RegalEagle
Professional
Meghana
Hr Professional
Amla
Hr Executive
Simrankhorana
Hr Professional
Srinivasan.S
Trainee-hr
Sai_2345
Business
Magoopreeti
Hr Manager
Nk
Hr Manager

- Azim Premji, CEO- Wipro

Every company faces the problem of people leaving the company for better pay or profile.

Early this year, Mark, a senior software designer, got an offer from a prestigious international firm to work in its India operations developing specialized software. He was thrilled by the offer.

He had heard a lot about the CEO. The salary was great. The company had all the right systems in place employee-friendly human resources (HR) policies, a spanking new office, and the very best technology,even a canteen that served superb food.

Twice Mark was sent abroad for training. "My learning curve is the sharpest it's ever been," he said soon after he joined.

Last week, less than eight months after he joined, Mark walked out of the job.

Why did this talented employee leave ?

Arun quit for the same reason that drives many good people away.

The answer lies in one of the largest studies undertaken by the Gallup Organization. The study surveyed over a million employees and 80,000 managers and was published in a book called "First Break All The Rules". It came up with this surprising finding:

If you're losing good people, look to their manager .... manager is the reason people stay and thrive in an organization. And he 's the reason why people leave. When people leave they take knowledge,experience and contacts with them, straight to the competition.

"People leave managers not companies ," write the authors Marcus Buckingham and Curt Coffman.

Mostly manager drives people away?

HR experts say that of all the abuses, employees find humiliation the most intolerable. The first time, an employee may not leave,but a thought has been planted. The second time, that thought gets strengthened. The third time, he looks for another job.

When people cannot retort openly in anger, they do so by passive aggression. By digging their heels in and slowing down. By doing only what they are told to do and no more. By omitting to give the boss crucial information. Dev says: "If you work for a jerk, you basically want to get him into trouble. You don 't have your heart and soul in the job."

Different managers can stress out employees in different ways - by being too controlling, too suspicious,too pushy, too critical, but they forget that workers are not fixed assets, they are free agents. When this goes on too long, an employee will quit - often over a trivial issue.

Talented men leave. Dead wood doesn't.
8th June 2007 From United States
Meghana,
Good inf, how people leave the org'n and that "they are not fixed assets they are free agents", quite informative........helpful to design retention policies, work atmosphere, most imp MANAGERS who try t ocontrol them etc....
Thanks for sharing good information...
SARI
9th June 2007 From India, Hyderabad
hi this artical is very good . regards sai kumar mukthevi horizonreach management consultants 9885555166
9th June 2007
AS I DOING THE PROJECT OVER THE SAME ISSUE,... THROUH THIS PROJECT I CAME TO KNOW THE SAME REASONS WHICH MENTIONED ABOVE PRAMOD
9th June 2007 From India, Kanpur
There is a learning for all of us, now, We as HRD Managers, will have to make sure to our employees, that we can help them shift departments so that they need not leave the organization and as well leave the boss.
good Idea,
S.K.Sundararajan
HRD Manager
Cell 9282103900
11th June 2007 From India, Madras
hey meghana,
thats a really good one. thanks for sharing it with all of us.
I totally agree with it.
these managers are also called as TOXIC LEADERS.
If you want to read more about them, here is the link
<link no longer exists - removed>
http://www.transleadership.com/ToxicLeadership.pdf
Regards
Simran
11th June 2007 From Germany
Good reasons...but how to retain the employees...retention is the priority or the REcruitment???? Ankur Kumar
12th June 2007 From India, Ahmadabad
Categorically we have to agree with this. Mr.Sundarrajan also given a possible suggestion for rectifying the problem. Regards Srinivasan 9894746074 Chennai
12th June 2007 From Singapore, Singapore
Hi Meghana,
The idea of people leaving manager has been identified and hence the 360 feedback. this is one of the options for the employee to give a proper feedback to the organization that this 'Manager' needs to be looked into.
second, besides compensation, job rotation and other incentive program, if the organization can implement 'open door' policy for feedback - to one up; this may help identify the 'manager'.
regards
12th June 2007 From India, Kolkata
Hi members,
The reason to share this article in this HR forum is to make all HR leaders look at the flip side of the employees exit. "IT IS NOT ALWAYS THE FAULT OF THE ORGN SYSTEMS OR SALARY, ITS THE MANAGERS TOO".
Its only when the employee is frustrated with the current state of affairs that he looks out for other options.......THATs WHEN HE KNOWS THAT HIS VALUE HAS APPRECIATED (ctc).....TILL THEN HE IS CLUELESS.
Think!!!!! If attrition rate is too high in a particular dept first check with the Manager.............than the orgn.
Regards,
Meghana
13th June 2007 From United States
A good read........

