1002 Francis Xavier Way, Cincinnati, OH 45207-1214, USA. E-mail: [email protected]
JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR BUSINESS, 89: 300–309, 2014 CopyrightÓTaylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 0883-2323 print / 1940-3356 online DOI: 10.1080/08832323.2014.900470
their employers’ organizations as they progress through their educational programs. First, research on the value of an MBA education is reviewed. Second, research on the transfer of knowledge, skills, and abilities in training pro-grams generally is examined. Third, the effects of an MBA education on student–employer relationships are explored. Fourth, hypotheses are developed and tested. Last, conclu-sions are drawn.
PAST RESEARCH
MBA Programs
Increasingly, the value of an MBA education is being ques-tioned (Bruce, 2010). Zhao, Truell, Alexander, and Hill (2006), for instance, recount the rising negativity seen in articles examining the value of the MBA degree appearing in many business publications. Pfeffer and Fong (2002) stated, “there is little evidence that mastery of the knowl-edge acquired in business schools enhances people’s careers, or that even attaining the MBA credential itself has much effect on graduate’s salaries or career attainment” (p. 80). Similarly, Bennis and O’Toole (2005) stated, “MBA programs face intense criticism for failing to impart useful skills, failing to prepare leaders, failing to instill norms of ethical behavior, and even failing to lead graduates to good corporate jobs” (p. 96). In response, some business schools have focused on reviews of their programs and changing their curriculum as ways to increase the value of their MBA programs.
This assessment of the value of MBA programs may be overly harsh since evidence has been reported which seems to support the value of an MBA education. In a longitudinal study, Inderrieden, Holtom, and Bies (2006), for instance, observed that the possession of an MBA degree has a posi-tive effect on early career success. Zhao et al. (2006) observed positive short- and long-term effects of an MBA degree and Arcidiacono, Cooley, and Hussey (2008) observed similar effects. Murray (2007) observed that employers report that nearly three-quarters of recently hired MBA graduates met their expectations and nearly a quarter exceeded their expectations, while only four percent report that recently hired MBA graduates did not meet expecta-tions. Likewise, Bruce (2010) observed that recent MBA graduates report high levels of satisfaction with their MBA education. Evidence exists, therefore, suggesting that an MBA degree may, in fact, provide value.
The conflicting assessments of the value of an MBA education suggest that the value of this degree may be affected by factors other than the degree itself. For instance, the MBA degree is offered by a significant number of dif-ferent types of institutions. Arcidiacono et al. (2008) observed that students need to attend a top-ranked school to benefit financially from an MBA education. Holtom and
Inderrieden (2007), however, observed a higher return on investment for schools not ranked in the top 10 as opposed to those in the top 10. Hence, existing research does not agree on whether the rankings of MBA programs are related to the value of the education they provide.
The quantity of student work experience prior to begin-ning an MBA program has also been forwarded as a factor affecting the value of the resulting degree (Sharbatoghlie et al., 2011). Some graduate business schools prefer that entering students have work experience. DeRue (2009) observed, “work experience has become an integral part of the business school curriculum with a focus on students learning as much from their peers as from professors. These drivers pushed the average years of work experience requirement at top business schools from three to five years” (p. 1). Empirical research has not supported this con-tention, however. Dreher and Ryan (2000), for instance, observed that previous work experience is related to perfor-mance in foundational courses, but not to the remainder of MBA courses. Sharbatoghlie at al. observed no difference between students without prior work experience and those with prior work experience on Kolb’s Learning Skills Pro-file. Hence, existing research does not agree on whether work experience affects the value gained from pursuing an MBA degree.
Most MBA students, however, are not full-time students, but are pursuing their degree on a part-time basis while maintaining full-time employment. In these instances, an additional dynamic exists which may affect the value of an MBA education—the relationship between MBA students and their respective employers. To provide insight into this area, past research on training is examined.
Corporate Training
Although an MBA education consists of much more than mere training, past research on training may provide insight into the effectiveness of an MBA education. Similar to an MBA education, training has the potential to increase an individual’s knowledge, skills, and abilities (Combs, Liu, Hall, & Ketchen, 2006). Key to effective training is the suc-cessful transfer of knowledge, skills, and abilities. Effective transfer involves the acquisition of new knowledge and skills and the productive use of the acquired knowledge and skills outside of the training setting (de Corte, 2003).
