The main function of organisation training and reconditioning is to help employees gain the necessary skills and competencies required for performing their jobs in an effective and efficient manner. In other words, it aims to enhance job satisfaction for all employees. However, what if the company has decided to implement a specific employee training program, but there is still a significant problem with the enrollees? Should the company go for reconditioning or should it consider hiring outside the company? What are the pros and cons of the two options?

Reconditioning has the obvious benefits of cost efficiency. It is also cost-saving as opposed to organisation training, which is an ongoing process. Another advantage of reconditioning is that it may be achieved faster, taking less time than the other option. The main disadvantage of reconditioning is that it does not address every possible situation. In addition, there is still the likelihood of enrollees becoming disengaged from the training.

Reconditioning is ideally suited to a company that needs to implement a specific program on the fly. However, companies with a long operational history may find it difficult to convince their employees about the importance of reconditioning. For these organizations, hiring a consultant to oversee and mentor enrollees is a much better option. It helps to ensure that every employee is motivated and gives the company the opportunity to monitor how well the employees have absorbed the training. Moreover, hiring a consultant also ensures that company resources are not wasted on training that will never be used.

Reconditioning, however, has its own disadvantages. First, it takes longer, and enrollees often need to take a number of weeks before they fully absorb the concepts taught during on-the-job training. In addition, it costs more money. Usually, the training program needs to be implemented on a trial basis for about one month before the organisation can conclude that the investment made was worth it.

On-the-job training, meanwhile, is much cheaper. This is because on-the-job training delivers the same level of information that a consultant provides in far less time. Also, employees who already possess the skills needed for an organisation training program can easily complete it within a few hours. Moreover, employees who already have some job experience can already use these skills to complement their on-the-job training. Employers, therefore, save on both time and money when they opt to implement an on-the-job training program rather than investing in a reconditioning program.

There are still arguments to be made in favour of a reconditioning programme, especially for companies that need their organisations to function smoothly despite a recent change in management. The biggest argument is that most organisations do not have the time to re-train all their employees every few months. They are more interested in achieving quick and meaningful results, so that they can put themselves back into the black hole where they came from, thanks to short-term interim solutions. This way, they avoid the stigma of being labelled as 'recession proof' and they avoid the long-term costs of hiring and training new staff. However, if the goals of the organisation training program are closely aligned with the organisation's goals, such as the creation of a more efficient work force or the implementation of new processes, then going for a reconditioning programme is not advisable.

Reconditioning training programs are also limited by their applicability. Only those employees who are most likely to meet the prerequisites of a particular training program can be brought in. Moreover, as compared to on-the-job training, reconditioning is not only costly but it is also not flexible. As opposed to employees who have already undergone a specific training program, candidates who want to learn new skills are usually left to choose between continuing their existing career or joining another employer-sponsored training program.

In general, organisations need to take a different approach to their on-the-job training. Rather than hiring an outside consultant, it makes more sense to run the training initiative internally. This ensures that all participants are aware of what is expected of them and that they understand why they should be motivated. Since the objectives of the organisation training program are aligned with those of the organisation, employees are much more likely to learn quickly and keep up-to-date on the areas in which they have been weak. Ultimately, organisations should make every effort to ensure that employees know what they need to know in order to get the most from the organisation's on-the-job training.