By Daryl G.
Whenever I see companies struggling with their turnover rates, and overall employee dissatisfaction, I notice that more often than not, companies assign the blame to their employees, not realizing that the company itself is undoubtedly to blame.
In 2017 the turnover rate for the USA was 6% for voluntary separations, according to the US national survey. For Mexico, it was a whopping 16% according to the National Institute of Statistics and Geography (INEGI), from which 70% happens in the first 3 months of a new hire. Moreover, it costs companies 37% of a position’s salary to try to refill it after separation.
When a company decides the employee is having an “attitude problem” often times the situation can be easily diffused with a five minute talk to align expectations. It doesn’t even have to be a negotiation: no salary talk, no work hours adjustment talk, just aligning expectations and being empathic.
Why don’t these conversations happen often enough to be reflected on statistics?
The common perception of both the company and the employee is that the latter is a hundred percent accountable for what happens inside and around a failed employee engagement. The company is often perceived as this rock-solid, perfect entity which is generously extending its hand to aid the employee. A rather paternalistic approach if you ask me.
This shouldn’t be the case.
The relationship that must be held between an employee and the collaborating entity has to be a win-win, customized and finely tuned relationship. The employee has to feel personally and professionally identified with the collaborating entity, with its vision, and with the values they both hold dear.
For this to happen a change in the fundamental method of hiring must happen.
A company must not look for a Project Manager, or a C# Developer, or a SCRUM master; instead they should be looking for a highly efficient, skilled and motivated human being. The way things are now, it appears that collaborating entities look to fill out a role, but they fail to understand that there’s a human behind that very skilled “key pusher”.
Let’s face it: companies need to make money in order to achieve other goals. For that to happen, some crude decisions have to be made – believe me I’ve been on that side of the fence too. But what distinguishes the low turnover company from the high turnover one is the humane approach.
Much has been said about the capability of a company to overlook profit in search for a better work environment, which ironically enough results in better profit in the long run, but very few companies find that sweet spot. Most of the time, these companies quickly find themselves receiving “Best Place to Work” awards and very good rapport on social media and client perception.
It tears me to pieces to see the way HR recruiters exchange resumes like a kid would baseball cards in the middle of the MLB season. What, rather strangely, HR people apparently do is make a cold calculation of the expected salary, the expected profit and loss, and the client’s opinion. Don’t you realize that the employee is a part of a whole? If the employee has a problem, the company has a problem!
But because this (not so) common sense notion is rarely even thought of, the company’s financial repercussions can be quite hefty. How can this be avoided?
My Rulesware Story:
When Rulesware first contacted me, I was skeptical about it. It is not common to be contacted directly by the Head of HR of any company and that was the first interaction with Rulesware. Later that day, the Head of HR (HHR henceforth) told me that he wanted to personally meet with me, which again raised some eyebrows but I accepted.
The date of the interview came and we met at a Starbucks in an upbeat section of town. We spoke about me, about him, about our experiences travelling, shared some laughs and had some coffee. The way he spoke of the company, the collaborators, the benefits, and the organizational culture was mesmerizing to me. From this very moment, I knew I had to be a part of this company.
The date of the interview came and we met at a Starbucks in an upbeat section of town. We spoke about me, about him, about our experiences travelling, shared some laughs and had some coffee.
But what really set this HHR apart from the rest is that we NEVER spoke about my experience. He was doing human resources, not looking for a quick buck or another stapler to be at the client’s office. He was looking for me.
After that, a heavy set of interviews focused on my experience followed, but the tone was set: this company was for me and I intended on staying. This tone and level of personal identification with the company is the one that has to be set with every potential hire you encounter.
People are very receptive of hidden (often involuntarily) intentions from others. Whenever your HR team is more interested in filling out a position rather than complementing your company with a great human being, the candidate will know. Then, an implicit barrier will be set in the (utmost beneficial) person-company relationship, and the (very toxic) employee-company relationship will start.
So for me, it quickly became apparent that Rulesware embodies not only the required values of a great place to work, but also a place in which a human being feels motivated to give that which they will never get back… time.