Past research suggests that the personal state of employ-ees can affect directly the degree of knowledge transfer (Tai, 2006). One such state affecting transfer is the degree to which students are motivated. A positive relationship between transfer and motivation has been observed (Blume, Ford, Baldwin, & Huang, 2010) and some argue that moti-vation is critical for transfer to occur (e.g., Gegenfurtner, Festner, Gallenberger, Lehtinen, & Gruber, 2009). Other research suggests that a firm’s management can affect employee motivation levels during training endeavors (Tai,
2006) affecting the degree of transfer that occurs. Colquitt, LePine, and Noe (2000) suggest that even if employees pos-sess the ability to succeed in a training endeavor, they may fail to benefit due to a lack of motivation.
Effective Transfer in Part-Time MBA Programs
All else equal, involvement in part-time MBA programs should result in the transfer of knowledge, skills, and abili-ties to students. Given that motivation affects transfer in training, it seems logical that student motivation will also affect transfer in the context of an MBA program. It appears likely, therefore, that the more highly motivated MBA stu-dents are to learn while getting an MBA, the greater the transfer of knowledge will be and, hence, the greater the value of an MBA. Since employers can affect motivation levels of employees enrolled in MBA programs, employers may ultimately affect the value of an employee’s MBA education.
The effect that an employer has on an employee’s moti-vation to pursue an MBA degree likely changes as the employee progresses through the program. When beginning an MBA program, for instance, motivation on behalf of an employer would seem to be particularly important for a stu-dent since returning to school often represents a significant change of life. To successfully make this change, students need to know how the education will benefit them and their position in the company. Later in the MBA program, how-ever, the role of employers in motivating students will likely decline as students will be better able to understand the personal value of the MBA program without outside (i.e., employer) motivation. In other words, as a student progress through an MBA program, the source of motiva-tion will likely move from externally based sources (e.g., an individual’s employer) to more internally based sources (e.g., an individual’s self).
MBA Education and Relationship With Employer
The education received from an MBA program should not substitute for continuing employer training. Instead, an MBA education should optimally facilitate and build on corporate training—an MBA education should work together with the training an individual receives on the job. To the extent that this occurs, part-time MBA students who are further along in their MBA education should see more value from their employer training compared with part-time MBA students who are not as far along in an MBA program.
More than just training, an MBA education should increase students’ connection to their employers. Through the knowledge gained through MBA studies and the appli-cation of that knowledge to their jobs, MBA students should become integrated into their employing firm. In this context, integration involves the extent to which employees
are socialized into their place of employment, where orga-nization socialization is regarded as the “process by which an individual acquires the social knowledge and skills nec-essary to assume an organizational role” (Van Maanen & Schein, 1979, p. 211). Organizational socialization, there-fore, involves the degree to which an employee accepts or has adapted to the characteristics or nature of an organiza-tion (Taormina, 2004) or, in other words, the degree to which an employee has integrated into their employers’ organization. Because it involves an ongoing process, level of integration does not only apply to new employees, but it applies to employees at any time during their employment in an organization (Taormina, 2004).
The degree to which employees are integrated into their companies can have a number of positive effects on their performance and well-being, including increasing job perfor-mance, job satisfaction, affective commitment, and reducing turnover intentions (e.g., Saeed et al., 2012; Saks et al., 2007). Taormina (1994) assessed the extent of the integra-tion process based on employees’ percepintegra-tions of and their company’s efforts by examining four integration factors:
1) the training one received from the organization, 2) one’s understanding (or perceptions) of the organizational con-text, 3) the role played by significant others (i.e., coworkers, who are organizational insiders, and 4) one’s prospects for the future (e.g., for advancement) regarding the organiza-tion into which one is being socialized. (p. 134)
The first three factors relate to three types of capital developed through continuing social exchanges suggested in relational cohesion theory: human capital based on knowledge, skills, and experiences (training); cultural capi-tal based on shared understanding of organizational norms, history, and culture (understanding); and social capital based on relationships (coworker support) (Yoon & Lawler, 2006). According to relational cohesion theory, an out-growth of the development of the three types of capital is affective and behavioral commitment to the organization (Allen & Shanock, 2013), which relates to the fourth inte-gration factor (future prospects). It appears logical that the increased integration of part-time MBA students will involve each of the four integration factors. Next, each inte-gration factor will be briefly discussed.
Training. Training has long been viewed as essential
to the development of employees (Prestan, 1993). When employers train their workers, for instance, they benefit from increased productivity and reduced turnover (Gomer-sall & Myer, 1996). Joo, Lim, and Park (2011) note that training effectiveness is directly affected by the degree to which employees believe that their employer and their cow-orkers are supportive. The effectiveness of an employer’s training activities can logically be enhanced by an employ-ee’s MBA education because employees ostensibly gain
302 M. PRINCE ET AL.
additional knowledge and background information that will enhance training. An MBA education, therefore, should enhance an employee’s integration with his/her employer by increasing the perceived effectiveness of training.
