that fact that a new employee needs to be trained before they work, so an on-line training program

will be recommanded by this company to help the company save training costs. To support this argument, the author

provides the evidence that the face-to-face training will cost a lot compared with the on-line one. This argument

sounds somewhat convincing, but after a quick but careful analysis, it is problematic in three aspects.



Firstly, the promoting company fails to take the costs of purchasing the on-line software into consideration. This

argument just oversimplifies the cost of the software purchasing by thinking that the face-to-face training will cost a lot

from both the experienced employees and new ones. However, this is not the case. Learning the personal training

from the experienced employees, the new employees can maximize their involvements in the program and can obtain

the first-hand experiences from them. For example, Alibaba pays almost 10% of their annual expenses on employees

training by sending them out to overseas to learn the lastest knowledge and skills. If Alibaba simply offered the

on-line training, there is not enough interaction for its employees to improve their skills timely and combine with their

real experience in the real world.



Secondly, even if the costs of the purchasing are affordable, not every employee is necessary to be fully trained. The

program also commits a fallacy that all of the new employees need to be trained on-line equally. However, if there are

some new employees who are experienced in the same industry for couple years, but they just new to the company, it

is not necessary to train them fully on-line.

On the contrary, they just need some proper training of the company and get better prepared. Moreover, some

positions are not required to be trained on-line, such as the cleaners and so on. If the company just thinks everyone

needs to be trained on-line and more costs will be wasted on unnecessary purchasing of the programs. Therefore, if

the company can clearly classify the groups of employees that need on-line training, more costs will be saved.



Thirdly, even if the costs can be saved from training, it does not guarantee that the profitability will increase. The

argument fails to claim that how much percent of costs that training takes up and it also omits the sales of the

company which also has significant influence on the profits. For example, if the cost budgets of training just merely

takes up a small amount of the total costs, there is no reason for the company to spend so much money to purchase

the on-line program. Moreover, if sales of the company still keep the same or drop down due to the inefficent

management structures, wrong developing strategies, the profits will undoubtedly drop. Without taking other factors

into consideration, it is imprudent forthe author to promise that the purchase of the on-line sof