Is long-term employee retention a losing battle?

[Lubang Bawah]

If the company is too often changing employees, the company's long -term goals will be difficult to achieve, and of course it is a tiring thing if the company is only filled with new employees, the company must dare to invest by maintaining employees who have potential because if the loss of the employee then the company's long -term plan can fail .

[$anounimus$]

For example, if you were a leader in a company what would you see?

Employee choice is an important factor in the long-term development of companies and individuals. So you have to pay attention to whether the person you choose is good or bad. If you have a special situation right now, you should try to think hard before making a decision. Remember, time is gold and only you can control your own future and that of your company.

[stompix]

I'm totally surprised by the replies here, sometimes I wonder, is anyone actually working for a company, or is everyone here a freelancer?

Nobody in three pages of replies thought about a thing:
There are companies who can't keep their employees because the employees themselves don't want that from the start, from the moment they signed the hiring contract they knew, this is a job for 1 2 maybe 5 years!

If you're a student and you get a job at a call center, a hyper store, gaming testing, or a barista, this is what you're going to do all your life, you're going to serve coffee all your life at the same place for 50 years? Are you going to play Fifa 2100 for EA till you are 65 to discover bugs?
There are millions of jobs that have no retention capabilities at all, nobody wants to work there their whole life, everyone wants to get better paid, less stress, and less physical work and there is no way in hell a pretzel stand in some mall will be able to pay you what a desk job at Exor would.

Again, I'm shocked that nobody realized this, all of you you still think you could have worked for the first company that hired you and you think that company had the profit margin to grant you the wage you desired?

[ultrloa]

If the company is too often changing employees, the company's long -term goals will be difficult to achieve, and of course it is a tiring thing if the company is only filled with new employees, the company must dare to invest by maintaining employees who have potential because if the loss of the employee then the company's long -term plan can fail .

No company will change their employee if they see them working so well and they can deliver excellent result to their jobs, for sure a company will treat them as a gem and the only one who will get lay off are those people which have bad record or silent type person which they are unknown to their top officials. Companies will not erase all the employees since this can affect to their overall performance and maybe their productivity will became more lower.

[davis196]

Data do not lie. If these companies do not want to keep losing this battle they have to start caring about their employees. They have to treat their employees great. In this day and age companies need to start to try to be human and actually care about what their employees care about or at least putting it on the same pedestal with the degree at which the company cares about making profit. We need new generational leaders who are high on emotional intelligence.

This is a double edged sword. What if the companies actually do take care of their employees, but the employees aren't loyal and they quit when they have a chance? Investing time and resources into the skills of your employees and seeing them leaving your company and getting hired by the competition must be the living nightmare for every employer.
We live in the "freelance age", where it's easier to simply outsource the task to some guy from the Philippines, who will do it for a 10 times lower price. Maybe this is another reason why the western companies don't cherish their employees that much. Nowadays, everyone is replaceable and everything can be outsourced.

[South Park]

Data do not lie. If these companies do not want to keep losing this battle they have to start caring about their employees. They have to treat their employees great. In this day and age companies need to start to try to be human and actually care about what their employees care about or at least putting it on the same pedestal with the degree at which the company cares about making profit. We need new generational leaders who are high on emotional intelligence.

This is a double edged sword. What if the companies actually do take care of their employees, but the employees aren't loyal and they quit when they have a chance? Investing time and resources into the skills of your employees and seeing them leaving your company and getting hired by the competition must be the living nightmare for every employer.
We live in the "freelance age", where it's easier to simply outsource the task to some guy from the Philippines, who will do it for a 10 times lower price. Maybe this is another reason why the western companies don't cherish their employees that much. Nowadays, everyone is replaceable and everything can be outsourced.

