the row immediately below is a HEADER [Running Head] and is to appear on each typed assignment pageber at

R side

Human Resources
Management / Canada

Question 1:

Page 1

Assignment Name:

Assignment 2
Chateau Whistler
Hotel

Submitted by:

Renato A. C. Miguel

College Name:

Centennial

Course Name:

Human Resources
Management / Canada

Course Code:

701

Section:

001

Instructors Name:

Rick Atkinson

Date Submitted:

Oct 26, 2016

300914411

Chateau Whistler invests so much into the orientation program because

they know that the employee-guest relationship is fundamental to the success
of the business. For this reason they put a lot of effort to ensure that the new
employees internalize the mission and the philosophy of the company. We can
also mention the well-known benefits of a proper orientation program, it reduces
turnover, errors, grievances, employees anxiety and increases stability in the
organization and consequently improving productivity. The head of the company
and managers know that this orientation is not an expense but a real investment
that guarantees, among other things, the continuous success of Chateau
Whistler.

Questions 2:

Proposal 1
In order to evaluate the effectiveness of these programs I would suggest
a simple and inexpensive pre-test and post-test1 questionnaire where the new
employees would have to answer some questions to assess whether they really
learned the content presented in the program However, this assessment would
be divided in four parts and would be applied at the end of the first four weeks
of work, by doing this we could measure how much the employees learned and
if after some days or weeks they would still be using the knowledge and
information received in the beginning of the employment
1 The pre-test/post-test is not a scientific method, since it does not control
for other influences on the training outcome, but it should suffice as a
practical measurement.
2

Proposal 2:
As a second proposal I would recommend a more scientific and perhaps
more costly approach based on the Four-Level Training Evaluation Model by
Donald Kirkpatrick. The four levels are: 1 Reaction relates to what degree
participants reacts favorably to the learning event. 2 Learning relates to what
degree participants acquired the intended knowledge and attitudes based on
their participation. 3 Behaviour relates to what degree participants apply what
they learned. 4 results relates to what degree targeted outcomes occur, as a
result of the learning event. This method of evaluation is composed of
questionnaires, surveys and patterned interviews behavioral observation
techniques. By analyzing all the four levels, the company can gain a thorough
understanding of how effective your training was, and how you can improve in
the future. But the negative aspect may be that measuring the effectiveness of
training with the model can be time-consuming and use a lot of resources.
Question 3:

After some research on the subject matter I can say that there is no
agreement on one single infallible evaluation system, and this may be a very
controversial subject, nevertheless some authors say that the best way is
qualitative, others prefer quantitative or experimental methods. We have to bear
in mind that the learning process is a continuous process and depending on the
circumstances we can apply a method or another. If I were to recommend an
evaluation I would rely on actual information that could be compared and
measured but I would also analyze and observe the behavior of the participants
3

before and after the learning session. Decisions informed by sound evaluation
are better than those based on habit, ignorance, intuition, prejudice or
guesswork. (Reeves & Hedberg, 2003 p.4)2 The authors also suggest that
people make poor decisions because they lack the proper and pertinent
information. In order to conclude my recommendation I would say that first you
must know and understand the target public, the purpose of the training and
how to assess the outcomes, after that we can choose among the infinite
numbers of tools available for evaluations the best for the current situation.

2 Interactive Learning Systems Evaluation

4

References
Hermann Schwind, H. D. (2013). Canadian Human Resources Management
10th Edition . McGraw-Hill Ryerson.
Thomas C. Reeves, J. G. (2003). Interactive Learning Systems Evaluation.
Englewood Cliffs , New Jersey: Educational Technology Publications
Inc.