I would also like to share a speech that was given by Bill Gates at the Harvard......., though its a big one, give some thought to this....

President Bok, former President Rudenstine, incoming President Faust, members of the Harvard Corporation and the Board of Overseers, members of the faculty, parents, and especially, the graduates:

I’ve been waiting more than 30 years to say this: “Dad, I always told you I’d come back and get my degree.”

I want to thank Harvard for this timely honor. I’ll be changing my job next year … and it will be nice to finally have a college degree on my résumé.

I applaud the graduates today for taking a much more direct route to your degrees. For my part, I’m just happy that the Crimson has called me “Harvard’s most successful dropout.” I guess that makes me valedictorian of my own special class … I did the best of everyone who failed.

But I also want to be recognized as the guy who got Steve Ballmer to drop out of business school. I’m a bad influence. That’s why I was invited to speak at your graduation. If I had spoken at your orientation, fewer of you might be here today.

Harvard was just a phenomenal experience for me. Academic life was fascinating. I used to sit in on lots of classes I hadn’t even signed up for. And dorm life was terrific. I lived up at Radcliffe, in Currier House. There were always lots of people in my dorm room late at night discussing things, because everyone knew I didn’t worry about getting up in the morning. That’s how I came to be the leader of the antisocial group. We clung to each other as a way of validating our rejection of all those social people.

Radcliffe was a great place to live. There were more women up there, and most of the guys were science-math types. That combination offered me the best odds, if you know what I mean. This is where I learned the sad lesson that improving your odds doesn’t guarantee success.

One of my biggest memories of Harvard came in January 1975, when I made a call from Currier House to a company in Albuquerque that had begun making the world’s first personal computers. I offered to sell them software.

I worried that they would realize I was just a student in a dorm and hang up on me. Instead they said: “We’re not quite ready, come see us in a month,” which was a good thing, because we hadn’t written the software yet. From that moment, I worked day and night on this little extra credit project that marked the end of my college education and the beginning of a remarkable journey with Microsoft.

What I remember above all about Harvard was being in the midst of so much energy and intelligence. It could be exhilarating, intimidating, sometimes even discouraging, but always challenging. It was an amazing privilege – and though I left early, I was transformed by my years at Harvard, the friendships I made, and the ideas I worked on.

But taking a serious look back … I do have one big regret.

I left Harvard with no real awareness of the awful inequities in the world – the appalling disparities of health, and wealth, and opportunity that condemn millions of people to lives of despair.

I learned a lot here at Harvard about new ideas in economics and politics. I got great exposure to the advances being made in the sciences.

But humanity’s greatest advances are not in its discoveries – but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity. Whether through democracy, strong public education, quality health care, or broad economic opportunity – reducing inequity is the highest human achievement.

I left campus knowing little about the millions of young people cheated out of educational opportunities here in this country. And I knew nothing about the millions of people living in unspeakable poverty and disease in developing countries.

It took me decades to find out.

You graduates came to Harvard at a different time. You know more about the world’s inequities than the classes that came before. In your years here, I hope you’ve had a chance to think about how – in this age of accelerating technology – we can finally take on these inequities, and we can solve them.

Imagine, just for the sake of discussion, that you had a few hours a week and a few dollars a month to donate to a cause – and you wanted to spend that time and money where it would have the greatest impact in saving and improving lives. Where would you spend it?

For Melinda and for me, the challenge is the same: how can we do the most good for the greatest number with the resources we have.

During our discussions on this question, Melinda and I read an article about the millions of children who were dying every year in poor countries from diseases that we had long ago made harmless in this country. Measles, malaria, pneumonia, hepatitis B, yellow fever. One disease I had never even heard of, rotavirus, was killing half a million kids each year – none of them in the United States.

We were shocked. We had just assumed that if millions of children were dying and they could be saved, the world would make it a priority to discover and deliver the medicines to save them. But it did not. For under a dollar, there were interventions that could save lives that just weren’t being delivered.

If you believe that every life has equal value, it’s revolting to learn that some lives are seen as worth saving and others are not. We said to ourselves: “This can’t be true. But if it is true, it deserves to be the priority of our giving.”