Understanding. Understanding involves the level of
insight employees possess regarding their employer (e.g., the firm’s goals and operations) and their role within it (Taormina, 1994). Porter and Lawler (1968), for instance, noted that employees’ understanding of their roles within their employers’ organizations positively affects their work performance. To gain this understanding, employees must interact with their work environment (Reichers, 1987) and actively seek information (Morrison, 1993), qualities which should be enhanced through an MBA education. An MBA education, therefore, should enhance employees’ integra-tion with their employers by increasing their understanding of their roles with the organizations.
Coworker support. Coworkers play a significant role
in integrating employees into an organization (Reichers, 1987). If employees perceive that their coworkers are help-ful, increased integration into the business is possible (Taormina, 1994). Coworker support acts to minimize neg-ative outcomes such as stress (George, Reed, Ballard, Colin, & Fielding, 1993) and foster positive outcomes (Seers, McGee, Serey, & Graen, 1983). Because relation-ship-building skills are a focus of most MBA programs, an MBA education should enhance an employee’s integration with his or her employer by facilitating productive interac-tion with coworkers and providing improved tools and abil-ities to foster collaboration.
Prospects for the future. Employees whose goals and
desires are not met at their place of employment are more likely to engage in behaviors that are counterproductive and are more likely to resign (Taormina, 1994). Individuals who perceive positive prospects for the future with their employer, however, are more likely to be committed to the organization, more likely to remain with the organization, and less likely to exhibit excessive absenteeism (Caldwell, Chatman, & O’Reilly, 1990). An MBA education can posi-tively affect employee perceptions of the future by provid-ing additional skills and abilities and facilitating promotions and professional advancement. An MBA edu-cation, therefore, should enhance employees’ integration with employers by improving prospects for the future.
RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE INTEGRATION FACTORS
It is logical to expect that the integration factors are posi-tively related with each other, as was observed by Taormina (1994). How these relationships are affected by an MBA
education, however, has received no known research atten-tion. Given the importance of employee integration to an organization’s performance, these relationships would seem to be an important concern. Each of the integration factors involves specific areas, or types of capital, as under-stood by Yoon and Lawler (2006). Consequently, it is unlikely that the relationships between the integration fac-tors will necessarily be consistent as part-time MBA stu-dents progress through their MBA programs.
Given the dearth of past research, how the relationships between the integration factors change as part-time MBA students progress through their MBA programs is less clear. Given that each of the integration factors involve the devel-opment of different types of capital, it seems reasonable to expect that increasing development of these different forms of capital will result in divergence between the integration factors. In other words, it is logical to expect that the rela-tionships between the integration factors will become weaker as students progress through their MBA programs.
Hypotheses
It appears that an MBA education should positively affect the integration of part-time MBA students into their places of employment. The following hypotheses, therefore, appear to be appropriate.
Hypothesis 1 (H1): Employed students enrolled in part-time MBA programs experience increased integration with employers. Hence, positive relationships exist between progress through a part-time MBA program and the degree of integration MBA students perceive with their employers. Consequently, positive relationships exist between students’ progress through their part-time MBA programs and;
H1a: perceptions of the training they receive at their place of employment;
H1b: level of understanding of their place of employment;
H1c: the support they receive from their coworkers; and
H1d: future prospects at their place of employment.
As discussed previously, Taormina (1994) observed that each of the integration factors is related to each other. The following hypothesis, therefore, seems appropriate:
H2: Each of the integration factors (training, understanding, coworker support, and future prospects) is related.
How these relationships between the integration factors are affected by an MBA education, however, has not received previous research attention. The integration fac-tors differ in form, with some being more content based and task oriented (i.e. training), content-based and organi-zation oriented (i.e., knowledge), social oriented (i.e.,
coworker support), and future oriented (i.e., prospects for the future), as discussed previously. Consequently, it is unlikely that the relationships between the integration fac-tors will necessarily be consistent as part-time MBA stu-dents progress through their MBA programs. Indeed, it is logical to expect that the differences between the individual integration factors will become more pronounced, resulting in the relationships between the integration factors becom-ing weaker. Hence, the followbecom-ing hypothesis appears appropriate:
H3: The relationships between the integration factors of individuals pursuing a part-time MBA degree will change as they progress through their MBA programs. Specifically, the strengths of the relationships between the integration factors will decrease as part-time MBA students progress through their MBA programs. Conse-quently, the relationships between the integration fac-tors (training, understanding, coworker support, and future prospects), then, are stronger for students who are relatively early in their MBA education as opposed to those who are further along in their graduate education.
