|
|  |
| |
|
| | The Human Resources: Recruiting, Hiring, and Staffing Network is not currently active and cannot accept new posts | | The most effective retention strategy | Views: 2029 | | Mar 14, 2007 1:08 pm | | The most effective retention strategy | # | 
Jo Verde | | Hello All,
I have for ages, been on the bandwagon with organizations on the root cause for force loss and poor retention rates. When all the HR policies and processes are in place addressing both organizational and employee issues and retention rates continue to dive I most often find that the symptoms being addressed are not the root cause. I would ask that you read this excerpt from a current interview and consider the skills and competencies of the manager as being the number one retention factor.For me, it follows then, that this is the area where companys need to address their attention, effort, training dollars, coaching etc.
Views?
Speaking exclusively to Personnel Today, Brearley said: "The most effective retention strategy is a great manager - it's not an HR policy or process.
"Our job in HR is to find how to help select, promote, develop and create the capabilities for great managers. People join great companies they leave bad managers."
Brearley said Vodafone, which employs about 10,500 people in nine offices across the UK, has focused on developing local standards for its line managers.
"We measure employee engagement by standards set by local measures. We've really worked on educating our managers about what it means to be a great Vodafone leader," he said.
Staff turnover across Vodafone UK stands at an average of 21%, compared with 30% across the retail and customer service industries
Senior Director
JeMM Consultants
www.jemmconsultants.comPrivate Reply to Jo Verde | | Mar 14, 2007 4:10 pm | | re: The most effective retention strategy | # |
Jimmy Sanderson | | Hi Jo:
I agree that having good managers in a place is an excellent tool to increase retention. I think it may be oversimplifying to say it's the most effective tool, I think that depends on other factors (pay, benefits).
However, I do agree that processes and policies only go so far, if organizational members lack interpersonal skills, people will look to leave the organization and go other placed where they will be treated better.
In my experience, it makes more sense to focus on developing the qualities mentioned in this article as they seem to have a bigger impact on employee retention than all the policies and processes combined.
Jimmy Private Reply to Jimmy Sanderson | | Mar 15, 2007 12:35 am | | re: re: The most effective retention strategy | # |
Viswanathan Chandrasekharan | | Its a mix.
People join an organisation with a lot of expectations.
They leave because their expectations arent met.
Some of the reasons which comes out during exit interviews are, a bad manager, or being ignored for promotion or not getting the salary they deserve.
Retention could be more effective if we can understand the reason or reasons, an employee joins a company. Private Reply to Viswanathan Chandrasekharan | | Mar 26, 2007 10:21 am | | re: The most effective retention strategy | # | 
Janhavi Mutalik | | I agree Jo..for the simple reason that the employee needs of recognition,promotion,benefits ,are looked after by their immediate boss.An effective manager would surely not miss these pointers in his/her team mates' career.If you look down the hierarchy,the continuation of this organisational attitude would build great company and retain the employees.
Thnx
JanhaviPrivate Reply to Janhavi Mutalik | | Mar 27, 2007 12:42 pm | | re: The most effective retention strategy | # |
KevinVinod | | Everyone's today talking of motivation & retention strategies.
End of the day, what matters is how well a manager relates to her/his team - her/his ability to build a strong relationship, how she/he adds value to the team members.
Managing teams and their expectations starts from the individual - how the manager manages herself/himself. Communication is key and a manager's ability to build strong relationships are key to motivating people to stay with the team / organisation.
Job satisfaction is a myth. Jobs cannot give satisfaction. Its the relationships we share at the workplace and the interactions we have that give us a satisfying experience. And managers who understand this can make a difference for their teams.
Companies need to focus & spend their dollars on developing people's ability to MANAGE SELF first. All else will follow.
Warm Regards
KevinPrivate Reply to KevinVinod | | Mar 29, 2007 1:14 pm | | re: The most effective retention strategy | # | 
Rohit Gupta | | I agree, manager is responsible for taking care of his/her juniors.
Best approach, take care of their personal and professional needs they will never let you down.