So we began our work in the same way anyone here would begin it. We asked: “How could the world let these children die?”

The answer is simple, and harsh. The market did not reward saving the lives of these children, and governments did not subsidize it. So the children died because their mothers and their fathers had no power in the market and no voice in the system.

But you and I have both.

We can make market forces work better for the poor if we can develop a more creative capitalism – if we can stretch the reach of market forces so that more people can make a profit, or at least make a living, serving people who are suffering from the worst inequities. We also can press governments around the world to spend taxpayer money in ways that better reflect the values of the people who pay the taxes.

If we can find approaches that meet the needs of the poor in ways that generate profits for business and votes for politicians, we will have found a sustainable way to reduce inequity in the world. This task is open-ended. It can never be finished. But a conscious effort to answer this challenge will change the world.

I am optimistic that we can do this, but I talk to skeptics who claim there is no hope. They say: “Inequity has been with us since the beginning, and will be with us till the end – because people just … don’t … care.” I completely disagree.

I believe we have more caring than we know what to do with.

All of us here in this Yard, at one time or another, have seen human tragedies that broke our hearts, and yet we did nothing – not because we didn’t care, but because we didn’t know what to do. If we had known how to help, we would have acted.

The barrier to change is not too little caring; it is too much complexity.

To turn caring into action, we need to see a problem, see a solution, and see the impact. But complexity blocks all three steps.

Even with the advent of the Internet and 24-hour news, it is still a complex enterprise to get people to truly see the problems. When an airplane crashes, officials immediately call a press conference. They promise to investigate, determine the cause, and prevent similar crashes in the future.

But if the officials were brutally honest, they would say: “Of all the people in the world who died today from preventable causes, one half of one percent of them were on this plane. We’re determined to do everything possible to solve the problem that took the lives of the one half of one percent.”

The bigger problem is not the plane crash, but the millions of preventable deaths.

We don’t read much about these deaths. The media covers what’s new – and millions of people dying is nothing new. So it stays in the background, where it’s easier to ignore. But even when we do see it or read about it, it’s difficult to keep our eyes on the problem. It’s hard to look at suffering if the situation is so complex that we don’t know how to help. And so we look away.

If we can really see a problem, which is the first step, we come to the second step: cutting through the complexity to find a solution.

Finding solutions is essential if we want to make the most of our caring. If we have clear and proven answers anytime an organization or individual asks “How can I help?,” then we can get action – and we can make sure that none of the caring in the world is wasted. But complexity makes it hard to mark a path of action for everyone who cares — and that makes it hard for their caring to matter.

Cutting through complexity to find a solution runs through four predictable stages: determine a goal, find the highest-leverage approach, discover the ideal technology for that approach, and in the meantime, make the smartest application of the technology that you already have — whether it’s something sophisticated, like a drug, or something simpler, like a bednet.

The AIDS epidemic offers an example. The broad goal, of course, is to end the disease. The highest-leverage approach is prevention. The ideal technology would be a vaccine that gives lifetime immunity with a single dose. So governments, drug companies, and foundations fund vaccine research. But their work is likely to take more than a decade, so in the meantime, we have to work with what we have in hand – and the best prevention approach we have now is getting people to avoid risky behavior.

Pursuing that goal starts the four-step cycle again. This is the pattern. The crucial thing is to never stop thinking and working – and never do what we did with malaria and tuberculosis in the 20th century – which is to surrender to complexity and quit.

The final step – after seeing the problem and finding an approach – is to measure the impact of your work and share your successes and failures so that others learn from your efforts.

You have to have the statistics, of course. You have to be able to show that a program is vaccinating millions more children. You have to be able to show a decline in the number of children dying from these diseases. This is essential not just to improve the program, but also to help draw more investment from business and government.

But if you want to inspire people to participate, you have to show more than numbers; you have to convey the human impact of the work – so people can feel what saving a life means to the families affected.

I remember going to Davos some years back and sitting on a global health panel that was discussing ways to save millions of lives. Millions! Think of the thrill of saving just one person’s life – then multiply that by millions. … Yet this was the most boring panel I’ve ever been on – ever. So boring even I couldn’t bear it.

What made that experience especially striking was that I had just come from an event where we were introducing version 13 of some piece of software, and we had people jumping and shouting with excitement. I love getting people excited about software – but why can’t we generate even more excitement for saving lives?

You can’t get people excited unless you can help them see and feel the impact. And how you do that – is a complex question.

