Talk:Induction programme/Archives/2012

Deletion

Speedy Keep I notice the original author has only one posting (ie they are new) and I can see a vast improvement since originally posted! An induction program is a well known procedure which almost every company has. Perhaps the most important point of which is for the current staff to be polite to new comers and to encourage them to join in. Obviously there is room for improvement, perhaps the writers might like to use Wikipedia as an example of the need for an Induction programme to develop a harmonious and productive working environment!--Mike 12:33, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I tagged it this way after seeing links to www.cipd.co.uk spammed across a few pages, and my concern is that this article was written solely to provide a home for such a link. We're increasingly facing a real problem with spam, so I combat it wherever I believe I see it.

However, this isn't a AfD listing - if you still dispute the {{prod}} tag, you can simply remove it from the article. --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 13:04, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I've added a few more references - when I updated this one I was at work, without actually having things to refer to, and I remember thinking "must go back and add more". Consider me nagged!

Incidentally, you will find that links to CIPD will tend to be referenced on various personnel/hr/management articles, is that being the Chartered Institute, many people would consider them the definitive experts on the subject. The same as having the BMA, or US equivalent referenced on medical articles. -Ladybirdintheuk 06:19, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks I've noticed this in working with the CIPD article in recent days. C'mon folks be bold and remove prod tags if you disagree :) I'm switching to {{sources}} since right now it's just a general link to their website, not a proper cite. --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 13:15, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

The boss has gone, so I can get back on Wikipedia! I've added references to specific articles/factsheets now. There are tons more out there, but these are the most reputable. -Ladybirdintheuk 15:42, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Good work, thanks for your efforts! --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 23:46, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

KEEP Brodger3 11:10, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Heading

I have just changed jobs and been Exit Managed out of my previous employer and Inducted into my new one. These are important terms for new entrants to the corporate word who do not know what induction is and also a valuable resource for companies in how to do it properly.

Suggest name change to "Employee Induction Management" to match the opposite "Employee Exit Management"

Brodger3 11:09, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Merge?

Do we need separate articles for Induction programme and Onboarding? Biscuittin (talk) 11:42, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

References

The deleted reference has a high credibility through a peer review process within the university, and the rejection of this kind are based solely on ignorance. The purpose of this study was to Provide understanding of how induction training Could integrate New Employees in an organization. This is the only scientific study in higher education conducted with this focus (with no special knowledge to understand even the uninitiated in the subject see applicability), as evidenced by the research plan adopted by the university and the thesis is approved and published. The scientific study was developed to meet a reliable and valid design, I suggest he read the study to further investigate its place in the scientific community before making unjustified acts.

However, I think it is acceptable to question the independence of the other references in the article, as it largely based on material that has not undergone peer review and further based on secondary sources. Something that should be avoided when looking for reliable knowledge.

28 September 2010 at 17:17.