Productivity is directly proportionate to satisfaction comfort and challenge).
Identify person's potential and exploit it completely.
Manager's only task is to channelize energy level of individual in productive manner.
Private Reply to Rohit Gupta | | Mar 31, 2007 5:33 am | | re: The most effective retention strategy | # | 
AOPU _MUMBAI | | Now a days , person looks for the job resposibilities which is becoming the main cause for the person to stay with the organization or not to stay with the organization.
In this era, where both the partners are working , one of them always takes the risk of trying out various jobs till the time he / she is satisfied.
Remuneration is important but not the only cause for the peson to take the decisions.Private Reply to AOPU _MUMBAI | | Jun 28, 2007 10:06 pm | | re: The most effective retention strategy | # |
Rashi Agarwal | | Hi,
Visit www.castalia07.com to know whats happening in the Industry with regard to Talent Retention...
Cheers!
RashiPrivate Reply to Rashi Agarwal | | Jul 04, 2007 4:51 am | | re: The most effective retention strategy | # |
Harini p | |
Retention of employees given the market conditions in our country today is extremely difficult; what matters is not just great pay but the overall culture and attitude of the management; I think managers should be quick enough to spot good talent and do what needs to be done to retain ; point is given work pressures managers realize this too late and try and woo an employee after he puts in his papers.
HR should be pro active enough to recognize and then retain
HariniPrivate Reply to Harini p | | Jul 05, 2007 7:48 am | | re: The most effective retention strategy | # | 
Pooja Rajan | | I do agree that having a great manager is one of the retention strategies.
But i also find that things like culture of the place where you are working, the kind of senior management it has ( in terms of how they project themselves , how they take decisions that affect the employees directly and small things like how they respond when an employee wishes them all these matter a lot), what is the market image of the company you are working for all contribute towards people quitting.
Its very important that these issues are addressed in the company policy and solutions to such problems has to have a top down approach .
And thats where managers play an important role because they have the decision making authority and sometimes the rapport which is required to get things done.
Pooja
Private Reply to Pooja Rajan | | Jul 05, 2007 3:27 pm | | re: re: The most effective retention strategy | # | 
Ben Simonton | | Retention is all about how the employee "feels" about his/her job. If the employee "feels" a strong sense of ownership, retention will be very high.
Most often, management uses a top-down command and control model which demeans, disrespects and demotivates employees. In this kind of environment, no employee can develop a strong sense of ownership.
So what we need is the opposite of the conventional command and control environment in order to maximize retention. This is easier said than done, but the steps to do so are straightforward. It all starts with asking each employee on a regular basis what they need to do a better job and then giving it to them. This is a bottom up model.
Best regards, Ben
Author "Leading People to be Highly Motivated and Committed"
http://www.bensimonton.comPrivate Reply to Ben Simonton | | Aug 27, 2007 6:34 am | | re: The most effective retention strategy | # | 
Stankov | | Hi,
People join Organisation but leave managers.
so focus on building good leaders and managers.
cheersPrivate Reply to Stankov | | Aug 27, 2007 3:06 pm | | re: re: The most effective retention strategy | # |
Chris Harris | | Stankov is exactly right. Organizations can only do so much to retain employees. Managers are really the key to retaining a talented workforce. Private Reply to Chris Harris | | Aug 28, 2007 7:04 am | | re: The most effective retention strategy | # | 
Karen | | I think what we need to remember is, in as much as it is an employees market it is also an employers market.
During a recruitment process both the candidates and the employers are said to be equally nervous and in my opinion this is where the employer should be spot on.
To begin with I believe organisations need to get employees with the right attitude.
