https://blackboard.strayer.edu/bbcswebdav/institut…https://blackboard.strayer.edu/bbcswebdav/institut…watch this video and for the first discussion writing produce 200 words about itWhat is the difference between cost/benefit analysis and cost/effectiveness analysis? Which would you use and why?Cost-benefit evaluation compares the monetary costs of training to non-monetary benefits such as attitudes and relationships. Cost-effectiveness evaluation compares the monetary costs of training to the financial benefits accrued from training. Both are important, however, strategic decision makers are interested in seeing that HR and HRD efforts lead to monetary gains when competing for funds; therefore, cost-effectiveness evaluation should be used as much as possible when proposing a training program. What is the difference between cost-savings analysis and utility analysis? When, if ever, would you use utility rather than cost savings? Why?In the text example it is shown that utility analysis allows us to estimate the increased results of training whereas cost-savings evaluation calculates the cost savings of the training. The research is not definitive about whether becoming more quantitative in the assessment and description of training outcomes leads to more acceptance of training as a unit that adds value to the bottom line. The textbook indicates that utility analysis can put the training manager on equal footing with the other mangers in the organization. However, this will depend on the culture and values of the organization.In Addition a response must be given back to the other students Janell Johnson and Kimberly Adams.Kimberly AdamsBUS407027 – Week..Comparison of Cost-Benefit Analysis and Cost-Effectiveness AnalysisProfessor and classmates, in my opinion the difference between cost-benefit analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis is simply about bottom line dollars. While cost-benefit analysis is a comparison of training expenses involved in teaching employees a better way to deal with customers and or others and changing attitudes of employees, it comes down to whether the training was worth the cost if nothing changes. And as you stated Professor Carroll, cost-effectiveness analysis is the preferred method by most HR and HRD leaders as well, because the point of providing training to employees is to help the company grow monetarily. Our company uses both classroom and CBT to roll out training programs to our employees, but the training provided in the classroom which is run by our own in-house training teams seems to have the biggest turnout. We pay for the training materials and send our trainers out to a vendor for them to learn the training program and bring it back to the employees to roll it out, because it comes down to the cost effectiveness of saving a few dollars to not bring the trainer to us. We were big proponents of Six Sigma a few years back, and many employees received their black belt and master black belt certifications which made them project champions to find ways to help the company save money. It was very successful and was led by a group of 4 people who trained over 3,000 employees by having our in-house trainers travel to the employees. They saved the company several million dollars by having the employees take the training they learned and utilize it on projects to cut unnecessary costs, and improve processes. So cost-effectiveness analysis seems to be the preferred method for delivering training to employees within our company, because it came down to a bottom line dollar savings which improved the company’s financial goals significantly.Janell JohnsonBUS407027 – Week..Week 8 DiscussionHello All -I found Chapter 9 to be an interesting read. Only because I too have encountered several training sessions and at the end of a training, we were asked to evaluate everything from the trainer’s attitude to timeliness of the training as well as the location of the training. Evaluation also occur on Computer Based training as well. However, what I find most interesting is that I am more prone to completing the evaluation after I have a completed a classroom setting training. Although, I must admit that I’m a little hesitant to do it then also. For computer-based trainings, I almost never complete the evaluation. To read chapter 9 and read the different ideas and topics around evaluation, such as there is really nothing to evaluate, or no one really cares and even to see that evaluations could threaten one’s job are all true and honest statements that I’ve actually thought about as a trainer and a trainee. However, the feedback can always provide some benefit when the right people review the outcome/data.
100% Original paper Customized to your instructions!