💾 Archived View for gmi.noulin.net › mobileNews › 6653.gmi captured on 2021-12-05 at 23:47:19. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

⬅️ Previous capture (2021-12-03)

➡️ Next capture (2023-01-29)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

The high costs of staff turnover

Workers are losing their chains

WORKERS are in a phase of being footloose and fancy-free. The proportion of

Americans leaving their jobs voluntarily is at a 17-year high. A survey by

Gallup in 2017 found that around half of American employees were hoping to

leave their current job.

Some of this is cyclical. The unemployment rate is 3.9%, close to its lowest

level in the past 50 years. Workers rightly think that it will be easy to find

a new job. But there is also a structural problem in some industries. The

hospitality sector, for example, is largely staffed by low-paid, low-skilled

young people. In Britain the industry s annual job turnover is as high as 90%,

says Polina Montano, co-founder of Job Today, an app that links employers with

potential workers.

It is tempting to blame this restlessness on millennials people who reached

adulthood after 2000 and who are sometimes portrayed as being less committed to

their careers than their seniors. Another Gallup survey, this one in 2016,

found that 21% of the American millennial cohort had changed jobs within the

previous 12 months. But in fact workers aged 25 to 34 have always had the

shortest average job tenure, at around three years. The low for this measure,

at 2.6 years, was reached back in 2000, when the first millennials were

starting college.

High turnover is not great news for employers. Nick South of the Boston

Consulting Group says a certain amount of churn is good for bringing fresh

blood into a company. But anything over 20% a year can be disruptive. Even in

low-skilled jobs, replacing workers can be expensive. The post must be

advertised; managers spend time interviewing; new workers take a while to learn

the ropes.

The costs are particularly large for high-skilled workers. A survey in 2016 by

Deloitte, a consultancy, suggested that a combination of hiring costs and lost

productivity added up to $121,000 per departing employee. Figures from the

second quarter of 2018 showed that employee turnover in the American software

sector was running at an annual rate of 24%, with two-thirds of those workers

leaving voluntarily. That must be a problem given the difficulties in

recruitment. A survey in 2018 by Manpower found that global talent shortages

were at their highest since the employment agency began collecting the

statistics in 2006. Two-thirds of large organisations said they could not find

workers with the right skills.

So how can companies hang on to their staff? An obvious answer would be to pay

more than the competition. Despite low unemployment, overall wage growth has

not risen much in America, perhaps because a large army of discouraged

low-skilled workers have been rejoining the labour force. Given the shortage of

high-skilled workers, those employees ought to be in a strong negotiating

position, but even among them there is little sign of a surge in compensation.

Another approach is to convince employees that the company has a positive

social impact. The idea that a business can help a community wider than just

shareholders and customers has been dubbed inclusive growth . It may sound

woolly but, according to a new survey by Deloitte, 38% of businesses have found

that inclusive-growth initiatives boost employee engagement, encourage them to

stay and bring more talent in.

Technology can also help managers to spot particular individuals who might be

planning to quit, and to head off the problem with some well-chosen words of

encouragement or improved benefits; some Silicon Valley firms are looking into

this approach. One academic paper* looked at the language people used when

communicating with colleagues, and how closely they cleaved to the linguistic

style of their organisations, a process the authors call the enculturation

trajectory . (In academia, business-school professors will fit in only when

they start to use terms like enculturation trajectory.)

The survey looked at over 10m emails exchanged over five years at an American

tech firm. It found that new employees who were slow to learn the corporate

lingo were more likely to get fired, and that long-lasting employees who veered

away from the culture in their messages were more likely to quit for another

job. But this raises the Orwellian prospect of managers using artificial

intelligence to comb through employees emails. Instead, to make an

old-fashioned suggestion, they could just stop by their desks for a chat.

Outcomes in Organisations by Sameer B Srivastava, Amir Goldberg, V Govind

Manian and Christopher Potts