Employees did not started this trend, it was the companies which did so, long time ago people still expected to work most of their life at a single company, but then companies began treating their employees as replaceable and firing them for no reason at all, at the beginning employees were confused about this new reality but they adapted themselves quickly to it, so now they do not care at all about the company in which they are working and they will only do what it is necessary to receive their paycheck, companies do not like this but it is their fault as this is the environment they wanted to create.

[qwertyup23]

Data do not lie. If these companies do not want to keep losing this battle they have to start caring about their employees. They have to treat their employees great. In this day and age companies need to start to try to be human and actually care about what their employees care about or at least putting it on the same pedestal with the degree at which the company cares about making profit. We need new generational leaders who are high on emotional intelligence.

What do you think? Are companies losing the battle for long term employee retention?

Personally, I think the reason for the high-turnover rate of some companies is due to the management not adapting to the "new normal" which COVID introduced. When the pandemic hit, this was a realization to most employees that they could actually function and work better while not physically attending on their desk and office jobs. Some companies, despite this realization, still chose to prefer the conventional way of operating their jobs which ultimately led to people quitting.

But if there is one thing that I have noticed with this generation, it is that most GenZ and millenials somehow job hop from one company to another, looking for the place which offers the highest profit. While this kind of strategy works most of the time, this damages their reputation in the long-term.

[AmoreJaz]

Data do not lie. If these companies do not want to keep losing this battle they have to start caring about their employees. They have to treat their employees great. In this day and age companies need to start to try to be human and actually care about what their employees care about or at least putting it on the same pedestal with the degree at which the company cares about making profit. We need new generational leaders who are high on emotional intelligence.

What do you think? Are companies losing the battle for long term employee retention?

Personally, I think the reason for the high-turnover rate of some companies is due to the management not adapting to the "new normal" which COVID introduced. When the pandemic hit, this was a realization to most employees that they could actually function and work better while not physically attending on their desk and office jobs. Some companies, despite this realization, still chose to prefer the conventional way of operating their jobs which ultimately led to people quitting.

But if there is one thing that I have noticed with this generation, it is that most GenZ and millenials somehow job hop from one company to another, looking for the place which offers the highest profit. While this kind of strategy works most of the time, this damages their reputation in the long-term.

indeed! during this pandemic crisis, many employers as well as employees found out that remote working is also a productive one. while attending to their jobs, they can also balance their personal life by working at the comfort of their homes. some do adopt this working set-up if their work don't necessitate them to be physically present at their office.
i guess, companies should accept the fact that long-term employee retention is already a thing in the past. as we are in this digital age, most individuals just hop from one job to another, looking for greener pastures.

[Semar Mesem]

If the company wants to move forward then the thing that must be done is always do skills training for employees, if regular training is carried out it will produce quality employees so that it becomes the most valuable advantage and asset for the company, sometimes companies are afraid to provide training because if employees have good skills then will leave and find another company, this is a mistake.

[Davidvictorson]

If the company is too often changing employees, the company's long -term goals will be difficult to achieve, and of course it is a tiring thing if the company is only filled with new employees, the company must dare to invest by maintaining employees who have potential because if the loss of the employee then the company's long -term plan can fail .

In my estimation, leave some permanent staff and employ remote workers who would not have access to confidential company secrets. I mean that is the direction that the world is going and like they say, if you cannot not beat them then join them. Besides, we know that some CEOs already are buying the idea of remote or hybrid work. I think the biggest thing that employees need now is freedom and because there are already more than one option, they leave. CEOs should incorporate both remote and hybrid work. It would help.

[Markinzo]

The main reason why employees leave companies can be on lack of incentives or rather lack of growth. Some of these companies are too rigid to the extent that its workers have less time to spend with family or even time for themselves. Some work six days in a week at at least 10hours daily. Another thing that prompts some workers to seek greener pasture else might be because they are not comfortable with shifts allocated to them, lack of growth within the company like raising in ranks easily like government owned work places. It could also be due to fear, some companies scare there workers with sack and they feel threatened so when better jobs opportunities come they turn to jump on it. Some of this companies also don't have retirement plans like pensions and workers tend to look for pensionable jobs since its hard to save for some during their active working days. Irregular transfers of employees by employers can effect the switching of jobs or people seeking to be independent.

