Define voluntary and involuntary turnover, and compare and contrast the effects that each type of turnover has on an organization.
Your response should be at least 75 words in length. You are required to use at least your textbook as source material for your response. All sources used, including the textbook, must be referenced; paraphrased and quoted material must have accompanying citations.
chal-
ollide.
:d to
about
ne uP
k and
3n to
were
osPer.
r and
I that
😮 for
rys.At
a set
:erms,
e end,
ed to
n the
raged
r. The
real-
: and
-ming
Every organization recognizes that it needs satisfied, loyal
customers’ In addition’
,”;.;;.dres satisfieJ, iJvuL .r’.,ptov.es. Research provides evidence
that retaining
ernployees heips retain ..rr,orl}”rr-nr-rcl increase suler.Z
Orgar’rizations with low turr-i-
.r,er a’d sarisfied “*pi.V*r
,.r-rd to p”.forrn better.s On the other side of the coin’
organizations ha’e *’, u.r-“,h.r-, u.r “iopioy.”‘s
performance co’sistently falls short’
Somerimes r”.,-,’,ir-,atir-ri;;;il;tt””iit in” or-,ly *uy to show fairness’
ensure qual-
ity, and maintain cllstolner satisfaction’
This cl,rapter explores rhe dual challenges of separatil-rg
ar-rd retaining employees’
We begin by distinguis;t;;”;;i””.urf ur-,1a.””t.,r-,ru.y.r.,ri”oue1.le1ribing
hou’ each
affects the organizari.;. 1i; ,,,” .*piot’. the separation process’
i.rcludi’g ways to
maltage this process rulrly. rir^r”tly,,n” dir..,r, *.ur.,.”, the organization
can take to
encolrrage ernployees to sray. These topics provide
a transition tttto’t”t” Parts 3 and 4′
The pre’iou, .hupr.rrli p^rt: .or-rrid..”.1 how lo assess and impro’e
perforrna.ce’
ar-rd this cl’rapter a”r..iir., ,t-r”ur.,r., to take depending orr wl]ether
performance
is
high or lorv. Part 4 dir.;;;, p’,ay a’d benefits, boil-, of r’virich piay a* irnpo’tant
role in
ernployee retention.
ffiar:agxrtg V*&a;nx*ary *ffi d Env*[*n**ryr Yun*e*v*n
c)rganizations n-rllst ,ry ,o
“r-rr_.,r.
that good performers \\rant to stal’ rvith the organi-
zarion and thar emplJy.”, *,t-ro.” p.rflrr’-r”r-r.. is chronicall)’
lou’ are euc.uraged-
or forced-to lea’e. g”il”, “f
these challenges involve emplolee tltrl..oL’e1′. that
is,
;rr;l.r.”t 1″”,rir’rg rh” otgn’-‘i’^tion’ ryhen lhe o’gar-‘i’atio’r initiates
the turnover
i”ii.” *trf-, “r’,;-‘1Jy”.s ‘uhJ
r.,o,.,ld prefer to stay), the tesr-rll is involuntary turnover’
Exarnples include r”r-t””rt”g
^r-, “*f”y””
foi ,’1rug r-rse or laf ir-rg t'[f emplo)’ees cluring
a downturn. Most organizatiJns ur” ,l’r.’t”or.l t.r.inofioir to
refer onl1′ to a discharge
related to a cliscipline problem, but sorne organizations
cali an-v invt’rhtntary tLunover
a tenninarion. W’hen tlt. “nrploy=es
iniriare fhe frtnrovet- {ofien n’lre;” Ihe otganiza-
;i;;;;.JJ;t.fer to keep thern), it is voluntary turnover. Ernployees
may leave to
retire or to take a job rvith a different organization’
l. general, o’gu.’i’uii; i’l’ to “”oii
the neecl for i.r-ol’ntarv turnover and to
mit-iirnize voluntary tufllovef, especially among top
perfbrmers’ Botl-r kinds of turr-r-
o\/ef aLe costly, as rurorourir”d ln’lable fO.t.”n”ilu.iirg
new employees need ;;;;l;”;; ,n.lr 1ot t ancl b*iLl tJarnt”ork skills’a
ln addition’
people today are more ready to slre a former ernployer ii rhey.feei
tl-rey t’ere un{aitly
discharged. rn” p.ori*”r*;i;;.;k;;.” uiot”t’t.. alsc, raises the risk associated
with
clischarging
“r-,-rpioy””r.
