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

How much does employee turnover really cost?

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 353 posts

Re: How much does employee turnover really cost?

#171

Post by gm-conspiracy »

DanTheManPR wrote: post #88
krapp wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Now, all you need is intelligence and mental fluidity to weather hardships. No longer is a job loss catastrophic. Just about anyone born in a Western nation can, if he decides to, gain an education and make his way up the social ladder. What Western nation do you live in? Because in the Western nation I live in, both job loss and education can be catastrophic for many people.

We have a long way to go. But the western world of today is, in a historical sense, unprecedentedly meritocratic.

Did you mean hysterical?

Re: How much does employee turnover really cost?

#172

Post by gm-conspiracy »

CPLX wrote: post #38
vinceguidry wrote: post #31

In my studies of history, I'm finding this current thrust of individuals as stores of wealth over firms and nations to be quite interesting. Back in the colonial period, everything revolved around national wealth. The crown alone sanctioned and funded expeditions, chartered corporations, and fought wars. Over the last few centuries, power gradually shifted to the firm, then to markets, and now finally to individuals.…

> Soon the world will turn completely on merit. lol

I enjoyed reading Atlas Shrugged, but I understand it is a work of fiction.

Re: How much does employee turnover really cost?

#173

Post by thomasrognon »

JamesBarney wrote: post #116
henrik_w wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"By the time it gets to a counter-offer stage, it's often too late." - so true! Also made me think of the Netflix HR/culture document [1] - pay the max you would be counter-offering for an employee right off the bat, don't wait unitl you actually have to give a counter offer (which would probably be too late anyway) [1] http://www.slideshare.net/reed2001/culture-1798664

This is the best candidate ad I've ever seen. This makes me really want to work at Netflix.

Wow, same here. I relate to every point, which has never happened with any "culture and values" brief before.

Re: How much does employee turnover really cost?

#174

Post by softawre »

JamesBarney wrote: post #116
henrik_w wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"By the time it gets to a counter-offer stage, it's often too late." - so true! Also made me think of the Netflix HR/culture document [1] - pay the max you would be counter-offering for an employee right off the bat, don't wait unitl you actually have to give a counter offer (which would probably be too late anyway) [1] http://www.slideshare.net/reed2001/culture-1798664

This is the best candidate ad I've ever seen. This makes me really want to work at Netflix.

Same with their presentations at conferences. They hire really good people, pay them a ton (300k+), and fire them when they stop performing.

It's a good way to get great people, if you can afford it.

Re: How much does employee turnover really cost?

#175

Post by jack9 »

Notice the article starts by talking about the mythical "superstar" instead of the more common "sub-performer" or "redundancy". Employee turnover FUD is all over, when existing dysfunction is ignored. I interview and hire in 3 days. I run through tens (if not hundreds) of interviews and the commensurately large resume pool. 1-2 hours every day, is barely a chore for the ability to hire someone smart and interesting to work with day to day who has the skillset we need. Employee turnover is expensive in tech, but not replacing specialized workers that are no longer useful, is worse for both sides.

Re: How much does employee turnover really cost?

#176

Post by overcast »

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #84

Managers, here me now. 1) Money is a factor because my job is difficult. 2) Up to date technology is important because I want to build interesting products. As a developer, these are my motivations.

Money I'll give you, but the vast majority of software is not going to be "interesting" or progressive. There are tons of major corporations doing "boring" work.

Re: How much does employee turnover really cost?

#177

Post by st3v3r »

_yosefk wrote: post #75
jedrek wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been to management seminars where they downplay the importance of money, saying that employees are mostly motivated by other factors. Then I talk to my co-workers, the ones that are quitting, and about half of them leave because they've been working for 2+ years without a raise. I worked at a company where a company decided to introduce a new management program (LEAN) into one department. That 16 person departme…

I'm guessing few would book a management consultant simply telling to pay people more money - consultants who want a job instead have to explain how to motivate for free. But the people who share a lot of the blame for this idiocy and who have no good excuse are "heterodox economists" and TED talk presenters telling us how money doesn't motivate people past a certain point, or how it actually makes people less creati…

Yes and no. If you're unhappy with your job, having a big bucket of money thrown at you is unlikely to make you suddenly happy at your job. But raises also usually come with the recognition that you're doing a good job; that the company is wanting to keep you around. Not getting a raise in 2+ years gives the impression that the company doesn't care about you, and what you do doesn't really matter.

Re: How much does employee turnover really cost?

#178

Post by jamiepenney »

mildbow wrote: post #41
Buttons840 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would guess it's common for a team to be in a disfunction environment but stick together for the sake of the team and friendships. Once one person leaves though, everyone then leaves in succession. I'm in that position now. If a PM who I highly respect leaves I'll probably leave as well because I wouldn't want to deal with the stuff he protects us from. I also wouldn't want to abandon this guy, so I probably won't…

I've been through this once and it was enough for me. In retrospect, I should have left way earlier. I urge you to consider whether, by staying, you are just enabling the sort of disfunction you dislike :) Camaraderie is great and if there is actual friendship/respect then the relationship will continue even after you quit.

Yep, been there. To be honest, nothing much changed when I left. The org was big enough that by leaving I wasn't doing catastrophic damage, so I had no leverage there. By staying, I was just allowing them to bleed me dry a bit longer. Took me too long to realise that and get out.

Re: How much does employee turnover really cost?

#179

Post by st3v3r »

beat wrote: post #123
phaus wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming you are correct, which I suspect you are, that means the group of people that aren't really motivated by money make up a tiny percentage of the work force. Therefore anyone running a business can safely disregard any idiot making the claim that money isn't a motivator, except on the rare occasions which they find themselves hiring executives that make north of $500k. For normal people, its infuriating to hea…

I was strongly influenced in my thinking by Jason Cohen's "Rich vs King" article, he talks about the S-curve of wealth utilization. Once you hit a few million in the bank, you have enough money to fund a reasonably lavish lifestyle, without working, for the rest of your life. At that point, how do you motivate someone?

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that some 85% of people reading this do not have 1 million in the bank, let alone a few. So that's just worrying about a problem that most are never really going to encounter.

That being said, motivation is a complex thing, and most people are motivated by many different things at once. Money itself may not be the only motivator, but it's definitely one of them, and an important one. Trying to skimp out on it is a recipe for failure.

Re: How much does employee turnover really cost?

#180

Post by jackaltman »

beachy wrote: post #156
georgeecollins wrote: post #67

Here is a strange thing I have seen: Turnover is bad for a company overall, but good for H.R. HR teams are more important the more there is a need for recruitment. I have seen them be the part of the company that says "we are a team like a sports team, not a family," implying churn is OK. That is good for their productivity, particularly if their workload is on boarding and "culture" as well as recruiting.

Turnover is not always bad by any means. Often a company accumulates (bad hires, acquisition, good apples going stale) people who would be better off gone for everyone's sake. There's good turnover and bad turnover.

Exactly. In this article I was focused on regrettable turnover (when you wish the employee didn't leave), as opposed to non-regrettable turnover, which is very healthy.
Post reply on HN