Employee Retention Issues? Look in the Mirror (Part 1)
Part 1 of 2-Part Series on the Important and Timely Issue of Employee Retention There is a saying that employees don’t leave companies, they leave managers. Today, they are leaving more than ever. According to recent U.S. Department of Labor statistics, the average tenure of an employee in the U.S. is now only 1.5 years. We have ample statistics that clearly indicate money is NOT the reason for employees leaving a company. They do not resign on impulse, or in a “Jerry Maguire” moment of anger, delirium, or a personal epiphany. When they decided to join your company, they initially saw the opportunity as a great fit for their career and wanted it to be a successful long run. Unfortunately, somehow, the wheels they thought fit came off. If you take the time to thoroughly investigate the true reason for their leaving – AND YOU SHOULD – you will likely uncover that it’s not the products, customers, industry, competition, location, coworkers, commit,e or tools they have at their disposal. IT’S THE LEADERSHIP! When employees or ex-employees grumble about “culture,” or that “communication is poor,” or express frustration at the lack of career progression and professional development, they are telling you that it is the leadership they are unhappy with and leaving. Clearly, company leaders are responsible for setting the culture, communication, and career development within a business. For the sake of your company, and more importantly, your people, take one moment as a leader and be brutally honest with yourself in answering these questions: Do you find yourself behind closed doors a good portion of the day as you strategize or execute in private? Do you put your personal gain over your employee’s best interest when making decisions? Do you consistently affix blame on the departing employee for “not following the process” or working hard or smart enough? (Have you ever blamed yourself?) Do you promise the “stars” in career progression, but consistently find an excuse why the company cannot deliver them? It’s time to look in the mirror and answer these questions. A “company” is a legal entity. A “business” is a collection of assets and liabilities. No one resigns because of that. It’s the decisions, the motivation, the atmosphere, the ethics, the support, the training, the vision, and the direction set by leadership that will properly engage employees to stay with you in a highly productive manner. If they are not engaged, then take another look in that mirror! The next time an employee resigns, resist your patterned behavior to shrug it off as “another underperformer who didn’t follow the process.” Take a moment to reflect in that mirror on what it actually is they are resigning from. Too many times it is not the departing employee who doesn’t “get it.” It’s not the company they are leaving. IT IS YOU! So you looked in the mirror and – employee retention issues are your fault. Admitting that is a good first step. Should you act immediately to improve employee retention challenges? Can’t you just add it to the projects scheduled later this year?” Check out these two recent findings published in a recent Kiplinger report as to why you should act NOW. Unemployment held at 4.1% in December 2017. Look for 3.8% by the end of 2018 as it becomes harder for employers to find suitable candidates. The short-term unemployment rate (less than six months) has fallen to its lowest level in 65 years. Further proof of a tightening labor market is evidenced by lots of job openings in certain sectors, including health care, food services, construction, transportation, and warehousing. Openings in health care and food services are at their highest level in 15 years. If you lead a company of 500 or fewer employees, the urgency is heightened. The shortage of qualified workers is starting to squeeze small businesses. In industries such as manufacturing and construction, many small firms are finding themselves forced to hike wages. Not just to lure new hires… many smalls need to pay more just to keep their current workers from jumping ship. The problem will only worsen later this year. The economy is accelerating, and many small businesses want to expand in order to cash in on rising orders. But those expansion plans will bump up against the constraints of a tight job market. What are retention or engagement warning indicators you should be looking for? According to the U.S. Department of Labor: 55% of Employees are currently searching for other job opportunities. 40% of organizations report that losing key employees is the top concern. 33% of new hires quit their job in the first 6 months. 33% of employees know within 1 week if they will stay with that company long term. What do the statistics look like for companies with highly engaged employees? They are: 2x more likely to remain with their current company. 3x as likely to do something good for the company that was not asked of them. In addition: 51% are more likely to have engaged employees when companies’ values are properly communicated, clear, and understood by all. 78% of employees communicate they would retain/stay longer with their current company if they could see a clear career path for their career. “So, how much is subpar employee retention costing my business?” Employee turnover costs include more than job posting fees and recruiter commissions. Some costs include, but are not limited to: Revenue loss from unfilled Jobs. Pre- & Post-employment administrative functions and expenses. Pre-employment screening and interviews for replacement hires. Training Costs for new hires and promotions. Loss of Productivity due to overworked remaining employees. Loss of knowledge transfer opportunity. Click here for the full list of 20 Retention Cost Metrics available upon request. To help you identify your company’s specific cost of retention, we found this calculator on bonus.ly that you may find helpful. Just remember to check the “assumptions” that these automated calculators use to make sure they accurately represent your company’s situation. Up Next: Click Here
