Retaining Staff at Your Non-Profit - Whose Responsibility?
At most non-profits and many small businesses there is no staff retention plan; no one has been designated as the Chief Retention Officer.
As a matter of fact, many organizations view staff turnover as almost a badge of honor; "our place is so tough to work at, most new people won't survive".
It's an approach that gives a left-handed compliment to the staff that stay.
But what some organizational leaders are beginning to realize is that (a) turnover is expensive (b) turnover makes for bad products and outcomes (c) turnover can be reduced.
Let's be clear about one thing, the goal here is not to retain all staff.
Sometimes turnover is not such a bad thing.
Turnover can bring fresh ideas into the organization and turnover of under performers gives the organization the opportunity to upgrade its human resource capacity.
However, when turnover begins to exceed 20%, and we know about non-profits that have triple digit turnover, three things begin to have a negative impact on the organization's performance.
(1)Organizational resources begin to be disproportionately dedicated to staff recruitment, selection and initial training.
Whether you think turnover costs 5% of the base salary or 50%, make no mistake about it, the inability to retain qualified and dedicated staff costs the organization money; money that could be shifted to other critical needs.
(2) The program or the product begins to suffer.
In the short haul, mistakes by inexperienced staff begin to occur, and in the long run, the customers or consumers of services are held back in their progress because they are always coping with new staff moving in and out of their lives.
(3) Unfilled vacancies result in an extraordinary burden on existing staff; supervisors don't supervise, they are filling coverage holes; everybody is wearing multiple "hats" and the burden of mandatory overtime causes a level of disruption in the personal lives of remaining staff that exceeds the value of the extra pay they receive.
But who in the organization is responsible to get this situation under control? As someone with over 40 years of human services leadership experience, it is my view that the inability to retain staff illustrates a lack of leadership accountability.
To me it means that no one has bothered to tell supervisory staff that they are responsible to retain the qualified staff who work for them.
Supervisors must understand that they must be committed to the success of their direct reports.
Here's what usually happens.
In high turnover organizations the hire-decision is often rushed; someone is needed to cover a shift tomorrow; so as it turns out, almost anyone with a normal temperature will do.
The next phase is the initial training package which is normally given to new employees during their first five days on the job.
The net result of this initial training is that new staff are given 5 times more information than they could possibly absorb and the employee leaves the experience confused, at best.
From thereon the new employee is thrown into the thick of things and it's very much of a sink or swim proposition.
Within a month or two the new employee begins to have performance problems.
Surprised? Shouldn't be.
Good chance the new employee was not a good match for the organization in the first place.
It's highly probable that the new employee has not been given good supervision...
or any supervision.
Nobody has ever made it clear to the supervisor that the performance of staff is his/her responsibility.
And then comes the really sad part.
Once performance begin to fall off, it normally continues to fall until the employee finds himself outside the organization either voluntarily or involuntarily.
We seem to know very little about reversing poor performance...
once it starts to decline it usually continues.
As depressing as this sounds, the fix is relatively simple for leaders who are determined to see things change.
Do three things: 1.
Rewrite the job description of supervisors and include language that states clearly that their performance will be evaluated in part on their ability to develop loyalty amongst the qualified people who work for them.
Be prepared to enforce it.
This should apply to all supervisors in the organization; senior level supervisors can model the desired behavior for their junior level colleagues.
2.
Treat supervisors like supervisors.
Involve them in the hiring process.
After all, if they are to be responsible for the performance and loyalty of their staff, they should be given a voice about who will be assigned to their work unit.
3.
Finally, recognize that supervisors have a tough job; give them the training and support that they need to learn new skills and supervisory behaviors that they can consistently use, day after day.
You can lower your employee turnover if you are determined to do so.
It is much more about involvement, support and acknowledgment of quality work than it is about money.
Dont surrender to turnover, develop your own plan to keep employees who add value to your organization; your customer satisfaction surveys will reflect a much more positive view of your organization, not to mention the money you will save.
As a matter of fact, many organizations view staff turnover as almost a badge of honor; "our place is so tough to work at, most new people won't survive".
It's an approach that gives a left-handed compliment to the staff that stay.
But what some organizational leaders are beginning to realize is that (a) turnover is expensive (b) turnover makes for bad products and outcomes (c) turnover can be reduced.
Let's be clear about one thing, the goal here is not to retain all staff.
Sometimes turnover is not such a bad thing.
Turnover can bring fresh ideas into the organization and turnover of under performers gives the organization the opportunity to upgrade its human resource capacity.
However, when turnover begins to exceed 20%, and we know about non-profits that have triple digit turnover, three things begin to have a negative impact on the organization's performance.
(1)Organizational resources begin to be disproportionately dedicated to staff recruitment, selection and initial training.
Whether you think turnover costs 5% of the base salary or 50%, make no mistake about it, the inability to retain qualified and dedicated staff costs the organization money; money that could be shifted to other critical needs.
(2) The program or the product begins to suffer.
In the short haul, mistakes by inexperienced staff begin to occur, and in the long run, the customers or consumers of services are held back in their progress because they are always coping with new staff moving in and out of their lives.
(3) Unfilled vacancies result in an extraordinary burden on existing staff; supervisors don't supervise, they are filling coverage holes; everybody is wearing multiple "hats" and the burden of mandatory overtime causes a level of disruption in the personal lives of remaining staff that exceeds the value of the extra pay they receive.
But who in the organization is responsible to get this situation under control? As someone with over 40 years of human services leadership experience, it is my view that the inability to retain staff illustrates a lack of leadership accountability.
To me it means that no one has bothered to tell supervisory staff that they are responsible to retain the qualified staff who work for them.
Supervisors must understand that they must be committed to the success of their direct reports.
Here's what usually happens.
In high turnover organizations the hire-decision is often rushed; someone is needed to cover a shift tomorrow; so as it turns out, almost anyone with a normal temperature will do.
The next phase is the initial training package which is normally given to new employees during their first five days on the job.
The net result of this initial training is that new staff are given 5 times more information than they could possibly absorb and the employee leaves the experience confused, at best.
From thereon the new employee is thrown into the thick of things and it's very much of a sink or swim proposition.
Within a month or two the new employee begins to have performance problems.
Surprised? Shouldn't be.
Good chance the new employee was not a good match for the organization in the first place.
It's highly probable that the new employee has not been given good supervision...
or any supervision.
Nobody has ever made it clear to the supervisor that the performance of staff is his/her responsibility.
And then comes the really sad part.
Once performance begin to fall off, it normally continues to fall until the employee finds himself outside the organization either voluntarily or involuntarily.
We seem to know very little about reversing poor performance...
once it starts to decline it usually continues.
As depressing as this sounds, the fix is relatively simple for leaders who are determined to see things change.
Do three things: 1.
Rewrite the job description of supervisors and include language that states clearly that their performance will be evaluated in part on their ability to develop loyalty amongst the qualified people who work for them.
Be prepared to enforce it.
This should apply to all supervisors in the organization; senior level supervisors can model the desired behavior for their junior level colleagues.
2.
Treat supervisors like supervisors.
Involve them in the hiring process.
After all, if they are to be responsible for the performance and loyalty of their staff, they should be given a voice about who will be assigned to their work unit.
3.
Finally, recognize that supervisors have a tough job; give them the training and support that they need to learn new skills and supervisory behaviors that they can consistently use, day after day.
You can lower your employee turnover if you are determined to do so.
It is much more about involvement, support and acknowledgment of quality work than it is about money.
Dont surrender to turnover, develop your own plan to keep employees who add value to your organization; your customer satisfaction surveys will reflect a much more positive view of your organization, not to mention the money you will save.
