4 ms·
Your answer assumes that the cost of preventing burnout exceeds the cost of turnover.
by bdhess 10y ago
Your answer assumes that the cost of preventing burnout exceeds the cost of turnover.
- falcolas 10y agoBased on videogame companies and how they churn through deveopers, this definitely seems to be the case for at least some sectors. I'd say the cost of turnover is only high for highly specialized roles; a role which software development is rarely considered to be by companies.
- sidlls 10y agoYes, and this is because consumers treat software products more like a disposable than a durable good. If they cared about quality, companies would react to that.
- leggomylibro 10y agoVideo games might not be the best example; they aren't commodities, and the games which are produced as you described often feel like assembly line productions. Compare Ubisoft's flagship Assassin's Creed or Far Cry games to Ubisoft's arthouse Montpellier studio (1). It's astonishing what a difference culture makes with creative works. Their works are smaller and less consistent, but they have a few enormous successes (compared to how much they cost) among those. But with a commodity like paper clips, where you can buy 100 from anybody, that might not be the case. You get a paper clip no matter how the workers are treated. I guess that might have been what you meant by 'specialized roles,' though. (1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubisoft_Montpellier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubisoft_Montpellier
- dragonwriter 10y agoIt is based the increased cost of reducing burnout being born immediately, but the savings in turnover not immediately being of the same magnitude, and that those short term costs have significant market effect.