3 ms·

All good points. I fully agree that the employee is not responsible for ensuring that there is minimum disruption upon their departure, management is. But what

All good points. I fully agree that the employee is not responsible for ensuring that there is minimum disruption upon their departure, management is. But what I don't see is why there seems to be so much difficulty in expecting a departing employee to give more than a minimum notice. People jumping to startups (and that's what this post is about) are usually very bright and have valuable skill sets. They usually leave because they are undervalued/under-compensated or disinterested, not because of an emergency or duress. So what's wrong with giving some extra warning to help out? Isn't that part of an amicable termination? Two weeks is common, but to fill a skilled spot takes a lot longer than two weeks.

pasbesoin 15y ago
Again, look at the context. Also, in addition to hard incentives, are you providing any soft ones? Literally saying, if you're bored or unhappy, we'd like to know. (And we're not looking to screw you over with the knowledge.) Are you backing up such statements with actions that demonstrate your good will? If you were taken by surprise, were you communicating effectively with this employee? ( A primary action that can demonstrate good will.) Finally, what's the demographic in question? Young people, on average, "go off and do things". It's one reason some employers favor married, settled (even "boring") employees. They are more predictable. (And these days, getting married and starting a family is less "the thing to do" than it used to be. It's still done, plenty, but it's not the course of action that it used to be.) If you wanted them to "do things" with you, it seems perhaps you should have been more pro-active in making that part of the assignment. Even then, there's no guarantee. For many employees, disengagement begins long before they quit. If you want the relationship to be valued, your only course of action is to begin doing so from your end. Too many self-interested employers (speaking generally, not necessarily of you) get their undies in a bunch when employees -- perhaps taking a cue from them -- start acting the same way. To repeat my and others' question: What's in it for them?
- molbioguy 15y ago
  To repeat my and others' question: What's in it for them? Nothing tangible. Just good will and (in some cases) a clear conscience. I asked this question because I wanted to get a feel for whether my expectations were right or wrong. The clear answer from the community is that the etiquette for leaving is rather complicated and that two weeks is not unreasonable at all. I also accept that the failure to retain this gifted employee was my fault (that was not in question). So it was helpful to read the comments as it tells me I need to do a lot better the next time around. Thanks.
  - pasbesoin 15y ago
    Understand, for my part, that I was the guy who would cut vacations short because a project was behind. Perhaps counter-intuitively, over time this seemed to cause me trouble, perhaps in part because it did not "fit" the broader culture nor others' expectations. (People become "worried" when you do not do the expected, even when the expected is bailing on the project for the sake of your vacation.) I tried to be "the good employee". As often as not, it burned me. Eventually, I was very much so with individuals (sometimes, 15 minutes of my time could save them a couple of days), but tried to learn to be less that way in an undifferentiated fashion towards the institution in general. Many institutions become very rigid with regard to culture, expectations, and reciprocation. Essentially, eventually, they "train" their employees not to care. (Once again, it's what you do, not what you say -- again, speaking generally and not to you specifically.)

pasbesoin 15y ago

Again, look at the context. Also, in addition to hard incentives, are you providing any soft ones? Literally saying, if you're bored or unhappy, we'd like to know. (And we're not looking to screw you over with the knowledge.) Are you backing up such statements with actions that demonstrate your good will? If you were taken by surprise, were you communicating effectively with this employee? ( A primary action that can demonstrate good will.) Finally, what's the demographic in question? Young people, on average, "go off and do things". It's one reason some employers favor married, settled (even "boring") employees. They are more predictable. (And these days, getting married and starting a family is less "the thing to do" than it used to be. It's still done, plenty, but it's not the course of action that it used to be.) If you wanted them to "do things" with you, it seems perhaps you should have been more pro-active in making that part of the assignment. Even then, there's no guarantee. For many employees, disengagement begins long before they quit. If you want the relationship to be valued, your only course of action is to begin doing so from your end. Too many self-interested employers (speaking generally, not necessarily of you) get their undies in a bunch when employees -- perhaps taking a cue from them -- start acting the same way. To repeat my and others' question: What's in it for them?

molbioguy 15y ago
To repeat my and others' question: What's in it for them? Nothing tangible. Just good will and (in some cases) a clear conscience. I asked this question because I wanted to get a feel for whether my expectations were right or wrong. The clear answer from the community is that the etiquette for leaving is rather complicated and that two weeks is not unreasonable at all. I also accept that the failure to retain this gifted employee was my fault (that was not in question). So it was helpful to read the comments as it tells me I need to do a lot better the next time around. Thanks.
- pasbesoin 15y ago
  Understand, for my part, that I was the guy who would cut vacations short because a project was behind. Perhaps counter-intuitively, over time this seemed to cause me trouble, perhaps in part because it did not "fit" the broader culture nor others' expectations. (People become "worried" when you do not do the expected, even when the expected is bailing on the project for the sake of your vacation.) I tried to be "the good employee". As often as not, it burned me. Eventually, I was very much so with individuals (sometimes, 15 minutes of my time could save them a couple of days), but tried to learn to be less that way in an undifferentiated fashion towards the institution in general. Many institutions become very rigid with regard to culture, expectations, and reciprocation. Essentially, eventually, they "train" their employees not to care. (Once again, it's what you do, not what you say -- again, speaking generally and not to you specifically.)