Who Benefits From Training? Examining Staff Category As A Moderator Of Human Capital Development In A Ghanaian University

This study investigates whether staff category (teaching versus non-teaching) moderates the association between training perceptions and employee performance outcomes in a Ghanaian public university. Drawing on Human Capital Theory and Social Exchange Theory, the research examines differential returns to institutional training investment across professional categories. A cross-sectional survey design was employed with 198 staff members from the University for Development Studies, Ghana. Chi-square tests of independence examined associations between staff category and trainingrelated perceptions across ten performance and career advancement indicators. Significant staff category variations emerged across six performance dimensions. Non-teaching staff demonstrated significantly stronger associations with perceptions that training improves performance, enhances skills, boosts efficiency, promotes advancement, builds confidence, and supports growth. Notably, no significant differences emerged for training relevance, goal support, job satisfaction, or retention, suggesting shared baseline appreciation but divergent perceived returns. The findings extend Human Capital Theory by demonstrating that training returns are not uniform across professional categories within higher education institutions. Staff category operates as a moderating variable that shapes how employees perceive and benefit from training investments. Universities should implement differentiated training strategies that account for professional category differences. Non-teaching staff appear to derive greater perceived returns from current training approaches, suggesting that teaching staff may require discipline-specific, pedagogically-oriented development programmes. This study provides first empirical evidence of staff category as a moderating factor in training-performance associations within African higher education, challenging assumptions of uniform training effectiveness