I must say that while I agree with both the views - i.e. giving the employees ownership of their projects; and making sure that their managers are leaders in the true sense and are approachable; I do also believe that the investment that an organisation makes in the way of mentors, coaches, well-being programmes, WLB practices, flexi work practices and such, definitely have an impact on whether an employee stays or goes.Private Reply to Karen | | Oct 05, 2007 12:40 pm | | re: The most effective retention strategy | # | 
Soumya | | While the most common ‘reasons’ employees give during an exit interview, is money and growth, I definitely agree that its beyond monetary benefits that the organization can offer. Primarily, managers play an important role in retaining existing employee; secondly the hiring managers should drive the concept of hiring the ‘right candidate’ and not ‘the best candidate’ Private Reply to Soumya | | Oct 22, 2007 3:37 pm | | re: re: The most effective retention strategy | # |
Jo Verde | | Hi All,
In lieu of this discussion thread, I thought you might find this interesting....times are a changing...J.
Employees who are satisfied with their employer's concern for the environment are more likely to take pride in their jobs - a key factor in increasing the engagement of workers - according to a study of more than 80,000 employees by Sirota Survey Intelligence, specialists in attitude research.
But the level of employees' satisfaction with their employers' environmental policies decreases further down the organizational ladder, with senior-level executives the most satisfied, hourly employees the least favorable and middle managers' views falling in between.
Key findings are as follows:
a) 82 percent of employees who are satisfied with their organization' s concern for the environment said they are proud to work for their employers.
b) Just 55 percent of employees who view their employer's environmental positions unfavorably express pride in working for their organizations.
c) Employees' satisfaction with their employers' concern for the environment decreases further down the organizational ladder - 93 percent of senior-level executives are satisfied with their employers' environmental concern, and 85 percent of middle managers and 70 percent of hourly workers look favorably toward their employers' environmental policies.
"An organization' s environmental efforts originate at the top, and senior-level management's participation is vital to achieving success," said Douglas Klein, Sirota Survey Intelligence president. "Lower-level employees may not be as involved in planning or in carrying out these endeavors - or even know about them - because they haven't been effectively communicated to all organizational levels.
"Our research demonstrates that companies can enhance a key component of employee engagement - workers' pride in their employers - by improving their environmental concern and by better publicizing and communicating their environmental activities to increase all employees' awareness of them."
Environmentally friendly policies are considered a key component of corporate social responsibility (CSR). Other research by Sirota Survey Intelligence showed employees who are satisfied with their company's commitment to social responsibility have high levels of employee engagement, as well as positive views about their employer's competitiveness, integrity and interest in their well-being.
Seventy percent of employees have a positive view of their organization' s CSR policies, according to a study of 1.6 million employees from more than 70 organizations by Sirota Survey Intelligence.
Of those who are satisfied with their employer's CSR commitment:
a) 86 percent have high levels of engagement.
b) 82 percent feel their organization is highly competitive in the marketplace.
c) 75 percent feel their employer is interested in their well-being.
d) 71 percent rate senior management as having high integrity.
"Organizations that demonstrate environmentally friendly behavior are taking a major step toward their workers viewing them as being socially responsible and are better positioned to reap the many employee-related benefits that Sirota has correlated with that perception," Klein said.
Private Reply to Jo Verde | | Oct 22, 2007 4:58 pm | | re: re: re: The most effective retention strategy | # |
Ben Simonton | |
Thanks for the data, Jo. Nice to see that the results are right in line with what common sense tells me.
Best regards, Ben
Author "Leading People to be Highly Motivated and Committed"Private Reply to Ben Simonton | | Oct 28, 2007 12:23 pm | | re: The most effective retention strategy | # | 
kishor Jagirdar | | I agree with Jo on this concept that a lot of people leave due to bad managers.A BOSS who is inefficient ,bad tempered ,manipulative,YES Sir type,illorganised etc can virtually choke the working environment and male even the best of the talent to leave the organisation no matter how good the compnay is.Majority of the people who quit in the exit interview state that they quit due to a bad manager and not for pay packages.
This is rampant in BPO and ITES sector where people are relatively very young and lack the management experiences to handle a team.
