3 ms·

Yeah but they don't care about employee churn at all. That's the whole point. There is almost an infinite supply of replacements. Did you not read my post?

AmericanChopper 7y ago
The only way for a company to not care about churn is if they literally don’t care about the quality of their product or services. There are very few businesses where this is the case (in software engineering at least), so if you’re trying to suggest that such businesses are a common problem, then you’re delusional.
- newswasboring 7y ago
  > The only way for a company to not care about churn is if they literally don’t care about the quality of their product or service. I disagree. There are plenty of jobs which are basically about qualified warm bodies. It doesn't matter who is doing it, it will get done. Even in high tech there are plenty of jobs like this. Not all companies have a heavily customized set of libraries. Most use off the shelf fairly famous things. It costs less to hire someone new and let them ramp up than to give someone a raise.
  - AmericanChopper 7y ago
    You’re really talking about two different things here, but you’re wrong on both of them. For starters, your typical software engineer hire will cost you more than the value they provide for at least their first six months. If they stay for less than 18 months, then you’ll never get a return on that investment. Realistically you need them to stay longer. Secondly, even if your just a vanilla web dev shop, using the most basic set of frameworks available, if the average tenure of your staff is too low, then the quality of your product/service will massively suffer. Ask anybody who’s had the analyze this in a management position (like I have for instance, many times). To make this work (and I have seen it work), you need an incredibly atypical set of circumstances. For starters, you need to be in a position where quality absolutely does not matter at all. This sounds ridiculous but there are some cases where this can be true (for some period of time at least, but maybe you don’t care about it lasting forever...). Companies that have built themselves an unassailable position in the procurement pipelines of government or large enterprise can exploit such dynamics, on a limited term basis, for example. Secondly, you need to have eliminated any quality control in your recruitment pipeline. Naturally, this will result in hiring a lot of very low quality labor, but as above, maybe that’s fine. Finally, you need to have completely eliminated any onboarding or training. You need people to turn up to work, and almost immediately start producing low quality work. Such companies do actually exist, but they are very, very uncommon. If you happen to find yourself working for one, though you may be underpaid and treated poorly, you can at least know that your employer is likely extracting very little value from you at all, regardless of how personally talented you might be.
- brmgb 7y ago
  > The only way for a company to not care about churn is if they literally don’t care about the quality of their product or services. Quality of product does not appear on quaterly result and is not taken into account when deciding bonuses. Obviously companies don't care about it. The only times I have seen companies care about churn is when : - constant departures started impacting customers delivery scheduldes leading to financial penalties - costs of hiring started to grate.
  - AmericanChopper 7y ago
    I honestly can’t tell if this comment is supposed to be satire. The quality of your product has a direct impact on ARPC, customer churn, LTV, sales conversions, customer engagement/feature usage, SLA reports, roadmap progress, competitor analysis, and many other metrics. Most, if not all of those metrics will be featured in quarterly reports. I’m getting the very strong impression that most of the commenters in this thread have absolutely no insight at all into how businesses or their management actually operate.

AmericanChopper 7y ago

The only way for a company to not care about churn is if they literally don’t care about the quality of their product or services. There are very few businesses where this is the case (in software engineering at least), so if you’re trying to suggest that such businesses are a common problem, then you’re delusional.

newswasboring 7y ago
> The only way for a company to not care about churn is if they literally don’t care about the quality of their product or service. I disagree. There are plenty of jobs which are basically about qualified warm bodies. It doesn't matter who is doing it, it will get done. Even in high tech there are plenty of jobs like this. Not all companies have a heavily customized set of libraries. Most use off the shelf fairly famous things. It costs less to hire someone new and let them ramp up than to give someone a raise.
- AmericanChopper 7y ago
  You’re really talking about two different things here, but you’re wrong on both of them. For starters, your typical software engineer hire will cost you more than the value they provide for at least their first six months. If they stay for less than 18 months, then you’ll never get a return on that investment. Realistically you need them to stay longer. Secondly, even if your just a vanilla web dev shop, using the most basic set of frameworks available, if the average tenure of your staff is too low, then the quality of your product/service will massively suffer. Ask anybody who’s had the analyze this in a management position (like I have for instance, many times). To make this work (and I have seen it work), you need an incredibly atypical set of circumstances. For starters, you need to be in a position where quality absolutely does not matter at all. This sounds ridiculous but there are some cases where this can be true (for some period of time at least, but maybe you don’t care about it lasting forever...). Companies that have built themselves an unassailable position in the procurement pipelines of government or large enterprise can exploit such dynamics, on a limited term basis, for example. Secondly, you need to have eliminated any quality control in your recruitment pipeline. Naturally, this will result in hiring a lot of very low quality labor, but as above, maybe that’s fine. Finally, you need to have completely eliminated any onboarding or training. You need people to turn up to work, and almost immediately start producing low quality work. Such companies do actually exist, but they are very, very uncommon. If you happen to find yourself working for one, though you may be underpaid and treated poorly, you can at least know that your employer is likely extracting very little value from you at all, regardless of how personally talented you might be.
brmgb 7y ago
> The only way for a company to not care about churn is if they literally don’t care about the quality of their product or services. Quality of product does not appear on quaterly result and is not taken into account when deciding bonuses. Obviously companies don't care about it. The only times I have seen companies care about churn is when : - constant departures started impacting customers delivery scheduldes leading to financial penalties - costs of hiring started to grate.
- AmericanChopper 7y ago
  I honestly can’t tell if this comment is supposed to be satire. The quality of your product has a direct impact on ARPC, customer churn, LTV, sales conversions, customer engagement/feature usage, SLA reports, roadmap progress, competitor analysis, and many other metrics. Most, if not all of those metrics will be featured in quarterly reports. I’m getting the very strong impression that most of the commenters in this thread have absolutely no insight at all into how businesses or their management actually operate.