Effective h,-,r-t’r”r-, resoLlrce managemeilt can heltr-t the organlza’
ia” ,ri.iriir” borh ki.rcls of turnover, as *’e11 as carrlr it .r-rt effecti’e1r’ r’r’hen llecessary’
O”rpir” a compa|ry’s best efforts at personnel selection, lraining’
:rr-rd compensation’
,-.r; .*1.y.”, *,i11 fail to meet p.rforr,'”r-r.” requirerner-rts or u’i1l r-iolate
colnpany
policies. When this hap;’ens, organizaLions need to ap;]11′ a discipline
pfogram that
io.,l.’l .,lti,ontely iead to discharging the individual’
CHAPTER 10 Separating and Retaining Employees 793
l.*t Distinguish
between involuntarY
and voluntarY
turnover, and describe
their effects on an
orga nization.
lnvoluntarY Turncver
Turnover initiated bY
an emploYer {often
vrrrth emploYees who
would Prefer to staY)’
VoluntarY Turnover
Turnover initiated bY
employees (often when
the organization would
prefer to keeP them).
]”*bi* 1*.1
Costs Associated with
Turnover
Recruiting. selecting, and training
re placements
Lost productivitY
Lawsuits
Workplace violence
Recruiting, selecting, and traintng
repla cements
Lost productivitY
Loss of talented emPloYees
a
ar\::trii: iiaa:i: i:’:
During the recent economic down- one-fourth of employees identified
Sources: Patricia o,Connell,
,,Don,t Let
turn, as companies scrambred to ov tireir emplovers as havins hish HBJ1il,?”otSTI;,I*n):fi;.-*,
cutcostswherevertheycould,potentialwereplanningtoqultlculuolyL|Lvv
many hoped they coutd count ti,ei, jon wi*’in *’e voar. s’llfl’f, ilj,Sni’ihi,..Y”ffI;1,'”,i”T'”‘*”
on their top talent to stick around an annual survey of emp,lo,yees ;;;l”y;;r ” wall streetJourna!,
in spite oi tfr” belt tightening- conducted byWatsonWyatt\ lofldl Nou”mb”r. 16,2oo9, http://online.
aftei all, they should 6e gratelul wide and worldatwork found that wsj.com.
to have a job- employees’ commitment to thelr
Some evidence suggests that employers has fallen, with the Questions
this hope may have
-6een mis- largest drop registered amono the
placed. worse, the most valuable highest performers’
“”u -“- 1′ what would be the costs to
employees seem to be the ones Part of the problem may be u
un o-fg^?.nization of losing top
who are least grateful for the iuf”” ;’op” that compa””;;;
executives or high-potential
chance to stay with their employ- meet employees’ desires”-in#
employees as the economy
ers through hard times. Accord- p*n’i”Jv”rn u “‘-“v Ou
ton”tl:l , ililtatff:u think a companv
ingtoa*-“ybytheCorporateCorporation,employerssaidworr–…-,^^.,
Executive Board, the percent- ers’ satisfaction depende; ;;;
can keeptop performers
age of senior executives
,,winins on a-pisitive work “*ir:lt”:t ilff’;l;i’r.J;#”t’t
to- go above and beyond what and good relationships *i’l-t”l^:: ;;;;r;t, at least in the
near
is Jxpected., fell by more than visors. Employees, however, sato
-*”
^
–‘
half since before the financial cri- they cared most about pay and
term/
sis. The same survey found that benefits’
:.j;
Retr
this m,
responl
volunt
at eacl
becam,
downtr
ErnF
Becaus
it is ea
to disc
of indi
should
ways t(
Prinr
The se
obviou
sions a
the wa
summ2
justice
and inr
cal tha
catego:
Peo
conseqFor a number of reasons, discharging empioyees can be very
difficult’ First’
the decision fru, t.gui*”rp”.r, ,hu,
“.uri
“ff”.t
the organization’ Historically’ if
the organization and ;*;Lt; do not. have a specific t*ploy*ettt contract’
the
employeroremployee*”‘””a,r.'”employmentrelatlonshipatanytime.Thisisthe
;;;;;;r;”;r;itt’dor}ilr, Jescribed’ in chapter s. rhis trine has
eroded
significa’tly, ho*”‘r”r. E;;”y;;t who ha1’e been terminated sometimes sue
their
;fr;il;;;, i;r wrongful Jir.t-,urg.. Some judges have considered that emplovment
at
will is limited where lnanagers Lak. ,tut”*ents that amount to an implied
contract;
; ilh”rC” ;lso can b” foJt”a illegal if it violates a law (such as antidiscrimination
laws) or public poli.y lfo. “*”*pi!,
firing an employee {or refusing to do something
;l;;;ii”l” u-rvpt ui 1u*r,rir f* *ro,-,gf,rl discharge, the former employee
tries to
