7 ms·

Too many times in my career have I seen an employer lose an employee, who has a ton of institutional knowledge and performs adequately or even excellently, only

Too many times in my career have I seen an employer lose an employee, who has a ton of institutional knowledge and performs adequately or even excellently, only to replace them them with someone that ends up costing much more money, and then takes a lot of time to get up to speed (which also slows the folks who help get them up to speed). It is like they haven't taken the time to even make a rudimentary calculation on the costs involved in keeping the employee versus replacing them.

panny 4y ago
But accounting and HR will time your bathroom breaks. I guess the watchers don't like being watched, which is why retention isn't a bother for them.
- toast0 4y ago
  > But accounting and HR will time your bathroom breaks. I guess the watchers don't like being watched, which is why retention isn't a bother for them. Maybe they should tune the company food to reduce bathroom occupancy. :P
- gsibble 4y ago
  Ha. I had the CFO once call me angrily asking where I was......I was in the bathroom. She told me to get back to my desk. I took my time.
  - feet 4y ago
    I would have taken that time looking at job postings
  - bonestamp2 4y ago
    These are the people who hate work from home culture. They can't tell who is at their desk in the particular second that they decide it's important.
  - _carbyau_ 4y ago
    I had the CIO - and a bunch of HR people - ask me why I was turning up to work at 10am! I was on the late shift, 10-6. Turns out the early and mid shift people hadn't turned up so CIO and HR people were manning the Service Desk until I got in. You'd think they would then appreciate the work done. But no one appreciates a good service desk it seems.
gsibble 4y ago
Oh, I've quit 3 companies where I was the CTO/lead engineer where they had to replace me with 5-10 people (backend and frontend devs, QA, devops, plus a manager or two, etc.) costing them enormous amounts of money. Many times they've hired me as a consultant where I make 5-10x my hourly rate for several months after bringing the new hires up to speed. Companies place very little emphasis on retention and retaining institutional knowledge. They don't seem to understand that employees who have worked at a company for years developing systems and architecture know where all of the secrets are.
- ok_computer 4y ago
  Though it may cost more, spreading functional knowledge across a greater base of people would be more resilient. Even if a company needs to pay an individual 10x salary consulting for a year, it would be in their long term best interest to spread a fraction of that knowledge across a larger employee base and document what is tangible. There is a limit (different for different people) across which an individual cannot cognitively support an operation. With years more growth every person would eventually reach their personal limit or lose interest. It helps to have teams of people that are smart enough to work through new problems and document procedures, playbooks, current states and retrospective reports and rely on institutional processes to maintain a coherent operation. Sometimes money isn’t the singular factor at work.
  - gsibble 4y ago
    They went out of business from the added cost, so, didn't work for them.
- ryan_lane 4y ago
  In most companies, it's good to let you leave, if they need 5-10 people to replace you. You take this as a point of pride, but I see folks like this as organizational bottlenecks. When I leave an organization, my goal is for them to either directly replace me, or for them to not need to replace me at all. I do this by ensuring that I don't silo my work (by ensuring others are working with me, or under me), documenting everything I work on, and occasionally changing roles. My specific goal is to help a company grow, not to make them depend on me.
returningfory2 4y ago
This is a common response to this issue, but I think there is a logical flaw in it. Employers don't know ahead of time which employees will leave and which will stay. In order to improve their employee retention, employers have to pay _all_ of their employees more, not just the ones that eventually will leave. This changes the math entirely. For example, suppose it costs 50% extra to replace someone who leaves. In retrospect, sure, giving the sole employee who leaves a 10% raise each year to retain them makes sense. But if you have to give all of your employees a 10% raise per year, just to retain that one person, it doesn't make financial sense anymore. To be clear I'm not endorsing this system at all! But from a pure financial perspective it makes sense to me and is why, I suspect, it persists.
- foobiekr 4y ago
  I would agree, but employers actually usually do know who is a flight risk.
- peteradio 4y ago
  Presumably not everyone is as valuable or risky.
  - bonestamp2 4y ago
    This is exactly how we look at it. Those who are more valuable get larger annual raises. Also, during a high turnover period around a year ago, we even bumped a few people up mid year when we normally do salary increases at the beginning of the year. These folks were very happy and I think it earned a lot of trust that we looked at the market rates, determined they were underpaid, and made sure they were at least getting what they'd get paid elsewhere.
    - agentwiggles 4y ago
      There is nothing like an unexpected raise to make a person feel some serious company loyalty. I started a position at a new company a few years back, run by a friend and senior colleague of mine. He had been with me at the previous company and had observed while I fought and fought to get a raise to market rates in that position. He called me a few months into the gig and told me that he felt I should be making more than my starting salary and that I was getting a fairly substantial raise effective immediately. I can't describe how good that felt, after having had to struggle to demonstrate my value at the previous gig only to be met with bureaucracy at every turn. I'm still with that company and genuinely love working with them. I make a pretty nice salary, and though I'm sure I could easily get a 20% raise to jump ship, I'm finally in a place where I can say "nah, I'm happy where I am" and not feel like I'm giving something up.
r930 4y ago
Not to mention the social load on integrating a new person to a team. Depending on the depth, breadth and number of interactions with other individuals, this causes others to have to also get up to speed on the new person's strengths, weakness, quirks, etc.
lloydatkinson 4y ago
I am seeing this recently. Imagine a place that hired dozens of really good developers in 2020. Now imagine that instead of focussing on retention and paying well, they focussed on ignoring the waves of developers leaving and instead on exclusively hiring graduate developers. Now imagine all that domain knowledge that left months ago... compounded by the fact there is only five developers left from 2020... Totally not a real story at all...