METHOD
Sample
Study participants were recruited from classes in part-time MBA programs at two universities. One was a public uni-versity located on the east coast and the other from a private university located in the Midwest. Participants were requested to complete self-administered questionnaires in their classrooms. They were informed that their responses would remain anonymous. The resulting sample was com-prised of 310 students. Since the sample was contacted within classroom settings, virtually no response was noted.
Instrument
The integration factors (company training, organization knowledge, coworker support, and future prospects) were measured based on selected items from the Organization Socialization Inventory (Taormina, 1994). The convergent and predictive validity of the four factors were supported by Taormina (1997, 2004). Taormina and Law (2000) and Taormina and Bauer (2000) also provide evidence of pre-dictive ability. Items are listed in Table 1. Respondents replied on a 7-point Likert-type scale with responses rang-ing from 1 (complete agreement) and 7 (complete disagreement).
Each of the scales appears to possess acceptable reliabil-ities according to Cronbach’s alpha: trainingD.908, under-standing D .875, coworker support D .875, and future
prospectsD.867. The mean response for each of the inte-gration factors is displayed in Table 2. For each of the fac-tors, respondents’ assessments were relatively positive, and interestingly, respondents expressed the most positive per-ceptions for coworker support.
Progress through an MBA program was measured by the number of semester credit hours completed.
RESULTS
Table 3 displays the relationships between the each of the integration factors and the number of credit hours study participants had completed in their MBA programs. Signifi-cant (at the .05 level) relationships were observed for two
TABLE 1
Scale to Assess Perceptions Toward Integration Factors
Training
1. This organization has provided excellent job training for me. 2. The training in this company has enabled me to do my job very well. 3. This company offers thorough training to improve employee job
skills.
4. Instructions given by my supervisor have been valuable in helping me do better work.
5. The type of job training given by this organization is highly effective. Understanding
1. I know very well how to get things done in this organization. 2. I have a full understanding of my duties in this organization. 3. The goals of this organization have been made very explicit. 4. I have a good knowledge of the way this organization operates. 5. This organization’s objectives are understood by almost everyone
who works here. Coworker support
1. Other workers have helped me on the job in various ways. 2. My coworkers are usually willing to offer their assistance or advice. 3. Most of my coworkers have accepted me as a member of this
company.
4. My coworkers have done a great deal to help me adjust to this organization.
5. My relationships with other workers in this company are very good. Future prospects
1. There are many chances for a good career with this organization. 2. I am happy with the rewards offered by this organization. 3. Opportunities for advancement in this organization are available to
almost everyone.
4. I can readily anticipate my prospects for promotion in this company. 5. I expect that this organization will continue to employ me for many
more years.
TABLE 2
Mean Responses on Integration Factors
Integration factors M SD
of the four factors: coworker support and prospects for the future. No significant relationships were observed for train-ing and understandtrain-ing. Support, therefore, was observed forH1CandH1Dand not forH1AandH1B.
Table 4 displays the relationships between the integra-tion factors. Each of the integraintegra-tion factors was observed to be significantly (at the .05 level) related. Support, therefore was observed forH2, supporting previous research.
To testH3, the sample was split into two virtually identi-cal sized groups based on individuals’ progress through their MBA program. The first group was comprised of stu-dents who had completed 12 or fewer credit hours in the MBA program and the other group was comprised of those who had completed more than 12 credit hours. In addition to providing virtually equal-sized groups, 12 credit hours typically represents the maximum number of hours that part-time students can reasonably complete during their ini-tial year in an MBA program. Table 5 displays the relation-ships between each of the integration factors for the two groups. Fisher’sZwas used to examine the significance of the differences in the relationships between integration fac-tors across students who are earlier in their program (12 hr of credit completed) versus later (>12 hr of credit com-pleted) in an MBA program. Significant (at the .05 level) differences were observed for four of the six relationships. In each instance, the relationships involving students who were earlier in their MBA programs were stronger than those involving students who were later in their MBA pro-grams, consistent with the hypothesis. Specifically, support for the hypothesis was observed for relationships between the training factor and understanding and coworker support and between the understanding factor and coworker support
and future prospects. Support for the hypothesis was not observed between the future prospects factor and training and coworker support. Partial support, therefore, was observed forH3.
