Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports recommending a redesigned orientation program as a cost-effective solution?

Question

A) Orientation needs to be done only once in an employee's tenure at the firm.
B) As orientation is delivered only to individual workers, it is more costly than training the whole workforce.
C) Peers can help deliver this form of training, avoiding the need for a professional orientation manager at each location.
D) Orientation does not cost the company as much money as do recruiting and screening new applicants.
E) In the past five years, most employees who left Mini-Glee did so within the first six months after being hired.

Answer 1

Answer: E
Explanation: E) The function of an orientation program is to offer a strong first impression and provide skills and information needed to get employees to bond with the company. So Choice E is correct: a heavy attrition rate within the first year after hiring suggests that orientation has been inadequate or ineffective. Choice D underlines a related point, that effective orientation saves the company money but does not in itself justify the move to redesign the existing program. Choice B suggests that costs will increase, since a training program that deals with workers one at a time will be less efficient than one delivered all at once. The other choices do not directly address the issue. While orientation may occur only once (Choice A), that does not mean that training shouldn't take place when the worker changes status or jobs within the firm. And while peers can help (Choice C), there remains the need for the orientation to be supervised to ensure its uniformity and completeness.