establish rhat the dir.^[..;;iotut”a .ith”, u. implied agreement.or
public poiicy’
M;;pftrs settle th.l. .lui*, out of court. Even though few former employees
rvin rvrongful-dirchargeruits, and employers usually *’-tt.*.|* they appeal’
the cost of
defendinithe lawsuif can be hundreJs of thousands of dollars’o–
Ai.”g *ith the fin”,,.lut risks of dismissing an employee’ there are issues
of per-
sonal safety. nhtr.rrrr]g u’ ii it ‘n”
so-e fot*er employees go to the courts’ far worse
;;;’rh. ;nLy””, *h”o react to a termination decision with violence’
Violence in
the $,orkplace has become a major organizational
problem’ Although any number of
organizational actions or decisions may incite violence
among employees’ the “noth’
ing else to lose” aspect of u.t “*ployee’s
dismissal makes rhe situation dangerous’ espe-
cially u,hen ,h. ,-tur,rr” of th” *ttk’udds other risk factors’7
Ou
Cor
Knt
Ou
tc
294
n’t Let
NS,
roo.com;
‘lesses
sto
g top
ntial
)my
‘lpany
S
is
near
CHAPTER 10 Separating and Retaining Employees 295
Retaining top performefs is not always easy either, and recent trends have made
this more alfi..,ti rhan ever. Today’s psychological contract, in which workers feei
,esponslbittty for their own cafeers rather thun ioyalty to a particular employer, makes
voluntary tumovef more likely. Aiso, competing organizations are c.onstantly looking
at each other,s top performerr; rh..r the labor market tightened, “poaching talent”
became an art form.B In fact, as the “HR Oops” box illustrates, not even an economic
downtum takes away the chailenges.
Employee Separation
Because of the critical firrancial and personal risks associated with employee dismissal,
it is easy to see rvhy organizarion, ,n.rr, develop a standardized, systematic approach
to discipline a.rd dlscha”.ge. These decisions should not be left solely ro the discretion
of indi;idual managers o1 supervisors. Policies that can lead to ernpioyee separation
should be based on principles of justice and law, and they should allow for
various
ways to intervene.
Principles of Justice
The sensitivity of a system for disciplining and possibiy terminating ernployees- is
obvious, and it is critical that the ,yrr”t-‘, b. ,.”., as fair. Employees form conclu’
sions about the system’s fairness based on the system’s outcomes and procedures and
rhe way managers treat employees when carrying oLlt those procedures. Figure i0.1
,.,**urir., these principles as outcome faimess, procedural justice, and interactional
i”rii… Ourcome ful*.r. involves the ends of a discipline process’ rvhile procedural
ur-rd i.rt”ru.tionai justice focus on the means to those ends. Not only is behavior ethi-
cal that is in accord with these principles, but research has aiso lir-rked the last two
caregories of justice with employ”.,utlrfu.tion a’d producti’ity.9
P-eople’s perception of outcome fairness depends on their judgment that the
.o,.rr”q.r”r-r.”s of a decision to employees are just. As shorvn in Figure 10.1, one
Outcome Fairness
Consistent outcomes r
Knowledge of outcomes
Outcomes in ProPortion
Procedural Justice
Consistent Procedures
Avoidance of bias
Accurate information
Way to correct mistakes
Representation of all
interests
Ethical standards
lnteractional Justice
Explanation of decision
Respectful treatment
L*? Discuss how
employees determine
whether the
organization treats
them fairly.
0utcome Fairness
A judgment that the
consequences given to
employees are iust.
Figure 10.1
Principles of Justice
.l!;lar,at..li::trl:1S:
t. First,
:ally, if
1ct, the
is is the
eroded
re their
ment at
ontract;
rinatiolr
nething
tries to
: policy.
rployees
: cost of
; of per-
1r worse
ence in
Lmbet of
e “noth-
us, espe-
to behaviors \
:
ir..:;ti,i,,;:ii,ti:.;3 r*#f;i
orkers
is expensive’ and
new employees need ;;;;l;”;; ,n.lr 1ot t ancl b*iLl tJarnt”ork skills’a
ln addition’
people today are more ready to slre a former ernployer ii rhey.feei
tl-rey t’ere un{aitly
discharged. rn” p.ori*”r*;i;;.;k;;.” uiot”t’t.. alsc, raises the risk associated
with
clischarging
“r-,-rpioy””r.
