Case Study Employee Induction Program

Question: Discuss about the Case Studyfor Employee Induction Program. Answer: Introduction The best title for this case study is the Khalids induction program. From this case study, it is evident that Ahmad was a newly hired employee, fresh from school. The new recruit was hired, as a human resource practitioner. He was assigned the task to foresee the institutional orientation program for the other employees. As a new recruit, Ahmed mastered the art of the HR process. After Khalid joined the institution, Ahmed was given the opportunity to take the new recruit through an orientation process. As explained by Welty (2009), orientation begins with the introduction to the general processes and operations of an organization. Ahmed took the first day to introduce Khalid to the staff. The orientation program presented challenges to Ahmed, the HR practitioners because without the mentor, it becomes difficult for any effort to be fruitful. The issue that has emerged in this situation is the inability of the HR practitioner to establish a strong relationship with the new recruits le ading to fallout. As a HR practitioner, it would be prudent to make - Khalid understand the issues and tender his apology. Regarding - Khalids manager, it is up to Khalid to decide whether to implicate his manager or not. However, any effort to implicate Ahmad will only flop because it will make the situation worse than resolve it. As demonstrated by Welty (2009), developing an orientation program would be critical to resolving such impasse. Ahmad holds a serious responsibility in the company. It is important that that Ahmad implement a buddy system because it benefits the organization and the new employee. With a formal buddy system, the new employee will find it easy to adapt to the new working environment (Castaldo 2015). The manager must understand the roles of buddy by making Sam know the expectations leading to employee satisfaction. Without a doubt, new recruits like Khalid experience steep learning curve. Therefore, Ahmad and Jean should consider building a process based on cultural competence (Bauer 2010). Since the buddy will act as the organizations ambassador, the manager needs to selectman employee who will make Khalid feel comfortable. This requires a teamwork and openness culture. Therefore, the hiring manager must identify the buddy who has time to perform the assigned duty. To this effect, it would be prudent for the Jean and Ahmad to reduce Sams assignments that would keep him away from Khalid. Khalids manager is part of the problem because he failed to understand the significance of induction. In fact, it would be difficult for a new staff to understand the operations and running of the organization without guidance. Jean should be implicated because, he has failed to implement to buddy system. Studies have indicated that a buddy scheme ensures a new worker settles into the role and feel supported (Cooper Wight 2014). He could have assigned Khalid a good friend who is ready to be a friendly and a contact. Jean is implicated because he failed to organize an informal meeting and outline the experience and roles of the buddy. He could have further clarified the expectations in establishing a buddy relationship. Bibliography Bauer, T.N. 2010, Onboarding new employees: maximizing success, SHRM Foundations Effective Practice Guidelines Series. [https://www.shrm.org/foundation/ourwork/initiatives/resources-from-past-initiatives/Documents/Onboarding%20New%20Employees.pdf] [Online] accessed 20 April 2017. Castaldo, J. 2015, Great employee engagement starts as soon as the hire is made, Canadian Business, Sep 23, [https://www.canadianbusiness.com/innovation/profit-500-achievers-onboarding/] [online] accessed 21 April 2017. Cooper, J. Wight, J. 2014, Implementing a buddy system in the workplace, Paper presented at PMI Global Congress 2014North America, Phoenix, AZ. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute. Welty, G. 2009, Developing a new employee orientation program for GXP compliance, Journal of GXP Compliance, vol. 13, no. 3, summer, pp. 82-92.