You will hear a radio interview with Dr. Edward Gordon, the Human Resources

You will hear a radio interview with Dr. Edward Gordon, the Human Resources manager from Orchard Supply Hardware.
For each question(23-30), mark one letter(A, B or C)for the correct answer.
After you have listened once, replay the recording.
You have 45 seconds to read through the questions.
[Pause]
Now listen, and mark A, B or C.
Woman: Dr. Edward Gordon, recently you have just launched your new book entitled Getting Off on the Right Foot. Why do you give your book such a title? What do you mean by that?
Man: You know, many companies provide some sort of introductory training or orientation for their new employees. It may take the form of an older employee assigned to show the new employee "the ropes". Or it may be left to the HR department or the individual’s new supervisor to show them where the coffee pot is and how to apply for time off. Some companies in highly competitive industries recognising the value in New Employee Orientation(NEO)goes much farther.
Woman: But there is a measurable cost to that training, how do companies consider its value?
Man: The technology in the workplace is changing very. rapidly and companies that can’t keep up will drop out of competition. Let me show you some issues and background facts. A survey by the Ontario Skills Development Office found 63% of the respondents planned to "introduce new technology into the workplace that would require staff training."
However, The American Society for Training and Development reports that less than $1,500 per employee was spent on training in 1996. The largest part 49% of that was spent on technical and professional training. Only 2% was spent on New Employee Orientation and 3% on quality, competition and business practices training. People have reasons not to do New Employee Training. You see, even at the less than $1,500 per year for training an employee we reported above, it is still a cost. For some companies, especially those with traditionally high turnover, it can be a major expense.
If your profit per employee is less than $1,500, it would be difficult to convince the stakeholders that training Is justified. Besides, we all know it is the responsibility of the school system to train people to be workers. And it is the worker’s responsibility to learn how to do a job so they can get hired.
Woman: Despite of such reasons for not doing New Employee Training, why do you perceive New Employee Training necessary?
Man: Not surprisingly, all the reasons not to train new employees except cost itself are actually reasons to do mat training. If you have high turnover, training new employees will make them more productive. They will feel better about themselves and the job. They will stick around longer.
The training and development knowledge, attitude and skills of the staff are fundamental to the continued efficient and profitable performance. And if you still believe that our schools provide adequate training to make students labouring ready, you are living in a dream world. Yes, some job seekers make the effort to learn on their own the skills needed for a new job, but most get that training on the job.
Woman: You made an interesting proposal that has aroused many HR managers attention. Can you make a further explanation?
Man: OK, I recommend companies make training a standalone function, separate from Human Resources. You know, a 20% increase in training expenditure since 1983 has not kept pace with the 24% increase in workers in the same period. So I believe that training function is a profit centre, not just a cost centre.
Woman: In your article cited above, you mentioned companies such as Sprint, Xerox, General Electric and General Motors. What is special about them?
Man: These companies have opted to establish Corporate Universities, reflecting the importance they place on employee training. The value for smaller companies is in arguably even greater. And there is no better time to start employee training than New Employee Orientation.