Posted in Human Resources Articles, Total Reads: 1802
, Published on 22 September 2012
Companies off late have been seeing a worrying trend. Their best young managers are on a constant lookout for a better gig. They are constantly networking and thinking about what next step they should take, even if they have more on their back than they can handle now. And these companies are coming up with so many employee development programs but its not helping them make anybody stay.
These young high achievers, generally in the age bracket of around 30 yrs, with strong academic records, holding degrees from elite institutes and best of the class internship experiences, are particularly antsy.
They have been sending out their resumes, are contacting search firms, and even keep appearing for interviews now and then. This trend is seen to stem from the comparison between the peripatetic managers’ salary histories, with those of their peers who stay put, it has been clear that each change in employer created a measurable advantage in pay. In fact, a job change has been found to be the single biggest determinant of a pay increase. This trend shows a contradiction to what had been believed for ages. Job hopping has long been viewed as a shortcut to the top, but research conducted worldwide show that this has been a total myth and the earlier generations who believed have paid a price in terms of promotions and have often seen their salaries suffer as well.
The earliest trigger for job hopping has been a lack and/or dissatisfaction with the employee development efforts of the employers. A large gap has been found by experts between what these young managers want their employers to do to help them grow in their jobs and what the employers actually do. It has been reported that these managers do get what they need for on-the-job development like high visibility positions and greater responsibilities, but by the way of formal development, like trainings, mentoring, coaching, and many other things which the managers highly value are not coming much their way. This leads to a decision to make a switch and the managers keep hopping in an average span of about 15-28 months.
But then why such disconnect? It can’t be that the employers are not aware of their managers’ feelings or their needs. It could be because a formal training is expensive and require the managers being taken off their jobs for considerable periods of time, short though it may be. Employers are generally and understandably reluctant to make such a big investment in their managers who they have no guarantee would stay long enough to reap the results of the investment. But they don’t realize that this creates a vicious circle.
The companies won’t train the managers thinking that they might leave, and the managers leave because they don’t get any new training or coaching or mentoring. By offering the employees a promising balanced menu of development opportunities, the employers could boost their managers’ inclination to stick around. This would bring down their high turnover rates which have been bothering the guys in the HR for long now.
It just so happens that then, people begin to blame the institutes or the attitude of the people who studied from there, as a cause for this trend. But they forget that one needs two hands to clap. As a product of some elite institute, these young managers definitely expect an edge and come with a stronger urge for moving up the ladder. It isn’t wrong that they need more to get satisfied, but the employers also need to take certain steps to help them decide to stay. A high attrition rate does not show a good picture on any report or portfolio of any company, and even practically does a company a lot of harm.
Each time a manager leaves, a company loses a person who had a considerable knowledge about the insides of the company and ends up creating a threat for itself. Times have changed and so do the need of employees. The previous generations believed in staying with one employer for all their life, but the new generation is more selfish and believes in personal development as a first priority, organization development can come later. At such a time, a small effort to break this vicious circle of attrition would go a long way in serving mutual interests – the managers would get their formal personal development, and the organization minimizes its threats and works towards its own development.