The more outstanding employees leave without a sound, sentiment simply can not keep people

The departure of good employees: the real departure is silent

Some people say that the departure of a good employee is like "hearing thunder without a sound". These are the people who work well for the company and do what they are told but often leave unexpectedly. For a company, there is no greater loss than the departure of good people.

A week ago, my good friend Zhiming told me that he was going to quit. I asked him, "Didn't you get an early turnaround at that company and do a great job, why are you suddenly leaving?" Having worked for almost a year, Zhiming thought about it and finally chose to resign.

Anti-humane company rules

There are no rules, so a company must establish a system to discipline and manage its employees. But very often, those strange and anti-humane rules not only do not play a restraining role but also become a reason to force employees away. I heard a friend talk about a company that emphasized "military" management. They had a rule that people were afraid to hear: the boss of the company issued a notice in the group, whether it was late at night, or just woke up in the morning if the employee did not reply within three minutes, and more than three times, will be fired. No matter how much of a positive effect this has on staff management. As a strong, good enough employee, why stay with a company like this and be on call every minute of every day? The system can control the staff, but not necessarily retain them. Those anti-human systems will only force people away. Leaders only care about themselves and treat their employees like performance machines. You may not believe it, but more than half of all employee departures in the workplace are related to direct leadership, and that's a fact. For a project, employees work overtime for several days in a row, no matter what time they get off work in the morning, the next day will be on time to the company, and the leader will only say that everything done does not serve any purpose, a word to deny the staff; the leader's heart is only concerned about the KPI, do not care how to achieve, there is no feasibility, just give orders to require the people under the staff must get it, even if it is overtime ...... Although the workplace is all about merit, who wants to dedicate 8 hours a day to a company and leaders who only know how to give orders, only care about performance, and always blame the employees? Too little! A good manager should be a coach who knows how to explore the potential and strengths of his employees, give them the right environment and help them to achieve their work goals perfectly.

Working hard but not getting paid for it

A workplace is a place where value is created and rewarded. From the company's point of view, the amount of money the company pays its employees is the amount of work they are expected to do and the amount of value they are expected to create. However, many times, employees with a responsible attitude to the company, take the initiative to create more value but did not get due feedback, and the company will often choose to turn a blind eye. They are paid a small salary, but they work overtime every day, 365 days a year; they work hard for a year and make achievements, but the company does not take any action, as if everything is deserved. What's more, these dedicated employees are surprised to find that the company has recruited a new employee who is not as competent as they are, but who is paid more than they are. Not everything is rewarded with equal effort, but no one wants to be ignored all the time.

Limited money prospects and career progression hindered

Money and career progression have always been the most important reasons for employees to leave. Many bosses like to talk about emotions and are not willing to pay their employees enough, but only want to use future benefits and interests to keep them; the company also does not have a smooth upward path, so employees are stuck in the same place, doing the same thing every day. But that's not what employees want. What they want in return for working hard are a higher salary, a better life, and better development. Everyone has plans for what heights to reach and what position to go to. With less money to give and no avenues for promotion, employees will naturally choose other places. After all, no one's youth can afford to waste. Some say it is a slow escape for good employees who leave. Their enthusiasm for a company is worn away little by little. When they first take on a new job, they are eager to make their mark, treating the job as their career, giving their best to the task, and doing their best for the company. They think they will be rewarded for their efforts, but in the end, they find that everything is very different from what they expected. They work hard and take the hit in silence; while gradually firming up their ideas until they finally leave. Retaining employees looks difficult, but it's not. Because most of these mistakes can be avoided. The only scary thing is that, in the face of these mistakes, the company has not been able to improve. And this time, most of those good employees will choose to leave, because they have more options.

02、Employees don't leave but leave their supervisors

Talent is the rarest kind of resource. Therefore, once the talent is found, not only to keep him but more importantly, to cultivate him, reuse him, to create an environment for him to fully develop his talent. The departure of good employees does not come suddenly. On the contrary, their interest in their work is gradually worn out. To retain top talent, companies and managers must recognize what they are doing that is causing their employees' passion to slowly fade. The following practices are the most damaging and must be avoided if you want to retain good employees. Treating employees without distinction and treating them equally, while applicable to schooling, should not be used in the workplace. For good employees, this means that no matter how well they perform (and good employees are usually "old bulls" who work hard), they are treated like idiots who just clock in and out. Tolerance of poor performance. It is said that a jazz band is only as good as its worst musician and that no matter how good the other musicians are, the audience hears the worst. The same is true of companies. If the company does not punish poor performers in any way, they will drag down the performance of other employees, especially the best ones. This can happen if managers are not emotionally intelligent enough to deal effectively with poor performance.

Failure to recognize employees' achievements

It is easy for managers to underestimate the power of praise, and particularly easy to underestimate its effect on good employees who are in desperate need of motivation. Everyone loves accolades, and this is especially true of hard-working, fully committed employees. Rewarding an individual's contribution shows that the manager values it. Managers need to talk to their staff to find out what their individual preferences are for rewards (some want a pay rise, others want public praise) for good work. If the reward system is implemented properly, rewards will be a regular occurrence for good employees. It may seem efficient to keep assigning tasks to employees without describing the company's development for them. However, for good employees, a lack of clarity about the company's blueprint can be a major reason for them to leave. Good employees are willing to take on a larger workload because they genuinely care about their work, and therefore that work must be worthwhile. If they don't know what the value is, they become alienated and feel directionless. They don't feel valued in the company, so they look elsewhere for value. Employees are unable to pursue their preferences Google requires employees to devote at least 20% of their time to "what they think is most beneficial to Google". These hobby projects have led to great Google products such as Google Mail and AdWords, but their greatest effect has been to create highly focused Google employees. Talented employees are often full of enthusiasm. Allowing these employees to pursue their hobbies can increase their productivity and job satisfaction, but many managers limit their employees to a small space. Such managers worry that if they allow their employees to expand their focus and pursue their hobbies, they will be less productive. This concern is purely superfluous. Studies have shown that if employees are cansue their hobbies at work, their brains will remain stimulated and they will be five times more productive than normal. In short, in the face of staff mobility problems, managers often blame God but ignore the crux of the problem - employees are not leaving but leaving the boss.

