2 things to manage employee retention in your team

High employee retention comes costly. So what does the data say about the key triggers why people leave?

A Gallup claims the No. 1 reason is a bad manager – 75% of workers who voluntarily left their jobs did so because of their boss  (based on a survey of 1 million employed U.S. workers: Employees don’t leave Companies, they leave Managers).

But this is also said to be one of the biggest HR lies!

It is usually much more complex and usually a combination of different reasons. Culture amp research based on comparison of 175 teams showed the percentage of people whose decision to leave an organization was driven by a manager was at 12%. The key findings are

  1. Yes, people leave bad managers, but it is not the number one reason
  2. In “good” companies, managers make a difference
  3. In “bad” companies, good or bad managers make little to no difference to a person’s decision to leave

see Culture amp blog

High retention – Low results

The typical equation goes like this. High retention is usually connected with the lower performance of the team and the individuals.

In 2018 we have done extensive research on 306 retail teams. 306 retail bank offices operating across the country facing average employee retention of 17% with maximum retention of 62%!

The question was crystal clear – what makes the difference?

What to focus when facing high employee retention?

To make the story short, the main things which distinguish “good” and “bad” teams were:

  1. Accurate space for personal development
  2. The quality of the managers’ communication

We found a statistically significant negative correlation between the retention and interest of the manager about team-members development. All subordinates were asked if they perceive they have sufficiently frequent development interviews with their manager.

The regression analyses suggest that providing your team with sufficient development possibilities can positively impact the retention roughly between 2-14%.

The quality of the managers’ communication perceived in the team has been also positively correlated with the business results delivered by the whole bank office team.

So what (to do)?

That’s why we have started to encourage the managers to change the way they are interacting with the team and what they focus.

First of all, managers needed to better understand their team and the needs of their people. A project including sociomapping analyses of the teams to open up the discussion between the manager and the team has been initiated. There was a focus on the following areas:

  • Do we have sufficient communication in the team?
  • How can we improve the quality of communication in the team?
  • How can we help our manager and team to grow?

Such a picture helped the teams to understand and discuss their needs better and drive the change to become a more sustainable team.

Sociomapping of the quality of communication in the team
Heigh represents the average quality of communication of the given team-member (perceived by other team members). Positions reflect mutual evaluation in quality of interaction – the closer the better. (A) – Manager

Customer quote

Sociomapping helped my managers to better understand their teams and adjust to it. As a result, they have re-focused their attention to people and their development which led to the tangible result in our teams.

Head of sales, Banking

Do you want to develop your team effectiveness?

Get in touch with us and find out more details about sociomapping programs for your company.

Book a demo