I think the corporate should seriously train their managers with "state of art" technics to handle their downline folks and this would automatically reflect on the Industry becoming and little more stable as an employee never forgets the value derived from a good Boss and always sticks around for very long time frames irrespective to other factors like pay scales, perks etc.Private Reply to kishor Jagirdar | | Oct 29, 2007 12:27 am | | re: re: The most effective retention strategy | # |
Jo Verde | | I guess all of this discussion begs the question....are organizations today getting the message that they best be spending a fair chunk of their training dollars on interpersonal skills and leadership training...and the expected impact on their force loss retention rates...all of this affecting the bottom line..
Cheers all,
JoPrivate Reply to Jo Verde | | Oct 29, 2007 10:34 am | | re: re: re: The most effective retention strategy | # |
Ben Simonton | |
It's a good question, Jo, but I would venture the answer to be a big fat NO.
Actually, that answer is not surprising given the disarray of the "leadership" gurus and writers.
Compared to fields such as accounting, finance, supply chain management, engineering, sales, marketing and all the other business disciplines, the field of leadership provides no coherent, comprehensive set of whats, whys and how tos. In fact, the leadership field provides almost no whys and very few how tos.
In addition, we are brought up in a very authoritarian society and learn that approach daily at home, in school, at church, and from the government. It is natural that we then use an authoritarian approach at work. So authoritarianism is ingrained in us from birth and is unfortunately the exact opposite of how one causes employees to use their full potential of creativity, innovation, productivity, motivation and commitment at work.
In fact, authoritarianism naturally disrespects, demeans and demotivates the workforce thus causing them to not use their innate abitlity to create and innovate at work.
Best regards, Ben
Private Reply to Ben Simonton | | Oct 30, 2007 9:10 pm | | re: re: re: re: The most effective retention strategy | # | 
Kevin Burns | | Ben,
Here's the reason why there are no whats, whys and hows in leadership: it's not a position. Leadership is an attitude. Management is not leadership. However management is something you could do with leadership. The rules are usually very clear on management but not leadership because it is NOT something tangible.
I have worked for great leaders and bad managers. Usually the only thing that separates a great leader from a bad manager is attitude.
I AM one of those leadership gurus and writers. I spend every single day immersed in leadership. I have figured out that it is true that people join a good company and leave a bad manager. An earlier comment mentioned that expectations may not have been met: bad management. Promises may not have been kept: bad management. Processes may be suspect: bad management.
Get rid of a bad manager and you immediately drop your attrition rates. It's usually the "one" who causes the "many" to leave.
Kevin Burns
Author & Attitude AdjusterPrivate Reply to Kevin Burns | | Oct 30, 2007 11:18 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: The most effective retention strategy | # |
Ben Simonton | |
Kevin,
You wrote - "Here's the reason why there are no whats, whys and hows in leadership: it's not a position. Leadership is an attitude. Management is not leadership. However management is something you could do with leadership. The rules are usually very clear on management but not leadership because it is NOT something tangible."
I apologize for not making clear that my contention is that those who write the rules for being a leader and exercising leadership of subordinates have not provided a comprehensive, coherent set of whats, whys and how tos. I was not contending that no such set exists.
I managed people for over 30 years, as few as 22 and as many as 1300. I have made all the mistakes possible but did find effective solutions to each. I was able to turnaround four different management disasters including a nuclear-powered cruiser and a 1300 person unionized group in New York City. In the last position, productivity rose over a four year period by over 300% per person, morale was sky high as were creativity and innovation, and almost everyone loved to come to work.
In the process, I had to create a set of comprehensive, coherent whats, whys and how tos in order to train my subordinate managers and supervisors as I could never have made such a large culture change alone. This set includes specific actions which must be taken, a script which anyone can understand and execute.
So I know that an easy to understand and easy to execute set of whats, whys and how tos does exist and does define leadership of subordinates in detail.
Best regards, Ben
Author "Leading People to be Highly Motivated and Committed"
http://www.bensimonton.comPrivate Reply to Ben Simonton | | Oct 30, 2007 11:56 pm | | re: The most effective retention strategy | # |
Jo Verde | | Hi Kevin,
While your comment was not directed to me, I choose to respond. I have not had the honor of dialogue with you but I have with Ben privately.
