Objectives In recent decades, continuous training has become a cornerstone of Strategic Human Resource Management (SHRM): not a marginal cost but an investment which, alongside other HR practices, develops knowledge, skills and abilities and enhances firm performance. Training strengthens human capital and organisational capabilities, supports managerial and technological adoption, and increases firms’ innovation absorption, becoming an enabler of innovation itself. Yet evidence remains mixed: meta-analyses and firm-level studies report positive, null or negative effects depending on measurement, research design and context. Covid-19 reshaped what is learned (soft/digital skills), how (hybrid/digital modes), who accesses training (gender and age inclusion) and where returns emerge (process reorganisation). The research questions also investigate how training quality, delivery modes and organisational conditions shape outcomes across different worker groups, with particular attention to gender equality and the extent to which inclusive programmes generate more sustained and equitable performance gains. Methodology The Italian INDACO–Enterprises microdata, merged with AIDA accounts, offer a unique chance to track pre‑ and post‑Covid changes in training and its link with performance. The survey measures training quantity, quality, inclusion and delivery across firm types. HR outcomes from INDACO are linked to economic data, enabling statistical and causal analysis, Covid‑related interactions, mediation tests and heterogeneity checks. Originality We expect training to yield positive but selective effects on firm performance. Quality—defined as needs‑assessment fit, transfer‑oriented design and systematic evaluation—should matter more than spending intensity; inclusive programmes reaching women and senior workers may generate broader and more stable returns; in‑house delivery may work better for specific content, while external training may be more effective for general skills, especially post‑Covid. HR outcomes are expected to partly mediate financial results, with technological intensity, firm size, international openness and regional ecosystems shaping effectiveness. The study integrates SHRM with a temporal lens, clarifying when and where returns emerge and offering actionable insights for public policy and HR practice. Aguinis, H., & Kraiger, K. (2009). Benefits of training and development for individuals and teams, organizations, and society. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 451–474. Becker, B. E., & Huselid, M. A. (2006). Strategic human resources management: where do we go from here?. Journal of Management, 32(6), 898-925. Combs, J., Liu, Y., Hall, A., & Ketchen, D. (2006). How much do highperformance work practices matter? A meta-analysis oftheir effects on organizational performance. Personnel Psychology, 59, 501–528. Garavan, T. N., McCarthy, A., Lai, Y., Clarke, N., Carbery, R., Gubbins, C., ... & Saunders, M. N. (2021). Putting the system back into training and firm performance research: a review and research agenda. Human Resource Management Journal, 31(4), 870- 903. Garavan, T. N., McCarthy, A., Lai, Y., Murphy, K., Sheehan, M., & Carbery, R. (2020). Training and organisational performance: A meta‐analysis of temporal, institutional, and organisational context moderators. Human Resource Management Journal. 31(1), 93–119. Jiang, K., Lepak, D. P., Hu, J., & Baer, J. C. (2012). How does human resource management influence organizational outcomes? A meta-analytical investigation of mediating mechanisms. Academy of Management Journal, 55(6), 1264–1294. Mikołajczyk, K. (2022). Changes in the approach to employee development in organisations as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. European Journal of Training and Development, 46(5-6), 544-562. Van Reenen, J. (2021). Innovation and human capital policy. NBER Working Paper No. 28713. National Bureau of Economic Research. Tharenou, P., Saks, A. M., & Moore, C. (2007). A review of critique of research on training and organizational-level outcomes. Human Resource Management Review, 17, 251–273.
Human Capital in Action: Exploring the Gender Sensitive Link Between Training and Firm Performance in Italy Using the INAPP INDACO Survey
Falavigna G.;Errichiello L.;Ippoliti R.;
2026
Abstract
Objectives In recent decades, continuous training has become a cornerstone of Strategic Human Resource Management (SHRM): not a marginal cost but an investment which, alongside other HR practices, develops knowledge, skills and abilities and enhances firm performance. Training strengthens human capital and organisational capabilities, supports managerial and technological adoption, and increases firms’ innovation absorption, becoming an enabler of innovation itself. Yet evidence remains mixed: meta-analyses and firm-level studies report positive, null or negative effects depending on measurement, research design and context. Covid-19 reshaped what is learned (soft/digital skills), how (hybrid/digital modes), who accesses training (gender and age inclusion) and where returns emerge (process reorganisation). The research questions also investigate how training quality, delivery modes and organisational conditions shape outcomes across different worker groups, with particular attention to gender equality and the extent to which inclusive programmes generate more sustained and equitable performance gains. Methodology The Italian INDACO–Enterprises microdata, merged with AIDA accounts, offer a unique chance to track pre‑ and post‑Covid changes in training and its link with performance. The survey measures training quantity, quality, inclusion and delivery across firm types. HR outcomes from INDACO are linked to economic data, enabling statistical and causal analysis, Covid‑related interactions, mediation tests and heterogeneity checks. Originality We expect training to yield positive but selective effects on firm performance. Quality—defined as needs‑assessment fit, transfer‑oriented design and systematic evaluation—should matter more than spending intensity; inclusive programmes reaching women and senior workers may generate broader and more stable returns; in‑house delivery may work better for specific content, while external training may be more effective for general skills, especially post‑Covid. HR outcomes are expected to partly mediate financial results, with technological intensity, firm size, international openness and regional ecosystems shaping effectiveness. The study integrates SHRM with a temporal lens, clarifying when and where returns emerge and offering actionable insights for public policy and HR practice. Aguinis, H., & Kraiger, K. (2009). Benefits of training and development for individuals and teams, organizations, and society. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 451–474. Becker, B. E., & Huselid, M. A. (2006). Strategic human resources management: where do we go from here?. Journal of Management, 32(6), 898-925. Combs, J., Liu, Y., Hall, A., & Ketchen, D. (2006). How much do highperformance work practices matter? A meta-analysis oftheir effects on organizational performance. Personnel Psychology, 59, 501–528. Garavan, T. N., McCarthy, A., Lai, Y., Clarke, N., Carbery, R., Gubbins, C., ... & Saunders, M. N. (2021). Putting the system back into training and firm performance research: a review and research agenda. Human Resource Management Journal, 31(4), 870- 903. Garavan, T. N., McCarthy, A., Lai, Y., Murphy, K., Sheehan, M., & Carbery, R. (2020). Training and organisational performance: A meta‐analysis of temporal, institutional, and organisational context moderators. Human Resource Management Journal. 31(1), 93–119. Jiang, K., Lepak, D. P., Hu, J., & Baer, J. C. (2012). How does human resource management influence organizational outcomes? A meta-analytical investigation of mediating mechanisms. Academy of Management Journal, 55(6), 1264–1294. Mikołajczyk, K. (2022). Changes in the approach to employee development in organisations as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. European Journal of Training and Development, 46(5-6), 544-562. Van Reenen, J. (2021). Innovation and human capital policy. NBER Working Paper No. 28713. National Bureau of Economic Research. Tharenou, P., Saks, A. M., & Moore, C. (2007). A review of critique of research on training and organizational-level outcomes. Human Resource Management Review, 17, 251–273.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