Effective h,-,r-t’r”r-, resoLlrce managemeilt can heltr-t the organlza’
ia” ,ri.iriir” borh ki.rcls of turnover, as *’e11 as carrlr it .r-rt effecti’e1r’ r’r’hen llecessary’
O”rpir” a compa|ry’s best efforts at personnel selection, lraining’
:rr-rd compensation’
,-.r; .*1.y.”, *,i11 fail to meet p.rforr,'”r-r.” requirerner-rts or u’i1l r-iolate
colnpany
policies. When this hap;’ens, organizaLions need to ap;]11′ a discipline
pfogram that
io.,l.’l .,lti,ontely iead to discharging the individual’
CHAPTER 10 Separating and Retaining Employees 793
l.*t Distinguish
between involuntarY
and voluntarY
turnover, and describe
their effects on an
orga nization.
lnvoluntarY Turncver
Turnover initiated bY
an emploYer {often
vrrrth emploYees who
would Prefer to staY)’
VoluntarY Turnover
Turnover initiated bY
employees (often when
the organization would
prefer to keeP them).
]”*bi* 1*.1
Costs Associated with
Turnover
Recruiting. selecting, and training
re placements
Lost productivitY
Lawsuits
Workplace violence
Recruiting, selecting, and traintng
repla cements
Lost productivitY
Loss of talented emPloYees
a
ar\::trii: iiaa:i: i:’:
During the recent economic down- one-fourth of employees identified
Sources: Patricia o,Connell,
,,Don,t Let
turn, as companies scrambred to ov tireir emplovers as havins hish HBJ1il,?”otSTI;,I*n):fi;.-*,
cutcostswherevertheycould,potentialwereplanningtoqultlculuolyL|Lvv
many hoped they coutd count ti,ei, jon wi*’in *’e voar. s’llfl’f, ilj,Sni’ihi,..Y”ffI;1,'”,i”T'”‘*”
on their top talent to stick around an annual survey of emp,lo,yees ;;;l”y;;r ” wall streetJourna!,
in spite oi tfr” belt tightening- conducted byWatsonWyatt\ lofldl Nou”mb”r. 16,2oo9, http://online.
aftei all, they should 6e gratelul wide and worldatwork found that wsj.com.
to have a job- employees’ commitment to thelr
Some evidence suggests that employers has fallen, with the Questions
this hope may have
-6een mis- largest drop registered amono the
placed. worse, the most valuable highest performers’
“”u -“- 1′ what would be the costs to
employees seem to be the ones Part of the problem may be u
un o-fg^?.nization of losing top
who are least grateful for the iuf”” ;’op” that compa””;;;
executives or high-potential
chance to stay with their employ- meet employees’ desires”-in#
employees as the economy
ers through hard times. Accord- p*n’i”Jv”rn u “‘-“v Ou
ton”tl:l , ililtatff:u think a companv
ingtoa*-“ybytheCorporateCorporation,employerssaidworr–…-,^^.,
Executive Board, the percent- ers’ satisfaction depende; ;;;
can keeptop performers
age of senior executives
,,winins on a-pisitive work “*ir:lt”:t ilff’;l;i’r.J;#”t’t
to- go above and beyond what and good relationships *i’l-t”l^:: ;;;;r;t, at least in the near
is Jxpected., fell by more than visors. Employees, however, sato
-*”
^
–‘
half since before the financial cri- they cared most about pay and
term/
sis. The same survey found that benefits’
:.j;
Retr
this m,
responl
volunt
at eacl
becam,
downtr
ErnF
Becaus
it is ea
to disc
of indi
should
ways t(
Prinr
The se
obviou
sions a
the wa
summ2
justice
and inr
cal tha
catego:
Peo
conseqFor a number of reasons, discharging empioyees can be very
difficult’ First’
the decision fru, t.gui*”rp”.r, ,hu,
“.uri
“ff”.t
the organization’ Historically’ if
the organization and ;*;Lt; do not. have a specific t*ploy*ettt contract’
the
employeroremployee*”‘””a,r.'”employmentrelatlonshipatanytime.Thisisthe
;;;;;;r;”;r;itt’dor}ilr, Jescribed’ in chapter s. rhis trine has
eroded
significa’tly, ho*”‘r”r. E;;”y;;t who ha1’e been terminated sometimes sue
their
;fr;il;;;, i;r wrongful Jir.t-,urg.. Some judges have considered that emplovment
at
will is limited where lnanagers Lak. ,tut”*ents that amount to an implied
contract;
; ilh”rC” ;lso can b” foJt”a illegal if it violates a law (such as antidiscrimination
laws) or public poli.y lfo. “*”*pi!,
