The relationship between diversity training, organizational commitment, and career satisfaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate the association between employees' perceptions of diversity training (DT) existence and effectiveness with organizational commitment (OC), and career satisfaction (CS). Design/methodology/approach The analyses in this paper utilize survey data collected between 2006 and 2007 from over 11,000 managers, professionals, and executives working in nine large organizations in corporate Canada. The survey included questions about employees' perceptions of their work experiences and outcomes and their organizations' diversity practices. Comparisons of means as well as multivariate regression analyses were undertaken. Findings The paper shows that employees who perceived DT to be effective were significantly more committed to their organizations and more satisfied with their careers than employees who perceived DT to be ineffective or non‐existent. Research limitations/implications The paper examines the linkages between DT, OS, and CS based on survey responses from managers, professionals, and executives. Findings may therefore not be applicable to entry level employees. Practical implications DT, and in particular when viewed by employees to be effective, increases employees' OC and CS, which are associated with loyalty, lower turnover and higher employee engagement. Originality/value The paper found that employees' OC and CS are highest when they perceived DT to be effective. Factors associated with OC and CS are explored based on employees' perceptions of the availability and effectiveness of DT.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".