In an effort to provide added insight into the findings, a series of post hoc analyses were conducted. Specifically,
t-tests were conducted across responses of the two groups to determine whether they had different perceptions toward the integration factors. Results (shown in Table 6) indicate no significant (p < .05) differences across perceptions of the two groups for any of the integration factors (although the relationship involving support of coworkers was close to significance). Thus, the differences observed in the rela-tionships between the integration factors are not due to dif-ferences in how the two groups perceive the factors.
DISCUSSION
The MBA degree has been under increased scrutiny as of late. Although there is growing attention being placed on understanding the effectiveness of an MBA education, rela-tively little research has examined whether integration with an individual’s employer is affected as he or she proceeds through education. From an employer’s point of view, a reason to have employees obtain an MBA education is to increase their contribution to the organization. Research indicates that employees who are more integrated make stronger contributions to their employers and are less likely to pursue opportunities elsewhere. The focus of the present study was to examine how an MBA education affects an individual’s integration with his or her employer.
TABLE 3
Relationships Between Integration Factors and Progress Through a Part-Time MBA Program
Training Understanding Coworker support Future prospects
Credit hours in a part-time MBA program .078 ¡.062 .147* .149*
.200 .314 .017 .015
Note: Correlational results and significance levels are reported.
* p<.05.
TABLE 4
Relationships Between Integration Factors
Training Understanding Coworker support Future prospects
Training —
Understanding .615* —
.000
Coworker support .461* .622* —
.000 .000
Future prospects .720* .572* .461* —
.000 .000 .000
Note: Correlational results and significance levels are reported. *p<.05.
The initial relationships examined in the study were those between students’ progress through an MBA program (measured by number of credit hours completed) and degree of integration (the degree to which they perceived they are integrated into their employing organization via the integration factors). The significant positive relation-ships observed between students’ progress through their MBA program and the integration factors of coworker sup-port and future prospects suggest that a graduate business education can have a positive effect on employees’ tion with their employers’ organizations. Increased integra-tion levels have been associated with many beneficial outcomes for organizations, including increased organiza-tional commitment and increased productivity, as men-tioned previously. An MBA degree, therefore, appears to have beneficial outcomes for employers. Consequently, an MBA degree appears to assist with integrating employees and employers.
The two integration factors for which significant rela-tionships were observed seem to be particularly important for businesses. The importance of coworker support is without question. Korte and Lin (2013) summarize the importance of coworker support in the integration process, recounting a growing realization of the broad number of ways that coworker support and the development of social capital can directly benefit a business organization. Coworker support, for instance, can minimize negative aspects of an employment situation while accentuating the positive. The findings suggest that pursuing an MBA
education may aid employees become more integrated into their employing organizations by building coworker support.
Future research into the relationship between progress through an MBA program and coworker support may examine the processes at play behind this relationship. For instance, does pursuing an MBA education require students to become more involved with individuals in other areas of their companies to complete projects assigned as a part of their MBA classes? Does the educational process help stu-dents to realize the importance of interacting with cow-orkers? Future research may provide business leaders with insight into specific ways that they may be able to build upon the benefits of an MBA program in integrating employees with coworkers. Further research may also pro-vide MBA educators with insight into ways that building relationships of their students with their coworkers can be fostered and further enhanced.
Employees’ perceptions of future prospects with their employer are also an important area of concern for busi-nesses. Employees who perceive better future prospects will benefit their employer in multiple ways. First, the per-ception of future prospects with their employers will likely engender stronger commitment from employees as they likely view increased rewards for their hard work in the form of future promotions and employment stability (Allen & Shanock, 2013). Furthermore, perceiving future pros-pects with their present employers, employees will tend to be less likely to leave for other employment opportunities,
TABLE 6
Differences in Integration Factor Perceptions Across Students Early Versus Late in an MBA Program
Integration factors Mean12 credit hr Mean>12 credit hr t df Level of significance
Training 3.24 3.38 ¡0.854 266 .394
Understanding 2.84 2.72 1.076 266 .283
Coworker support 2.15 2.38 ¡1.924 264 .055
Future prospects 3.01 3.24 ¡1.357 264 .176
TABLE 5
Relationships Between Integration Factors Based on Progress Through a Part-Time MBA Program
Training Understanding Coworker support Future prospects
Integration factors 12 hr >12 hr Fisher’sZ 12 hr >12 hr Fisher’sZ 12 hr >12 hr Fisher’sZhr 12 hr >12 Fisher’sZ
Training
Understanding .769* .444* 4.350*
.000 .000
Coworker support .557* .352* 2.090* .713* .568* 1.993*
.000 .000 .000 .000
Future prospects .763* .662* 1.659 .671* .457* 2.562* .498* .405* 1.020
.000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
Note: Correlational results and significance levels are reported. *p<.05.