Still, I’m optimistic. Yes, inequity has been with us forever, but the new tools we have to cut through complexity have not been with us forever. They are new – they can help us make the most of our caring – and that’s why the future can be different from the past.

The defining and ongoing innovations of this age – biotechnology, the computer, the Internet – give us a chance we’ve never had before to end extreme poverty and end death from preventable disease.

Sixty years ago, George Marshall came to this commencement and announced a plan to assist the nations of post-war Europe. He said: “I think one difficulty is that the problem is one of such enormous complexity that the very mass of facts presented to the public by press and radio make it exceedingly difficult for the man in the street to reach a clear appraisement of the situation. It is virtually impossible at this distance to grasp at all the real significance of the situation.”

Thirty years after Marshall made his address, as my class graduated without me, technology was emerging that would make the world smaller, more open, more visible, less distant.

The emergence of low-cost personal computers gave rise to a powerful network that has transformed opportunities for learning and communicating.

The magical thing about this network is not just that it collapses distance and makes everyone your neighbor. It also dramatically increases the number of brilliant minds we can have working together on the same problem – and that scales up the rate of innovation to a staggering degree.

At the same time, for every person in the world who has access to this technology, five people don’t. That means many creative minds are left out of this discussion -- smart people with practical intelligence and relevant experience who don’t have the technology to hone their talents or contribute their ideas to the world.

We need as many people as possible to have access to this technology, because these advances are triggering a revolution in what human beings can do for one another. They are making it possible not just for national governments, but for universities, corporations, smaller organizations, and even individuals to see problems, see approaches, and measure the impact of their efforts to address the hunger, poverty, and desperation George Marshall spoke of 60 years ago.
13th June 2007 From India, Hyderabad
Dear Meghana, The article is really good. I especially agree with the last sentence "Talented men leave. Dead wood doesn’t." Quite appropriate. Regards, Swapna Nair
14th June 2007 From India, New Delhi
Hi
To add further, at Vodaphone retention is not the part of HR. They have successfully initiated this policy of training the managers on the retention part. So while the industry average is 28% theirs is 21%..
Today i was interacting with some employees of another company where one of the team member (say X) was not coming in time despite repeated counselling and pulls by HR. When i probed further i found that this manager is coming to the office even after X. Also he takes no pain in interacting with X to found out the problem area. Essence is that Manager commands no respect either on the professional or personal front.
Manager is the first point of interaction and HR plays the strategic role of root cause analysis.
Sandeep
14th June 2007 From India, New Delhi
Hi All,
"People leave managers not companies," 100 & 10 percent true, I am totally agreed with it. Because I left my earlier one of the dream organization due to rude and ravish behave of my boss.
Best Regards
Bimlesh K. Bibhakar
14th June 2007 From India
Meghna,
This article is indeed good, but I firmly believe that people don't leave organization just for this reason. This might be one of the strongest reasons, but not the only one.
We as HR people should focus on all the reasons why people leave organizations and then try to control on it.
Thanks
Preeti
15th June 2007 From India, Delhi
Hi,

i agree with the above statement.................

last year when i had gone for an interview for the post of HR Executive at DTDC Courier, the same thing happened to me..............

A female called Annie Paul and her colleague kavita came to take my interview for the said position.

i was interviewed for more than 30 minutes and was badly insulted and humiliated............

i was asked question by any where...........asking define different types of policies people adopt for recruitment..........

many more pinching questions.........like are you sure you are an MBA and many more things................

i walked out from that place and was offered to join them as a trainee for Rs. 5000/- whereas i was an M.Com and M.B.A Person with more than 3 years experience in HR.

People, i mean many managers take the advantage of thier positions and never let even a second go without humiliating people like this...............


Now even i work as a HR Manager and never practice such unethical behaviour with people who come for interview or even my colleagues............
15th June 2007 From India, Mumbai
an eye opener for all the organisations for highligting such a vital issue of human assets.
every organisation should comprise good hr practices to make their employees happy & contended.
thanks for sharing this article.
highly impressed.
15th June 2007
Add Reply Start A New Discussion

Cite.Co - is a repository of information created by your industry peers and experienced seniors. Register Here and help by adding your inputs to this topic/query page.
Prime Sponsor: TALENTEDGE - Certification Courses for career growth from top institutes like IIM / XLRI direct to device (online digital learning)





About Us Advertise Contact Us
Privacy Policy Disclaimer Terms Of Service



All rights reserved @ 2019 Cite.Co™