firing an employee {or refusing to do something
;l;;;ii”l” u-rvpt ui 1u*r,rir f* *ro,-,gf,rl discharge, the former employee
tries to
establish rhat the dir.^[..;;iotut”a .ith”, u. implied agreement.or
public poiicy’
M;;pftrs settle th.l. .lui*, out of court. Even though few former employees
rvin rvrongful-dirchargeruits, and employers usually *’-tt.*.|* they appeal’
the cost of
defendinithe lawsuif can be hundreJs of thousands of dollars’o–
Ai.”g *ith the fin”,,.lut risks of dismissing an employee’ there are issues
of per-
sonal safety. nhtr.rrrr]g u’ ii it ‘n”
so-e fot*er employees go to the courts’ far worse
;;;’rh. ;nLy””, *h”o react to a termination decision with violence’
Violence in
the $,orkplace has become a major organizational
problem’ Although any number of
organizational actions or decisions may incite violence
among employees’ the “noth’
ing else to lose” aspect of u.t “*ployee’s
dismissal makes rhe situation dangerous’ espe-
cially u,hen ,h. ,-tur,rr” of th” *ttk’udds other risk factors’7
Ou
Cor
Knt
Ou
tc
294
n’t Let
NS,
roo.com;
‘lesses
sto
g top
ntial
)my
‘lpany
S
is
near
CHAPTER 10 Separating and Retaining Employees 295
Retaining top performefs is not always easy either, and recent trends have made
this more alfi..,ti rhan ever. Today’s psychological contract, in which workers feei
,esponslbittty for their own cafeers rather thun ioyalty to a particular employer, makes
voluntary tumovef more likely. Aiso, competing organizations are c.onstantly looking
at each other,s top performerr; rh..r the labor market tightened, “poaching talent”
became an art form.B In fact, as the “HR Oops” box illustrates, not even an economic
downtum takes away the chailenges.
Employee Separation
Because of the critical firrancial and personal risks associated with employee dismissal,
it is easy to see rvhy organizarion, ,n.rr, develop a standardized, systematic approach
to discipline a.rd dlscha”.ge. These decisions should not be left solely ro the discretion
of indi;idual managers o1 supervisors. Policies that can lead to ernpioyee separation
should be based on principles of justice and law, and they should allow for
various
ways to intervene.
Principles of Justice
The sensitivity of a system for disciplining and possibiy terminating ernployees- is
obvious, and it is critical that the ,yrr”t-‘, b. ,.”., as fair. Employees form conclu’
sions about the system’s fairness based on the system’s outcomes and procedures and
rhe way managers treat employees when carrying oLlt those procedures. Figure i0.1
,.,**urir., these principles as outcome faimess, procedural justice, and interactional
i”rii… Ourcome ful*.r. involves the ends of a discipline process’ rvhile procedural
ur-rd i.rt”ru.tionai justice focus on the means to those ends. Not only is behavior ethi-
cal that is in accord with these principles, but research has aiso lir-rked the last two
caregories of justice with employ”.,utlrfu.tion a’d producti’ity.9
P-eople’s perception of outcome fairness depends on their judgment that the
.o,.rr”q.r”r-r.”s of a decision to employees are just. As shorvn in Figure 10.1, one
Outcome Fairness
Consistent outcomes r
Knowledge of outcomes
Outcomes in ProPortion
Procedural Justice
Consistent Procedures
Avoidance of bias
Accurate information
Way to correct mistakes
Representation of all
interests
Ethical standards
lnteractional Justice
Explanation of decision
Respectful treatment
L*? Discuss how
employees determine
whether the
organization treats
them fairly.
0utcome Fairness
A judgment that the
consequences given to
employees are iust.
Figure 10.1
Principles of Justice
.l!;lar,at..li::trl:1S:
t. First,
:ally, if
1ct, the
is is the
eroded
re their
ment at
ontract;
rinatiolr
nething
tries to
: policy.
rployees
: cost of
; of per-
1r worse
ence in
Lmbet of
e “noth-
us, espe-
to behaviors \
:
ir..:;ti,i,,;:ii,ti:.;3 r*#f;i