306 M. PRINCE ET AL.
lowering personnel turnover (Allen & Shanock, 2013), allowing employers to retain institutional knowledge and avoid costly searches for new employees.
Future research into the relationship between progress through an MBA program and perceptions of future pros-pects may examine how an MBA education may help stu-dents to perceive increased future employment prospects. Does an MBA education, for instance, help employees to become more aware of opportunities with their present employer? Does an MBA education open doors to new opportunities with one’s present employer? This information would likely be valuable for employers and educators alike.
Interestingly, significant relationships were not observed for the other two integration factors, training and under-standing. That is, progress through an MBA program does not appear to have an effect on employee perceptions regarding the quality of the training they receive or their understanding of their employer. These findings suggest that employers may not expect employees pursuing an MBA education to view training differently or possess a better understanding of the organization as a result of their education. These counterintuitive findings also suggest the need for further research. Specifically, educators may have the ability to affect these relationships through changes in pedagogy and/or assignments and projects to further increase the integration benefits of an MBA education.
Additional insight can be gained when considering the relationships between the integration factors. First, consis-tent with past research, each of the factors appears to be strongly related to each other. When the strength of the relationships between the integration factors for students who are relatively early in their MBA programs are com-pared with those who are further along are considered, how-ever, important differences emerge for four of six relationship possibilities consistent with the hypotheses.
When training is examined, the relationships between training and understanding and between training and coworker support were significantly stronger for employees who were relatively early in their MBA programs compared with those further along in their programs. The findings suggest that employees earlier in an MBA program may look to training to provide an understanding of their employer more so than those later in a program. Further-more, the finding suggests that employees earlier in an MBA program may look more to coworkers as a component of their training compared with those later in a program. The lack of a significant difference in the relationship between training and future prospects suggests that both groups view the effect of training on future prospects with the company similarly.
These findings provide some support suggesting that the integration factors become more individually defined as students continue their education. Specifically, it indicates that the training factor becomes increasingly differentiated from the understanding and coworker support factors as
students progress through their MBA education, suggesting that employers should increasingly view these factors (the integration factor of training and understanding and coworker support) as distinct integration factors, each of which should receive particular attention. Interestingly, the strength of the relationship between training and future prospects was not observed to change as students pro-gressed through their programs. This relationship will be discussed further later.
When understanding is examined, the relationships between understanding and coworker support and between understanding and future prospects were significantly stron-ger for employees who were early in their MBA programs versus those who were further along in their programs. These findings suggest that coworkers may play a greater role in an individual’s understanding of his or her employ-ing organizations among employees who are relatively early versus late in their MBA programs. The findings also suggest that understanding an individual’s employer may play a greater role in perceptions of future prospects among employees who are relatively early versus late in an MBA program. It seems that employees who are further along in an MBA program may rely more on knowledge gained from the MBA to assess their future prospects.
These findings further suggest that the integration factors become more individually defined as students continue their MBA education. Specifically, it indicates that the understanding factor becomes increasingly differentiated from the coworker support and future prospects factors as students progress through their MBA education, suggesting that employers should also increasingly view these integra-tion factors (the integraintegra-tion factor of understanding and coworker support and future prospects) as distinct areas of integration.
Finally, the relationship between coworker support and future prospects was not significantly different for employ-ees who were relatively early versus late in a MBA pro-grams. This finding, along with a lack of a change in the strength of the relationship between training and future prospects as students proceed through an MBA education discussed previously, casts doubt onto whether future pros-pects should be viewed as a separate integration factor or whether it is best viewed as an outgrowth of the integration process. Indeed, relational cohesive theory (discussed ear-lier) only addresses the first three integration factors of Taormina (1994; Yoon & Lawler, 2006). This study pro-vides initial evidence consistent with Yoon and Lawler. Additional research into the appropriateness of future pros-pects as a separate factor seems warranted.
When the results from testingH1 and the results from testingH3are compared, an interesting observation can be made. When testing H1, relationships were observed between progress through an MBA program and the inte-gration factors of coworker support and future prospects and not for training and knowledge. When testing H3,
however, it was the relationships involving the knowledge factor, which were observed to be more likely to grow weaker as students proceed through their MBA programs, whereas it was relationships involving future prospects, which were observed to be more likely to remain unchanged as students proceed through their MBA programs. Addi-tional research is needed to fully understand the basis of these findings. These findings, however, appear to lend addi-tional support for the need for employers and educators to examine the integration factors separately. They further sug-gest that examining only the relationships between the inte-gration factors and individuals’ progress through their MBA programs will provide an incomplete understanding.
