Can organizations use attrition rates to improve manager performance? It’s tough to do.
In an article last week, I started a series on how managers receive feedback on their own performance. Most managers don’t actively solicit performance feedback, let alone from their employees, and as a result, the default moment that a manager receives feedback as a manager is when someone quits. As performance feedback, it fails. But what about when a bunch of people quit over a period of time? That has to say something about a manager, doesn’t it?
It does! But there are problems, and as a design for getting information to the manager so that they can change their behaviors, it fails. Here’s why:
Attrition rates = slow, lagging data: Many companies’ HR departments will track attrition rates for managers or divisions within the company. They may even divide attrition between “good attrition” (lower performing or problematic employees who leave) and “bad attrition” (high performing employees who leave). This is excellent information, since it can give visibility to the HR department and the management team where the best and worst rates are in the organization. They can then do a study to identify what is being done in the “high good attrition/low bad attrition” areas, and vice versa. Then they can identify the teams and organizations that are having the most problems, and then work on finding ways to change the behaviors, and try to implement a program that improves the areas where the bad attrition is the highest and good attrition is the lowest. Then they can measure the new “good and bad” attrition rates and see if there has been improvement. . .
More reasons mandatory meetings are bad for you and bad for your team
In my previous post, I discussed why mandatory meetings create a bad dynamic for your group or your team. The post centered on the cycle that the people who don’t want to attend – the ones that compelled you to make it mandatory – end up sabotaging your meeting anyway, making it a bad experience for you, the ones who wanted to attend, and the ones who didn’t want to attend.
But there are more reasons you should consider not making any meetings mandatory. And here they are:
Reason number 1: You can’t get everyone to attend anyway
This is an obvious point, but one that seems to be lost on many managers who require attendance at meetings. For any given meeting, there is going to be a group of people who will not or cannot attend. Read more
Loyalty is a lagging indicator, so don’t ask for loyalty and expect it
If you are a manager, you may value loyalty in your employees. You may even express this in your presentation to your employees as part of your values. However, if you ask for loyalty, then you are attempting a short cut. Loyalty is a lagging indicator that you can obtain only several years down the road. If you treat it like a leading indicator by asking for it initially, then you probably have lost some loyalty in your employees, defeating the purpose. Here’s how it works: Read more