03、Employees leave in 3 months and 2 years, the reason for the difference in what?

The cost of staff turnover is horrible an employee leaves a pit after leaving, and does not find another person to fill in everything is fine. Generally speaking, the loss of core talent and the recruitment of a new employee to fill it involves at least a 1-2 month recruitment period, a 3-month adaptation period, and a 6-month integration period; in addition to recruitment costs equivalent to 4 months' salary and a failure rate of over 40%. After an employee leaves, the replacement cost alone, from finding a new person to getting them up and running smoothly, can be as much as 150% of the departing employee's annual salary, or even more, if the person leaving is a manager. To add to the tangle: authorities estimate that one employee leaving will cause about three employees to think about leaving, so if the turnover rate is 10%, 30% of employees are looking for work; if the turnover rate is 20%, 60% of employees are looking for work. There is a big difference between an employee leaving in 3 months and leaving in 2 years! You can certainly quote a famous person about the reasons why employees leave, and there are just two: the money is not paid and the heart is aggrieved. In reality, it's not that simple. Employees at different levels and with different years of service have more complex and all-encompassing reasons for leaving.

Leaving 2 weeks after joining

This means that new employees see a large gap between the actual situation and expectations, including the company environment, induction training, treatment, systems, and other aspects of the first feeling. In the induction interview, the actual situation as clear as possible, not hidden nor rendered, so that the new employee can objectively understand his new home, so that there will not be a huge psychological gap, not worry about the newcomer coming to hand, the one who should leave always can not stay. Then the various aspects of the induction process are systematically sorted out, including recruitment to notification of induction, reporting, induction training, handover with the employing department, and other aspects, taking full account of the newcomer's feelings and inner needs, systematic planning and introduction, so that the newcomer feels respected and valued and allows him to understand what he wants to know. Leaving after 3 months of employment is mainly related to the job itself. This may indicate that there are some problems with the company's job set-up, job responsibilities, qualifications, and interview criteria, which need to be carefully reviewed to remedy the situation and reduce ineffective labor in the recruitment process. If you leave after 6 months of employment, it is most likely to be related to your direct supervisor. HR needs to find ways to get the company's managers to receive leadership training and to understand and master the basic leadership qualities. Managers need to understand the strengths of their subordinates and match their strengths with the responsibilities of the position to be most effective for the company, while also allowing the employee to demonstrate their value. A good manager is a coach who has the duty and responsibility to discover potential and strengths and develop his subordinates and be a key driving force for their success. The same department with a different leader may have completely different results, and the same group of employees may perform diametrically opposite, one may be full of fighting spirit and enthusiasm, the other may complain a lot, the team is disorganized, and departures are frequent. Direct superiors should be the first to understand the various trends and tendencies of subordinates, his words may solve the problem but can also cause conflicts, if not dealt with, the team morale decline, combat effectiveness decline, and it will enter a bad cycle. Therefore, teams with a large number of employees leaving within 1 year should be aware that there may be a problem with their direct supervisor.

Leaving after 2 years or so

Leaving around 2 years is generally related to the culture of the company. At this time, employees generally have a complete understanding of the company, various ways of dealing with people, interpersonal relations, human environment, empowerment, career development, and so on very comprehensive understanding, even including the company's strategy and the boss's hobbies. As a company, you need to think twice a day and be aware of the bad elements in the company. The company is not big or small but needs a good working atmosphere to keep the employees happy.

Leaving after 3-5 years

Leaving after 3-5 years is related to career development. With no new knowledge or skills to learn, little scope for salary progression and no ,more senior positions to offer, the best solution for employees is to jump ship. However, the value of employees at this stage is greatest for the company, and the loss of leaving is greater. We should design reasonable career development channels according to the different types of employees with different demand structures; understand the psychological dynamics of employees and listen to their voices; research the supply and demand in the job market and take the initiative to adjust the salary and job design; we aim to retain employees and other policies can be considered for flexible adjustment according to the situation.

Leaving after 5 years or more

Employees who have been with us for more than 5 years have increased tolerance. We need to give them new responsibilities and more innovative work to motivate them. On the other hand, personal development and enterprise development speed are not unified, who is slow to develop has become the object of elimination, staff neglect to learn, stagnant, inevitably alienated by the enterprise and cold; enterprise development is too slow, the staff's upward space can not open, career-minded employees can not see new hope, will certainly find another job.

The above from the perspective of the length of time in service to consider the main reasons for leaving, the specific situation should be judged according to the actual situation, timely adjustments, to control the rate of departure to a minimum, the loss of enterprises will also be the minimum. In the face of the high cost of leaving, it is more important to treat your employees well, especially the best ones! In a knowledge-based organization, where the most important feature is innovation and creativity, any manager should learn how to guide, not command. It is the army that needs command, because that only requires obedience to superior orders, and does not advocate self-creation. (A common problem in the push for militarised management)