In summary, the study findings suggest that an MBA education may increase the integration of part-time MBA students with their employer’s organizations. The study, therefore, suggests an additional important issue for employers to consider as they examine the desirability of encouraging and requiring their employees to pursue MBA study. Not only may employers benefit from the added skills and knowledge that their employees may gain from an MBA education, but they may also gain from the added integration their employees may ultimately possess with their employers’ organizations. Also, although the study findings raise questions whether future prospects represents a separate integration factor, the findings suggest that the integration factors may become increasingly differentiated as students become more integrated into their employers’ organizations as they progress through their MBA educa-tions. This would seem to indicate that employers and edu-cators should focus on each of the integration factors if they wish to more effectively integrate employees into their employers’ organizations, particularly as their employees proceed through their MBA programs.
CONCLUSIONS AND LIMITATIONS
The present study is an initial exploratory study. The pri-mary value of the study is to identify plausible relationships that in turn should be examined in future studies. Overall, the findings suggest that progress through MBA programs may affect the extent to which employees are integrated into their workplaces. Research to further explore this rela-tionship seems to be warranted.
A primary shortcoming of this study concerns causality. Although directional causality is suggested several times throughout the discussion section, causality was not exam-ined in this study. To increase the practical applicability of the current findings, future research should assess causality to offer not only additional insight and understanding, but also to provide businesses and business schools with knowl-edge to guide future course-related decision making.
Additional research is also needed to examine whether differences exist across different MBA programs. For
instance, does attending a full-time MBA program differ compared with attending a part-time program in terms of integration with employers? Furthermore, additional research should explore students with different back-grounds who work in different business settings. Does an MBA education, for instance, uniquely affect students with different backgrounds (i.e., educationally, extent of busi-ness experience, or culturally)? Moreover, do these effects differ for students from different business settings (e.g., industry or position level)?
REFERENCES
Allen, D. G., & Shanock, L. R. (2013). Perceived organizational support and embeddedness as key mechanisms connecting socialization tactics to commitment and turnover among new employees.Journal of Organi-zational Behavior,34, 350–369.
Arcidiacono, P., Cooley, J., & Hussey, A. (2008). The economic returns to an MBA.International Economic Review,49, 873–899.
Bennis, W. G., & O’Toole, J. (2005). How business schools lost their way.
Harvard Business Review,83, 96–104.
Blume, B. D., Ford, J. K., Baldwin, T. T., & Huang, J. L. (2010). Transfer of training: A meta-analytic review.Journal of Management,36, 1065– 1105.
Bruce, G. D. (2010). Exploring the value of MBA degrees: Students’ expe-riences in full-time, part-time, and executive MBA programs.Journal of Education for Business,85, 38–44.
Caldwell, D. F., Chatman, J. A., & O’Reilly, C. A. (1990). Building organi-zational commitment: A multifirm study.Journal of Occupational Psy-chology,63, 245–261.
Colquitt, J. A., LePine, J. A., & Noe, R. A. (2000). Toward an integrative theory of training motivation: A meta-analytic path analysis of 20 years of research.Journal of Applied Psychology,85, 678–707.
Combs, J. G., Liu, Y., Hall, A. T., & Ketchen, D. (2006). How much do high performance work practices matter? A meta-analysis of their effects on organizational performance.Personnel Psychology,59, 501– 528.
De Corte, E. (2003). Transfer as the productive use of acquired knowledge, skills, and motivations.Current Directions in Psychological Science,12, 142–146.
DeRue, D. S. (2009).Quantity or quality? Work experience as a predictor of MBA student success. Retrieved from http://www.gmac.com/market- intelligence-and-research/research-library/validity-and-testing/research-reports-validity-related /quantity-or-quality-work-experience-as-a-predi-ctor-of-mba-success.aspx?fromsearch=1
Dreher, G. F., & Ryan, K. C. (2000). Prior work experience and academic achievement among first-year MBA students.Research in Higher Edu-cation,41, 505–525.
Gegenfurtner, A., Festner, D., Gallenberger, W., Lehtinen, E., & Gruber, H. E. (2009). Predicting autonomous and controlled motivation to trans-fer training.International Journal of Training and Development,13, 124–138.
George, J. M., Reed, T. F., Ballard, K. A., Colin, J., & Fielding, J. (1993). Contact with AIDS patients as a source of work-related distress: Effects of organizational and social support.Academy of Management Journal,
36, 157–171.
