There are times when hard decisions get made about employees (as an employer) just as there are times when hard decisions get made about jobs (as employees). Furthermore, change is often good and can bring out a better situation for all involved. That said, whenever there is a turnover, the intellectual capital walks out the door the skills and experience of that employee walks with it. There is always hope that the person that replaces will be bettter suited and the team/facility will be better off. Regardless, there is no disputing how disruptive it is for all involved when we have turnover.
Assuming an employee gives you a proper notice (14-30 days), you will be unlikely to replace that position without a period of having to stretch other employees in the meantime. To properly recruit for, interview, hire, train and get an employee to be efficient, you are looking at well beyond 30 plus days, depending on their experience. The higher the turnoever, the more dispruptive it can be. A direct-care staff can be replaced with less disruption (in some cases), but when a leader is turned over, the impact can be far and wide.
If you think about the time it takes to recruit a talented, high-functioning leader and then you must see how they fit in with existing team or decisions they might make (and rightly so) to create a team around them. Given the time it takes to fully replace someone, the momentum is often severely impacted, which prevents a team from experiencing their full potential.
It would be ideal to hire the right candidates and be able to keep them happy and productive, yet most environments don't have the bandwidth or imagination to fulfill the lifecycle and curiosity of an employee, so they leave. Not to mention, statistically, people get paid more when they move around, so what is the answer? It used to be culture; create a good culture, pay them competitively and they will have a sense of loyalty, which will allow you build momentum. Currently, the conversation around turnover is one that is an example of the "tail wagging the dog" and organizations are struggling to find the answer as they compete with opportunities in the gig economy.
The answer is "and both". An oganization must do the fundamentals of having good culture, comptitive wage and adopt some of the lessons from the gig economy. If your organization lacks the imagination to offer a path instead of a job, you will be stuck in the hamster wheel of turnover, probably blaming the current generation for their work ethic or the pandemic for the paradigm shift. Have you considered looking in the mirror? What innovations have you installed to compete witht the gig economy?
Commentaires