Labor Economics - Research Paper Example

No matter how effective the human resource managers are in the selection and recruitment process, it appears that they still have to invest in employee training to optimize employee productivity. The essence of this article is to carry out an analysis of the two sources of employee knowledge and to provide a fact-based reaction on the same. Employee training refers to the provision of extra education to employees after the recruitment process as a way of enhancing their productivity by equipping them with knowledge that is relevant to the organizational activities.

On the other hand, on-school training refers to the kind of knowledge that potential employees gain in school depending on the subjects and the topics they pursue in part of their career specialization. Most economists have failed to reach a concession on which of the two is more effective or which would be more beneficial to the organization in terms of profit turnover. Dostie (2008) is one of the researchers who have engaged in an empirical research to investigate the effectiveness of the two sources of employee knowledge.

The findings of her research indicate that there is a particular advantage in obtaining employees with proper school training rather than investing on on-job-training. It is indisputable to appreciate that each of the two types of training has its pros and cons and as it seems both are important to the firm. In supporting school training, Dostie (2008) points out that the subjects provided in school are optimized and are best suited for diversified for job opportunities. Consequently, employees will have a good background that will enhance their productivity while in the employment sector.

In addition, employees who have adequate training will require little adapting to various work environments much quicker and hence reach the expected production rate almost after they are assimilated in the company. However, the major weakness in school trained employees is that they have little diversified knowledge while companies have specific operational activities that may be unique from one organization to the other. In short, although school training outputs an effective labor force, they may have shortfalls in terms of specialization and work orientation.

On the other hand, the on-job-training is efficient in orienting new employees to the specific tasks that they are supposed to undertake in an organization. The strength of worker training lies in its ability to model the employees to fit their job description more efficiently and quickly whose cumulative effect is to improve their productivity. However, Dostie (2008) points out that employee training consume a lot of company capital that cannot be recovered by the impact of the process on employee productivity.

From this point of view, on-job-training may have a negative impact on the turnover value of the company, which is contrary to the company’s aim of effecting this strategy (Goux & Maurin 12). In essence, employee productivity can only be measured from their net contribution to the revenue turnover of the firm at the end of the fiscal year rather than their gross production rate. The main goal of any organization is to achieve maximum profits by optimizing employee productivity and minimizing the expenditure in terms of either salary or other priced business operations.

The graph below