Every salary earner looks and hope towards a wonderful pensionable life after years in service and this hopes can hardly be fulfilled with private establishments, for a very few of them tend to meet up to this expectations from employees and that's why every employee with a good retirement plans in mind will definitely switch from one establishments to another in his/her best interest as these private establishments are there for their own best interest too.
In third world countries especially, the only establishments that obviously renders gratuity and pension to  employees after their years of service is done with are the government owned establishments and that's why many people scout for employment is parastatals and establishments own by government as the feel secure about their pension and gratuity benefits in their old age under government establishments as against  the private ones. Cause a private establishments is profit oriented based their capitalist drive which is not solely of a focus from government that seek to just making sure her citizens are gainfully employed, perhaps the reasons for job switch by many.

[RolonNigel]

It is still necessary to distinguish the business of the company. If it is a sales company, the turnover of employees is very high. If it is a technology company, the boss will definitely find a way to retain core personnel.
Now the company has developed good benefits to retain core personnel. Employees will also want to leave because they are dissatisfied with the company's system, or they are not satisfied with the salary. Some employees of small companies change a group of people every week...

[MarjorieZimmermanGinger]

If the company is too often changing employees, the company's long -term goals will be difficult to achieve, and of course it is a tiring thing if the company is only filled with new employees, the company must dare to invest by maintaining employees who have potential because if the loss of the employee then the company's long -term plan can fail .

Not necessarily a company that changes employees frequently, is not able to achieve long-term goals, this I often see in the area where I live. One example of a financial company, they rotate employees every two years, but long-term targets such as loans are going very well.
For me, the most important thing is that management, directors or heads of fields can work together to build a more advanced company, the concept lies in these three components in my opinion.

[Fatunad]

If the company is too often changing employees, the company's long -term goals will be difficult to achieve, and of course it is a tiring thing if the company is only filled with new employees, the company must dare to invest by maintaining employees who have potential because if the loss of the employee then the company's long -term plan can fail .

Not necessarily a company that changes employees frequently, is not able to achieve long-term goals, this I often see in the area where I live. One example of a financial company, they rotate employees every two years, but long-term targets such as loans are going very well.
For me, the most important thing is that management, directors or heads of fields can work together to build a more advanced company, the concept lies in these three components in my opinion.

Doesnt matter if they are making out active shuffling or replacing of their employees or not then its still their rights on what they should gonna do into their company.If they do look for it to be relevant or useful then
they would be surely be doing that even it would really be getting those bad feedbacks or negative impressions by others but if it turns out to make productivity to be effective then they would really be sticking into that.They are the one who do run the company then there's no choice but to deal up with their system. So as an employee then you dont have any choice but to deal with it.
Its sad if you've been thinking about long term relationship but it cant be possible for this kind of company set-up.

[MarjorieZimmermanGinger]

Doesnt matter if they are making out active shuffling or replacing of their employees or not then its still their rights on what they should gonna do into their company.If they do look for it to be relevant or useful then
they would be surely be doing that even it would really be getting those bad feedbacks or negative impressions by others but if it turns out to make productivity to be effective then they would really be sticking into that.They are the one who do run the company then there's no choice but to deal up with their system. So as an employee then you dont have any choice but to deal with it.
Its sad if you've been thinking about long term relationship but it cant be possible for this kind of company set-up.

Basically, not all employees have good performance in the long term, therefore it is necessary to select according to needs. The company has certain standards in terms of achievement as a set target, for that they recruit employees who are competent and in accordance with their knowledge, in contrast to working in a government environment which is generally less responsible for performance, while companies have greater standards and responsibilities.

However, if you are not the type of person who likes to be managed and does not want to follow the company's standard work system, then this job is not the right place for us to go.

