Ranked by cost per technician retained at twelve months, the six channels in Halden's Unit 5 analysis reorder sharply: the busiest looks ordinary and the fastest costs most by far. Searches like "gb 546 unit 5 assignment example", "gb546 unit 5 sample" and "gb546 unit 5 example" land here.
What a finished GB546 Unit 5 sourcing channel analysis looks like
Five pages built on a channel table with eight columns: applicants, hires, yield, days to fill, direct cost, recruiter hours, hires retained at twelve months and cost per retained hire. Job boards bring 612 applicants at $35 each but yield 1.5 percent and keep 5 of 9 hires, $6,144 per retained technician. Referrals yield 13.8 percent and keep 7 of 8. A community college certificate program takes 63 days and keeps 5 of 6. A military transition program is slowest at 88 days and cheapest among new sources, $1,028 per retained hire, with all five still employed. The staffing agency fills in 18 days and costs $35,247 per retained technician, keeping 3 of 7. Rehires, three of them, cost $192 each. Recruiter hours are costed at $48 throughout.
How a GB546 Unit 5 example is structured
The analysis states its measure before its results: cost per hire still employed at twelve months, because a hire who leaves in month four must be bought twice. Data sources come next, the applicant tracking system and payroll, with the eighteen-month window and the 38 hires it covers. The channel table follows, then a section per channel explaining its result rather than restating it, such as why job board applicants fail the electrical screen and why military technicians stay. Time is treated separately from cost, since the agency's 18 days can be worth their price when tools sit idle. A capacity section asks how many hires each channel could deliver if scaled, which matters because the forecast needs about 42 technicians in the next eighteen months. Recommendations move recruiter hours toward the three strongest channels.
Retained at twelve months
The measure chosen and defended: cost per technician still employed a year later, since an early leaver doubles the spend on a seat.
Eight columns, six channels
Applicants through retention for every source over eighteen months, recruiter hours costed at $48 and included in every total.
Cheap per applicant, ordinary per keeper
Job boards at $35 an application and $6,144 per retained technician once screening time and early losses are counted.
When eighteen days is worth $35,247
The agency's speed priced against idle tool hours, and the narrow circumstances in which buying time makes sense.
Could it deliver forty-two?
Each channel's realistic capacity set against next year's forecast need, with recruiter hours shifted toward the three strongest.
Where marks go in GB546 Unit 5
Channels ranked by advertised cost or applicant volume miss the unit's point, and many sections penalize exactly that. The measure has to follow the hire past the start date. Recruiter hours left out of cost per hire flatter the busiest channel, since screening 612 applicants takes real time. Strong analyses separate speed from cost and say when speed is worth buying. Small numbers call for honesty: five military hires, all retained, is encouraging and not yet proof, and a paper claiming otherwise overreaches. Capacity is often ignored, although the cheapest channel may yield only a handful of hires a year. A table offering no explanation of why each channel performs as it does gives a recruiting manager nothing to act on.
Get a GB546 Unit 5 example written to your instructions
What shapes the analysis is channel data: applicants, hires, time and cost by source, whether issued with the Unit 5 exercise or pulled from requisitions you have anonymized. Add the rubric. It returns within 24-48h with every channel costed per retained hire, speed treated separately and small numbers handled honestly. A first sample costs nothing.
GB546 Unit 5 questions, answered
Why use twelve-month retention rather than ninety days?
For technicians, the costliest departures happen after qualification, which takes about three months, so a ninety-day window misses them. Twelve months captures the loss that matters. For high-volume roles with faster ramp-up, ninety days can be the better measure. The example states its choice and the reason; your analysis should match the window to the role it studies.
Are five or six hires from one channel enough to draw conclusions?
Not firm ones, and the example says so. Small counts can swing on a single departure, so the analysis treats the military transition and rehire results as promising rather than proven and recommends tracking them for another year. If your data has small cells, report them honestly and avoid ranking channels on differences a single hire could reverse.
Should recruiter time be included in cost per hire?
Yes. Leaving it out makes high-volume channels look cheaper than they are, because screening hundreds of weak applicants consumes recruiter hours even when the posting itself costs little. The example costs recruiter time at a loaded hourly rate. If your case lacks hours, estimate them and label the estimate, since omitting them distorts the ranking.