It occured to me that while each of you have your own way of expressing your ideas, your base belief is pretty much the same. I am not an author like the 2 of you nor am I a guru..but I am a practicing human resources consultant and facilitator and have seen and experienced first hand the damage of ineffective management and poor leadership in many of the companies I work with.
In addition, I too have worked with great and terrible managers as well as awesome and awful leaders. And yes agree there is a difference.
Upon reflection, in my learning to be,I probably qualified in all four categories.Had my bosses just decided to get rid of me as opposed to coaching and teaching and training and mentoring and encouraging me...well...let us just say a number of people would have missed out.
I remain steadfast in my belief that unless and until organizations "Get It", that being the impact on the bottom line.....retention rates will continue to plumet and impact the bottom line. As a consultant I see this as a challenge and an opportunity to show organizations practical steps to turn the theory into measureable changes in action and behaviour.
While retention rates is not perceived as the number one issue here in Canada or at least not with the same significance as in other countries around the world,the competition for highly qualified individuals is a global issue as our world continues to become smaller. So say I.
Just my views and reflection on your post,
Cheers,
Jo
Senior Director
JeMM Consultants
www.jemmconsultants.comPrivate Reply to Jo Verde | | Oct 31, 2007 1:21 am | | re: re: The most effective retention strategy | # |
Kevin Burns | | Jo,
I appreciate your comments and it's good to meet you. In my dealing with organizations over the past ten years, I have come to this conclusion as it concerns finding leadership candidates: it's not up to the organization to improve the individual but the inherent responsibility of the individual to raise his/her value.
I'm a big believer that any person who demonstrates initiative is a better candidate to lead others than is the person who waits for his number to come up through tenure. It amazes me how many people stop learning once they get the title.
I can prove that. I do this in my training sessions - ask a group of managers/leaders on how many of them read a book on leadership in the last 90 days. Less than 10% will raise their hands.
I put my money on the guy who invests in himself first and THEN asks a company to invest in him. If you want to keep your good people, let them buy in and take some ownership (not necessarily financial) of the work.
Leaders lead. Managers manage. Which one would you follow? It's the leaders who take ownership of what they do. When you take ownership, it becomes more emotionally difficult to walk away. That's how you keep them - emotionally engage them.
The problem is, these folks attend the weekly management meeting not leadership meeting. You'll never attract the good people, train the good people or keep the good people if you, as a leader, aren't leading by example and asking the rest to buy in like you should.
But you already get that, as does Ben. You're right, we're not that far apart are we?
Kevin Burns
Author & Attitude Adjuster
www.kevburns.comPrivate Reply to Kevin Burns | | Nov 02, 2007 8:08 am | | re: The most effective retention strategy | # | 
Akshay | | Hello All,
Its been educative reading Ben, Kevin, Jo and others. On the last post Kevin you said “..it's not up to the organization to improve the individual but the inherent responsibility of the individual to raise his/her value.” While I agree prima facie to this view point I request a little deeper thought into this.
Organizations hire individuals who they feel fit the bill to execute a role. To expect to find a perfect match seems fairly unlikely, result you are going to get folks who are either over / under qualified (from a competency perspective) for the role.
At the point of landing a new role, for someone who is under qualified it would be best to start investing in himself in order to succeed. However is it not the organizations responsibility to do so? Not just from human perspective but also a purely economic view point?
The over qualified person is going to be restless and become quickly disgruntled. At that time what is expected of this person? Is he/she expected to move on or is the organization expected to intervene and handle this situation to retain the individual again from both a human & economic stand point?
If the organization is expected to intervene, in either (or both) case who does so? To my mind it is the person’s first level supervisor’s job to do so – either directly train / coach / counsel or to first report to relevant entities with in the organization and later to facilitate the execution of actions as determined fit by these entities.