[YUriy1991]

If the company wants to move forward then the thing that must be done is always do skills training for employees, if regular training is carried out it will produce quality employees so that it becomes the most valuable advantage and asset for the company, sometimes companies are afraid to provide training because if employees have good skills then will leave and find another company, this is a mistake.

Yes, businesses may expect employee retention, there is a much stronger force driving the success of any company namely business performance. they need the best employees so that the company's ultimate goals are achieved at the end of the year.

Hopefully, with a little extra effort and attention, companies can improve the way they work, and get their employees to live up to their philosophy. Of course it's worth taking the time to consider how you might go about it, given how much money and talent a company can lose without realizing it.

[gantez]

sometimes companies are afraid to provide training because if employees have good skills then will leave and find another company, this is a mistake.

Training and more training is very good for company and that is the international standard. Company that is focus know how to take care of the workers not to leave maybe by bonus, breaks, good working condition. If you give workers that kind of benefit they will stay more time. If company is afraid that workers will leave them they can sign contract with the worker to stay with them for the period of time specify and by this agreement they will not leave till the date expire. This is how football team have the players contract also.

[Falconer]

What do you think? Are companies losing the battle for long term employee retention?

In my country, jobs are more difficult and there are very few of them than the number of graduates each year. Each of these graduates needs a job and is even willing to stand in line for years to get a job according to their educational background.

I can also say that in my country many employees are willing to volunteer in government agencies for a very small salary. This is a huge advantage for the government or certain companies because they will think that there is nothing to be afraid of when many of their employees quit.

I never know who to blame even though in fact volunteer workers in government agencies are the most common choice of workers. The problem is that the government cannot humanize humans, I mean they only benefit from their workers but ignore more rights from their workers.

[Sterbens]

If the company is too often changing employees, the company's long -term goals will be difficult to achieve, and of course it is a tiring thing if the company is only filled with new employees, the company must dare to invest by maintaining employees who have potential because if the loss of the employee then the company's long -term plan can fail .

You are right if turnover is too frequent then it will affect the company itself, because they have to start over from scratch. I mean if the plan for the future is held by a new person then the plan will be a little different because usually employees have their own ideas which will later be channeled into their work. Indeed, it must be through permission from the company itself, but still, in my opinion, there will be a margin of 2 different ideas.

[Fortify]

Reading this article, I couldn't help but wonder about a lot of things that have gone wrong and is going wrong in companies. Some of these companies are know that employees leaving are a problem and are making efforts to fix it while other who know, ,amy have chosen to ignore it.
Below are some important points highlighted in the article.

According to the report, more than 6.5 million people (20% of the U.K. workforce) are expected to quit their job in the next 12 months, according to estimates from the Charted Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD), which published the data in June after surveying more than 6,000 workers. That’s up from 2021, when 16% of the U.K. workforce said they plan to quit within a year, according to the CIPD. Meanwhile, in March Microsoft’s global Work Trend Index found that 52% of Gen Zers and Millennials — the two generations that represent the vast majority of the workforce — were likely to consider changing jobs within the following year.

Data do not lie. If these companies do not want to keep losing this battle they have to start caring about their employees. They have to treat their employees great. In this day and age companies need to start to try to be human and actually care about what their employees care about or at least putting it on the same pedestal with the degree at which the company cares about making profit. We need new generational leaders who are high on emotional intelligence.

What do you think? Are companies losing the battle for long term employee retention?

You are the one extrapolating and maybe taking it too far. There is often different careers that happen throughout peoples lives and suggesting that it should somehow be closer to 100% of people staying in their jobs forever is naive too. New innovations come along which reduce the need for employees, causing natural attrition within companies. Many people have certain service jobs when they are younger, maybe to sustain them through their studies, but will eventually progress into more lucrative career paths. Others realize that moving around is sometimes the only way to increase your salary but it also adds an element of instability into your life, so there is a trade off there.