Retained Executive Search in a Contingency World
Sandy has a problem. As head of a mid-sized consumer products manufacturer, her National Sales Manager just gave her two weeks’ notice. Her current plan to fill the position is to do what she has always done before – hire a couple of “contingency” recruiters, who will compete against each other, to quickly find her a replacement because there are major retailer line reviews coming up. This situation is not new to Sandy or hundreds of other companies. However, upon further review, Sandy has had 5 people in that same position in the last 8 years. Furthermore, the constant turnover in this position has had a major impact on sales and expenses. “Breakeven” was actually celebrated two years ago, and her sales are down 8% this year-to-date in what should be a robust sales environment for her product line. In addition, Sandy wants to go younger, thinking she can mold a “millennial” or college graduate into the type of National Sales Manager she believes will stay and grow into the position, as well as save salary expense in the process. When we initially talked to Sandy, she elected to go the contingency route once again because it has always worked for her in the past. Really? Instant gratification, the “quick fix,” or “putting a warm body into the seat,” is a strategy that rarely works, but is at the heart of the contingency executive search model. The speed and cost are often attractive to the client and the recruiter! The search firm finds someone they think will work, arranges interviews, and when that person is hired, they achieve a nice pay day and then move on. In talking with Sandy, it became clear that there were several underlying issues where just plugging a body in would not work and lead to even more turnover in an important position that demanded stability… The staggering turnover in this position over the last 8 years points to the fact that little thought has gone into developing retention strategies and effective onboarding. In talking with some of her former managers, when they joined the organization, they immediately sought ways to leave it. There is a lot more at work here. A traditional interview process (lack of behavioral interviewing) that actually directed a well-rehearsed candidate to say what Sandy and her human resources team wanted to hear, rather than identifying the best candidate. A confusing compensation plan. Sandy has been focusing her energies on saving time and money rather than putting the right person in the position, which has saved her neither time nor money. She has “accepted the fact” that there have been major costs and missed opportunities due to turnover, but she chooses to continue the same strategy. We live in a world where instant gratification and the need for speed often overwhelm the need for quality and taking the time to get it right. This is much like the difference between contingency executive search and retained executive search. A retained executive search firm is engaged in all aspects of the search process, starting with defining a customized search strategy, all the way through to candidate onboarding. Retained executive search firms often continue consultation and follow-up months after the hire, since their success is based on the impact and long-term commitment of the executive hired. These firms conduct the search exclusively—no other recruitment agencies will take part—so that it will be very client-focused with intense investment of resources to find the right candidate. Retained search firms work very closely with each client, and will take their time and use an agreed-upon methodology to find the best person for the job. The process is rigorous, with a shortlist of 4 to 6 quality prospects developed after an exhaustive sourcing process, beginning with upwards of 300 initial targets. While retained search may be perceived as expensive, it provides a better ROI, and over time, it is no more expensive than contingency, and especially the opportunity costs involved in having a bad hire. The key is that retained search firms are looking for the most qualified candidate. On average, a retained placement ends up being a better fit in their position and ultimately stays in the role longer than with any other type of recruiting scenario. Companies will most often request a retained search when they are looking to fill an executive level position, and sometimes when all other less expensive—and ineffective—contingency search options have been exhausted. The moral of the story and the happy ending… Anything worthwhile usually takes time and effort, and this is especially the case when finding the right hire. Think of the wasted time, expense, and opportunities that Sandy has had over the last 8 years. After a lot of analysis and discussion, Sandy agreed that it may be time for her to “retain” a different hiring strategy. We agree!