panny 4y ago

But accounting and HR will time your bathroom breaks. I guess the watchers don't like being watched, which is why retention isn't a bother for them.

toast0 4y ago
> But accounting and HR will time your bathroom breaks. I guess the watchers don't like being watched, which is why retention isn't a bother for them. Maybe they should tune the company food to reduce bathroom occupancy. :P
gsibble 4y ago
Ha. I had the CFO once call me angrily asking where I was......I was in the bathroom. She told me to get back to my desk. I took my time.
- feet 4y ago
  I would have taken that time looking at job postings
- bonestamp2 4y ago
  These are the people who hate work from home culture. They can't tell who is at their desk in the particular second that they decide it's important.
- _carbyau_ 4y ago
  I had the CIO - and a bunch of HR people - ask me why I was turning up to work at 10am! I was on the late shift, 10-6. Turns out the early and mid shift people hadn't turned up so CIO and HR people were manning the Service Desk until I got in. You'd think they would then appreciate the work done. But no one appreciates a good service desk it seems.

gsibble 4y ago

Oh, I've quit 3 companies where I was the CTO/lead engineer where they had to replace me with 5-10 people (backend and frontend devs, QA, devops, plus a manager or two, etc.) costing them enormous amounts of money. Many times they've hired me as a consultant where I make 5-10x my hourly rate for several months after bringing the new hires up to speed. Companies place very little emphasis on retention and retaining institutional knowledge. They don't seem to understand that employees who have worked at a company for years developing systems and architecture know where all of the secrets are.

ok_computer 4y ago
Though it may cost more, spreading functional knowledge across a greater base of people would be more resilient. Even if a company needs to pay an individual 10x salary consulting for a year, it would be in their long term best interest to spread a fraction of that knowledge across a larger employee base and document what is tangible. There is a limit (different for different people) across which an individual cannot cognitively support an operation. With years more growth every person would eventually reach their personal limit or lose interest. It helps to have teams of people that are smart enough to work through new problems and document procedures, playbooks, current states and retrospective reports and rely on institutional processes to maintain a coherent operation. Sometimes money isn’t the singular factor at work.
- gsibble 4y ago
  They went out of business from the added cost, so, didn't work for them.
ryan_lane 4y ago
In most companies, it's good to let you leave, if they need 5-10 people to replace you. You take this as a point of pride, but I see folks like this as organizational bottlenecks. When I leave an organization, my goal is for them to either directly replace me, or for them to not need to replace me at all. I do this by ensuring that I don't silo my work (by ensuring others are working with me, or under me), documenting everything I work on, and occasionally changing roles. My specific goal is to help a company grow, not to make them depend on me.

returningfory2 4y ago

This is a common response to this issue, but I think there is a logical flaw in it. Employers don't know ahead of time which employees will leave and which will stay. In order to improve their employee retention, employers have to pay _all_ of their employees more, not just the ones that eventually will leave. This changes the math entirely. For example, suppose it costs 50% extra to replace someone who leaves. In retrospect, sure, giving the sole employee who leaves a 10% raise each year to retain them makes sense. But if you have to give all of your employees a 10% raise per year, just to retain that one person, it doesn't make financial sense anymore. To be clear I'm not endorsing this system at all! But from a pure financial perspective it makes sense to me and is why, I suspect, it persists.

foobiekr 4y ago
I would agree, but employers actually usually do know who is a flight risk.
peteradio 4y ago
Presumably not everyone is as valuable or risky.
- bonestamp2 4y ago
  This is exactly how we look at it. Those who are more valuable get larger annual raises. Also, during a high turnover period around a year ago, we even bumped a few people up mid year when we normally do salary increases at the beginning of the year. These folks were very happy and I think it earned a lot of trust that we looked at the market rates, determined they were underpaid, and made sure they were at least getting what they'd get paid elsewhere.
  - agentwiggles 4y ago
    There is nothing like an unexpected raise to make a person feel some serious company loyalty. I started a position at a new company a few years back, run by a friend and senior colleague of mine. He had been with me at the previous company and had observed while I fought and fought to get a raise to market rates in that position. He called me a few months into the gig and told me that he felt I should be making more than my starting salary and that I was getting a fairly substantial raise effective immediately. I can't describe how good that felt, after having had to struggle to demonstrate my value at the previous gig only to be met with bureaucracy at every turn. I'm still with that company and genuinely love working with them. I make a pretty nice salary, and though I'm sure I could easily get a 20% raise to jump ship, I'm finally in a place where I can say "nah, I'm happy where I am" and not feel like I'm giving something up.

r930 4y ago

Not to mention the social load on integrating a new person to a team. Depending on the depth, breadth and number of interactions with other individuals, this causes others to have to also get up to speed on the new person's strengths, weakness, quirks, etc.

lloydatkinson 4y ago

I am seeing this recently. Imagine a place that hired dozens of really good developers in 2020. Now imagine that instead of focussing on retention and paying well, they focussed on ignoring the waves of developers leaving and instead on exclusively hiring graduate developers. Now imagine all that domain knowledge that left months ago... compounded by the fact there is only five developers left from 2020... Totally not a real story at all...