This case focuses on three di>erent aspects of training and development: (1) employee
orientation, (2) on-the-job training, and (3) formal training.
II. OBJECTIVES:
1. To provide a catalyst for discussing the goals and objectives of an employee
orientation program.
2. To demonstrate the required interrelationships between training needs, training
methods, and training evaluation.
3. To illustrate the importance of choosing an appropriate training methodology.
4. To provide a basis for examining e>ective on-the-job training techniques.
III. DISCUSSION:
This case depicts a situation in which a training program appears to have failed. To some extent
it also shows what a 6asco some firm make of training.
Students who read HR textbooks sometimes conclude that all firm have systematic training
programs and follow the guidelines presented in these books. While most large companies do follow
most of these guidelines, smaller firm often do not. Students should be reminded that some firm have
li?le human resource expertise of any kind, including training.
Another related point is that some students implicitly believe that all firm should have and use
sophisticated human resource policies, procedures and methods, including state-of-the-art training
programs. The point is that this is not necessary for a small firm’s survival. It would not be cost e>ective
for them to develop these. Indeed, firm can be quite successful without them.
IV. ANSWERS TO CASE QUESTIONS:
1.Evaluate the company’s on-the-job training program. Should it be changed?
This question is designed to facilitate discussion regarding the purposes of on-the-job training,
the basic principles for conducting it e>ectively, strengths and weaknesses of it, and what should and
Joe Gleason, the supervisor, seems to think that OJT is a perfect way to beli?le college students.
2.Should the company install an employee orientation program for new factory workers,
or is one unnecessary?