The False Cost of Turnover
Here is a phrase that I have in the contract for anyone coming on my team (this one happens to be for our Data & Tech Associate role, but it applies to any role):
The Data & Technology Associate is allowed (and encouraged) to take Intellectual Property from this part-time position experience and use it for good in the world and to help others, while maintaining the Non-Disclosure Agreements between Make Tech Work For You and its clients.
Data privacy and security certainly need to be respected and implemented. But most of what a person can share with the world is not going to violate privacy or security.
It is no secret that there are money, time, and energy costs to off-boarding and on-boarding employees. Professional Development opportunities have been touted as a way to keep employees happy, thereby reducing the amount of turnover, thereby reducing costs. But this math just doesn’t really work out in my mind.
First of all, Professional Development opportunities for data & tech learning are not “optional bonus extras,” not anymore. Continuous learning in data & tech is increasingly a mandatory need to allow all employees (not just the IT or Data teams) and organizations to gain the most benefits out of using these tools for mission-driven work.
Second, Professional Development or Continuous Learning means that employees are gaining new knowledge, new skills, and new experiences. This also means they are likely going to be able to do more and at higher levels. Doing more at higher levels in a typical work structure means getting a new role, either through a promotion or a role switch or some other re-arrangement. We shouldn’t provide Continuous Learning with the hopes that people will stay in one place. Whether it means a shift within the same organization or a move to another org, there is going to need to be some kind of change, and that is not what I would consider a “cost of turnover” - it is a positive and expected outcome.
Trying to pair the cost of Professional Development to the “cost savings” of retention is so transactional - the equation encourages organizations to hold employee retention as more important than supporting people to be in the job that is the best fit for them. Consider the organization that invests time and money in Professional Development for an employee, but has no room for growth for that employee, either in a new role or with more compensation. It should come as no surprise that this employee will need to look for that role growth somewhere, and maybe not at their current org if it isn’t available to them.
In the turnover equation, organizations put an employee leaving in the “costs” pile. But if an employee leaves to use their new knowledge, skills, and experiences at another social justice organization then we should be considering this a positive return on the investment of continuous learning for that person. This is where we really miscalculate the cost of turnover. We are not in a zero-sum game - if your organization invests in a person and that person uses that investment to do good in the world, then that is a net positive.
Learn. Share. Invest in people.
Invest in yourself! Check out some upcoming personal and professional development opportunities we offer:
Enjoy deep breathing, poetry, music, friendship, mindfulness, and tech conversations at our Friday Tech Mindfulness Gatherings
Spreadsheet skills, Mindsets for tech success, data collection, managing without a tech team, and more - we’ve got workshops for non-profit data & tech work that are fun! Find one for you by clicking here.
Manage your inbox, your tabs, your computer health, and more with the 7-Day Shut Down Your Computer Challenge.