Gomersall, E., & Myer, M. S. (1996). Breakthrough in on-the-job training.
Harvard Business Review,44, 62–72.
Holtom, B. C., & Inderrieden, E. J. (2007). Investment advice: Go for the MBA.BizEd,6, 36–40.
Inderrieden, E., Holtom, B., & Bies, R. (2006). Do MBA programs deliver? An early career investigation. In C. Wankel & R. DeFillippi
308 M. PRINCE ET AL.
(Eds.), New visions of graduate management education (pp. 1–9). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
Joo, Y. J., Lim, K. Y., & Park, S. Y. (2011). Investigating the structural relationships among organisational support, learning flow, learners’ sat-isfaction and learning transfer in corporate e-learning.British Journal of Educational Technology,42, 973–984.
Korte, R., & Lin, S. (2013). Getting on board: Organizational socializa-tion and the contribusocializa-tion of social capital. Human Relations, 66, 407–428.
Morrison, E. W. (1993). Newcomer information seeking: Exploring types, modes, sources, and outcomes.Academy of Management Journal,36, 557–589.
Muff, K. (2012). Are business schools doing their job?Journal of Manage-ment DevelopManage-ment,31, 648–662.
Murray, M. (2007).Corporate recruiters survey March 2007 general data report. Retrieved from http://www.gmac.com/NR /rdonlyres /440ADD86-C5 49–402E-997F-DA86941E27A1 /0/CorpRecSurveyGeneralDataReport2007 .pdf
Pfeffer, J., & Fong, C. T. (2002). The end of business schools? Less suc-cess than meets the eye.Academy of Management Learning and Educa-tion,1, 78–95.
Porter, L. W., & Lawler, E. E. (1968).Managerial attitudes and perfor-mance. Homewood, IL: Irwin.
Prestan, D. (1993). Management development structures as symbols of organizational culture.Personnel Review,22, 18–30.
Reichers, A. E. (1987). An interactionist perspective on newcomer sociali-zation rates.Academy of Management Review,12, 278–287.
Saeed, T., Abu Mansor, N. N., Siddique, S., Anis-ul-Haq, M., & Muham-mad Ishaq, H. (2012). Organizational socialization: Individual and orga-nizational consequences.International Journal of Academic Research,
4, 96–101.
Saks, A. M., Uggerslev, K. L., & Fassina, N. E. (2007). Socialization tac-tics and newcomer adjustment: A meta-analytic review and test of a model.Journal of Vocational Behavior,70, 413–446.
Seers, A., McGee, G. W., Serey, T. T., & Graen, G. B. (1983). The interac-tion of job stress and social support: A strong inference investigainterac-tion.
Academy of Management Journal,26, 273–284.
Sharbatoghlie, A., Mosleh, M., & Emami, S. H. (2011). Work experience and learning: A case study of MBA students.Research in Higher Educa-tion Journal,11, 1–12.
Tai, W.-T. (2006). Effects of training framing, general self-efficacy and training motivation on trainees’ training effectiveness. Personnel Review,35, 51–65.
Taormina, R. J. (1994). The organizational socialization inventory. Inter-national Journal of Selection and Assessment,2, 133–145.
Taormina, R. J. (1997). Organizational socialization: A multidomain, con-tinuous process model.International Journal of Selection and Assess-ment,5, 29–47.
Taormina, R. J. (2004). Convergent validation of two measures of organi-zational socialization.International Journal of Human Resource Man-agement,15, 76–94
Taormina, R. J., & Bauer, T. N. (2000). Organizational socialization in two cultures: Results from the United States and Hong Kong.The Interna-tional Journal of OrganizaInterna-tional Analysis,8, 262–289.
Taormina, R. J., & Law, C (2000). Approaches to preventing burnout: The effects of personal stress management and organizational socialization.
Journal of Nursing Management,8, 89–99.
Van Maanen, J., & Schein, E. H. (1979). Towards a theory of organiza-tional socialization. In B. M. Staw (Ed.),Research in organizational behavior(pp. 209–264). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
Yoon, J., & Lawler, E. J. (2005). The relational cohesion model of organi-zational commitment. In O. Kyriakidou & M. F.Ozbilgin (Ed.),€ Rela-tional perspectives in organizaRela-tional studies: A research companion.
Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar.
Zhao, J. J., Truell, A. D., Alexander, M. W., & Hill, I. B. (2006). Less suc-cess than meets the eye? The impact of master of business administra-tion educaadministra-tion on graduates’ careers.Journal of Education for Business,
81, 261–268.