If such were the case does the manager have the skills to do so? Would it be worth while to spend money on getting the manager competent for these activities? To my mind the answer is that it does
Private Reply to Akshay | | Nov 03, 2007 3:51 pm | | re: re: The most effective retention strategy | # |
Ben Simonton | |
Akshay,
You took exception to Kevin Burns' statement that “..it's not up to the organization to improve the individual but the inherent responsibility of the individual to raise his/her value.”
I agree wholeheartedly with you, Akshay, for several reasons. Kevin is right that each individual should do their utmost to raise their own value and in truth, the company cannot actually improve the employee's value since only the employee can actually learn and develop new skills. But for the company not to do their best to help the employee is a huge and very costly error, very shortsighted.
First and most important, any increase in the capabilities of an employee make that employee more valuable and more productive to the company. For the company to leave this to chance assures mediocrity. If the company leads in this effort, employees tend to follow that lead and commit themselves to more learning. Companies who don't do so are leading in the direction of low levels of proficiency and learning, and get more of that.
Second, the company needs a reliable source of employees who are proficient at more than one position and without active company involvement in the training/development process this goal will never be achieved.
Third, the company needs highly proficient employees at every position. There is simply no way to hire precisely the right expertise level in all the different areas. New hires always have some skills, but will always be lacking in some skills and always could use improvement in all skills. To leave this to the employee is once again to assure mediocrity.
Fourth, the issue of retention is huge. An employee tends to become very loyal to a company which spends time and energy helping that employee become highly proficient and the more spent by the company the more indebted the employee. There is only one way the employee can payback the company for this investment and that is by working more diligently and trying harder to do a better job for the company.
Fifth, the issues of productivity and motivation are likewise huge. Developing employees unselfishly is just one of many ways a company can show great respect for employees. If the company takes advantage of all the ways to show great respect and that they highly value their employees, employees will develop a sense of ownership of their work. This causes employees to unleash their full potential of creativity, innovation, productivity, motivation and commitment (all of which come from the brain) making them over 300% more productive than if poorly motivated. Failing to commit time and energy to developing employees dooms a company to having far too many poorly motivated employees who apply very little of their brainpower to the work.
Best regards, BenPrivate Reply to Ben Simonton | | Nov 04, 2007 6:23 pm | | re: re: The most effective retention strategy | # |
Kevin Burns | | Akshay,
Let me answer your request for further clarification. Please bear with me as I take up a little more time with a longer post to expound my point of view.
When an employer goes looking for a potential employee, perfect match or not, they are looking for someone who can accomplish the job. They are not looking for someone to exceed expectations or they would have advertised that. They just want someone merely competent. And if they find that competent person, if the person doesn't improve over time and if the job doesn't change, they will be happy with their employee for years to come. If the employee can live with doing the same job every day getting the same paycheck every week and not testing his/her abilities, then they have a match. The company only requires someone competent. Nothing more.
However, over time we all know the employee will eventually begin to feel they are being taken advantage of. They haven't been given big raises (but the job hasn't changed either) and they become disgruntled. The company however, doesn't feel they need to pay more. The job hasn't changed, the responsibilities haven't changed and the employee is doing exactly the job that was advertised.
The company is only responsible for training the employee to do the job. That's it. If you take the job you agree to the expectations. If you are better than the job then don't take the job. Clearly you will not be happy. If you are under skilled for the job, then I'm not sure the company would hire you but if they did, their responsibility for "training" ends once you are able to do the job competently.
In order to better one's position in life, they have to become more valuable. It's not the company's job to make the individual better. Sure, the company can provide an environment where self-improvement is encouraged but ultimately it's not the company's responsibility to improve the individual beyond the expectations of being able to do the job. That's it.
However, as an employee, one can't use the excuse that they won't improve because the company won't pay for it. (Anyone who would dare say that in my shop would be fired immediately and I would gladly pay the legal bills to get rid of a cancer like that.) Sitting on the sofa watching TV reruns is no replacement for opening a book and becoming better at the job or better as a person.
We have to all accept accountability. We are what we are and where we are in our lives by our own doing. We have said "yes" all the way along. It's how we ended up where we are. Now, if we are being paid what we are perceived to be worth (and we are), wouldn't it make sense to self-improve, get better at the job or the next job up the ladder, raise our worth, raise our profile, raise our stock which, in turn, would raise our paychecks?
