Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Psychology of Employee Retention

romymisra.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 32 posts

Re: The Psychology of Employee Retention

#21

Post by eavc »

I would suggest those who are interested in the literal psychology of employee retention do some reading of the academic research on the subject.

There's an interesting review of the literature about job burnout, for example, that was published in the Annual Review of Psychology in 2001.

http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/fss/2006-1104-200110/mas...

I know that psychology isn't held in as high regard around here as the harder sciences, but as much anecdote about the laws of human behavior as there is on HN and in the startup scene in general, I'd think there would be more interest in what science has to say.

Re: The Psychology of Employee Retention

#22

Post by SatvikBeri »

btipling wrote: post #3

I never understood perks. I work where I work because I like the people, the technology, and the product in that order. The lack of money and success create anxiety, but an abundance of these in terms of what an employee can hope to achieve do not influence my decision about where I work. As for perks, I don't care about trivial asides that people think up in order to retain talent. This is an artificial device that…

The perks are largely about (1) having something cool to talk about, and (2) feeling respected. Perks aren't the only possible way to achieve these but they're a good indicator.

With my friends I can't talk about the details of the awesome technical projects I'm doing at work-they won't find it interesting. But I can talk about how fun it is that we have tons of autonomy, about 30 different board games in the office that we play at lunch every day, a beanbag chair we can use for naps, and have a foosball table.

Re: The Psychology of Employee Retention

#23

Post by SatvikBeri »

DanielRibeiro wrote: post #7
BadassFractal wrote: post #5

Sounds a lot like Guy Kawasaki's MAP: Mastery, Autonomy, Purpose. From http://hiring.monster.com/hr/hr-best-practices/workforce-man... : "First, the most powerful way to enchant employees is to provide a MAP. “M” stands for mastery -- that is, a way to master new skills on the job. “A” stands for autonomy -- so that employees can master new skills while working autonomously and not be micro-managed. Finally, “P” stan…

That actually comes from Dan Pink[1]: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc [1] Also a book http://www.amazon.com/Drive-Surprising-Truth-About-Motivates...

...and this framework has been around even longer than that, although the vocabulary has typically been "Autonomy, Competence, and Relatedness": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-determination_theory

Re: The Psychology of Employee Retention

#27

Post by viscanti »

ruswick wrote: post #24

They are forgetting the most powerful story of all: "I am making a lot of money."

"I am making ENOUGH money" is important, and different for everyone, but it's not enough to retain top talent. There will always be someone willing to throw more money at a great employee. Basing any retention policy on salary (beyond making sure the salary is "enough") is doomed to fail.

For startups, equity is a big motivator, because the employee has some level of control over how the company does. This allows the employee to dream of the perfect beach house somewhere, that if they work hard enough, they will be able to get. Even selling that dream isn't enough to keep the best talent. There needs to be a good team in place, and tasks need to be delegated in a way that employees are constantly challenged and rewarded by being able to build awesome things. If those aren't in place, no amount of equity or salary is going to make things better.

Re: The Psychology of Employee Retention

#28

Post by rprasad »

rdl wrote: post #9
btipling wrote: post #3

I never understood perks. I work where I work because I like the people, the technology, and the product in that order. The lack of money and success create anxiety, but an abundance of these in terms of what an employee can hope to achieve do not influence my decision about where I work. As for perks, I don't care about trivial asides that people think up in order to retain talent. This is an artificial device that…

Perks which improve my productivity are things I care about (good computer, ability to get needed books and other resources, functional IT support, fast Internet connection, private office when/if desired, wfh when optimal, comfortable chair, easy commute/parking). For most of those things I'd trade $1 in salary for $0.50 or less allocated to them optimally. Not having to deal with admin stuff like expense or hour tr…

[Reply to the dead comment; you need to be logged in witht showdead to see it.] Benefits in kind does not refer to work equipment, since those aren't things you get to take with you--the company owns that stuff, you just get to use it. Benefits in kind means something like receiving a personal laptop on company dime that you can take with you even if you leave.

Re: The Psychology of Employee Retention

#29

Post by thaisan »

Great point. I think having a story is spot on. It's why founder's myths are so enthralling to all of us and why having a concise and digestible message is so important to a company. I work in the hiring space and I've come to believe that recruiting is really the same thing as selling... It's the same idea pitching your company and product to VCs or selling your product to consumers. In all these cases, people want to know where they fit into the tapestry - why should they buy your product, invest in you, or join your team?

Point 3, "These make for a unique story. A unique cult to want to be a part of and more importantly tell people about." is also really interesting. The companies with the best recruiting and team-dynamics are those that harness these inclusive, cult-like cultures. You can see it everywhere, in little things like team t-shirts, quirky events, or big things, like cult-leader CEOs.

Re: The Psychology of Employee Retention

#30

Post by enraged_camel »

I think perks matter if and only if they reinforce an existing positive culture.

For example, I work for a medium-sized software company where employees tend to be fairly athletic. We have groups of runners, surfers, soccer players, tennis players and softball players. We have a licensed yoga instructor come in twice a week for yoga lessons (paid for by the company). We even have a group of people who participate in sailing races every week on the CEO's sail-boat. This aspect of our culture makes it very easy for new hires to quickly make friends and feel like they have become a part of the company. Also, all of these sports are fully sponsored - all sport-related expenses can be reimbursed.

Last year, management approved building showers on the first floor of the building for the sole purpose of making it easier for lunch-time runners to clean up before going back to work. The effect was immediate: many more people started running at lunch time, as they no longer had to worry about being sweaty and stinky after lunch. The showers themselves are a very small perk, but they reinforce the perception that management cares about and supports the active lifestyles of employees.

I somehow doubt having a "Whiskey Fridays" would have the same effect, as we don't have many heavy-drinkers at our company. But one of my friends works for Zappos (based in Las Vegas) and I'm told that everyone there drinks at work. Makes sense, since it's Vegas.

Post reply on HN