If you won't raise your personal worth, why should the company pay more? If the job hasn't changed and the individual hasn't changed then the paycheck shouldn't change.
One can't ever use the excuse "that's all the company pays" for not doing better. Look around. There are others in the company making more than you. The truth really is, "That's all the company pays ... you."
The company will do whatever is necessary to keep a high-performer (including money, status, position, perks, etc.). The company will do little to upset the apple cart of someone who is doing a competent job. (You may want to check my Blog for recent entries on high-performers - http://www.kevburns.com/blog.html)
In a nutshell, here's a simplistic overview of how a company can run a clean ship (organization): 1) Don't mess with what's working (competent employees). 2) Do whatever is necessary to keep the superstar (high-performer). 3) Get rid of the deadwood (under-achiever).
It's imperative that the individual honestly figures out where they, as an individual, are on that scale. The company makes their choices based on #1 and #2. That's their choice. The individual now must figure out where they are on the scale and hope that it's not #3.
Hope I've made it a little more clear.
Kevin Burns
Author & Attitude Adjuster
www.kevburns.comPrivate Reply to Kevin Burns | | Nov 07, 2007 11:23 am | | re: re: re: The most effective retention strategy | # |
Jo Verde | | Hi Kevin,
Couldn't resist responding...Akshay knows me well enough...the reality is that whatever the rationale behind what an individual does in terms of personal growth, the responsibility for self development rests with the individual. Yes, in some or perhaps most cases here in North America, the company can encourage and support those efforts to learn, to grow, to increase personal value and therefore increase market value.However, all organizations look at the value to the organization and few from the individual's perspective.
In my career, my thirst for knowledge is ever growing, but that has nothing to do with an employer but my personal choice. No employer would ever dictate to me my ability to be slotted based on my ability/choice to perform.My development is my choice, no one can impede that.
Not to get hung up in semantics, for once again, I think we have the same base belief. What I would perhaps question,is an assumption that culturally, organizational belief is the same in India as in NA for thus far my experience is somewhat different.
Akshay, your perspective to help my knowledge is most welcome here.
Best Regards,
Jo
Senior Director
JeMM Consultants
www.jemmconsultants.comPrivate Reply to Jo Verde | | Nov 27, 2007 2:46 pm | | re: re: re: re: The most effective retention strategy | # |
Navneet Chandra | | Fantastic Discussion!!!!
Every one has given great inputs. Jo spoke about good managers, Viswanathan and Janhavi mentioned expectations or the lack of it, Kevin touched on the importance of relationships, Pooja spoke about culture while Ben looked at the aspect of “belonging” and finally Ben, Kevin and Jo discussed about Leadership, Training and Identification of Performers at all levels ( or the lack of it). Every one touched on one important aspect of a rather complex structure or strategy. Complex not because it is difficult or too elaborate but it needs to be on an enterprise level and a continuous function.
I think everyone will agree that the most effective Retention Strategy is to have a good “Talent Management” Strategy which includes a good acquisition plan which includes Induction, a good development plan which includes training and a good HR plan which includes monitoring, rewarding and employee satisfaction plans.
The problem, I speak for myself and my experiences in this industry for the last 18 years, especially in the IT / ITeS industry is that it has become a “numbers” game. To meet numbers, you need to compromise on the quality of resources and the process being followed to recruit each person. I remember when the SAP market was HOT in 1998 - 99 ( its hot once again now), organizations would recruit any one whose resume had SAP mentioned on it ( even if it was Typing error). The situation was so ridiculous that there was a standard joke in an organization I was working for in Hyderabad, India to have Warning signs put up all around our campus which said “ Trespassers would be RECRUITED”….LOL
Just my 2 cents…
Cheers and Hopefully all of you would have had a good Thanks Giving.
Navneet Chandra
Private Reply to Navneet Chandra | | |
| |
| |
