4 ms·

Whatever you offer, including non-monetary, someone else can offer and then also spend their training budget on higher comp.

godelski 5y ago
Is this supposed to be a rebuttal? I don't see a problem here.
- austhrow743 5y ago
  Yes. Spending money and then not recouping is a losing strategy.
  - brewdad 5y ago
    So the answer is to not spend the money at all? How much are you costing your company by putting candidates through 8 hours of interviews only to reject them. Rinse. Repeat. All the while, productivity suffers as the remaining team falls further behind due to short-staffing and being pulled away from their real jobs to interview.
    - ABCLAW 5y ago
      Professions mandate training minimums per year in order to maintain credentialled status. They're low, sure, but they at least create a need for ongoing professional education.
  - wyldfire 5y ago
    Every process has pros and cons, you have to weigh the net benefits.
  - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
    Working at a company that doesnt pay for my training while my skills fall behond is a loosing strategy.
  - godelski 5y ago
    I literally said it isn't all about money. Most people leave because managers[0] > In general, people leave their jobs because they don’t like their boss, don’t see opportunities for promotion or growth, or are offered a better gig (and often higher pay); these reasons have held steady for years. And if it is about money, then this is called paying competitively. But lastly, recognize that if everyone is training employees you're still not really losing out unless you're only hiring entry level employees. Sure, you might be training someone that leaves, but so does your competitor. But if you're only hiring junior engineers then you're probably doing something wrong that's much bigger. [0] https://hbr.org/2016/09/why-people-quit-their-jobs https://hbr.org/2016/09/why-people-quit-their-jobs
newsyyswen 5y ago
Not necessarily. It's not easy to find a boss who you genuinely trust to consider your best interests, for example. Out of curiosity, what sort of "non-monetary" benefits were you thinking about? There's usually not a reliable way to turn (small amounts of) money into the sorts of things that really build loyalty.
epicureanideal 5y ago
That works if this is a "one time game" (game theory) as opposed to a repeated game. If an employer does do training, it means they'll probably continue to do more training over time, which helps the employee become more valuable. If the employer doesn't do training, yes they may be able to allocate the training budget to salary, but they are not going to spend anything training you or letting you work on projects to increase your skills while you're there, unless they absolutely must. I think people also have some human perception of how they're being treated, and prefer to work for people that invest in them.

godelski 5y ago

Is this supposed to be a rebuttal? I don't see a problem here.

austhrow743 5y ago
Yes. Spending money and then not recouping is a losing strategy.
- brewdad 5y ago
  So the answer is to not spend the money at all? How much are you costing your company by putting candidates through 8 hours of interviews only to reject them. Rinse. Repeat. All the while, productivity suffers as the remaining team falls further behind due to short-staffing and being pulled away from their real jobs to interview.
  - ABCLAW 5y ago
    Professions mandate training minimums per year in order to maintain credentialled status. They're low, sure, but they at least create a need for ongoing professional education.
- wyldfire 5y ago
  Every process has pros and cons, you have to weigh the net benefits.
- ClumsyPilot 5y ago
  Working at a company that doesnt pay for my training while my skills fall behond is a loosing strategy.
- godelski 5y ago
  I literally said it isn't all about money. Most people leave because managers[0] > In general, people leave their jobs because they don’t like their boss, don’t see opportunities for promotion or growth, or are offered a better gig (and often higher pay); these reasons have held steady for years. And if it is about money, then this is called paying competitively. But lastly, recognize that if everyone is training employees you're still not really losing out unless you're only hiring entry level employees. Sure, you might be training someone that leaves, but so does your competitor. But if you're only hiring junior engineers then you're probably doing something wrong that's much bigger. [0] https://hbr.org/2016/09/why-people-quit-their-jobs https://hbr.org/2016/09/why-people-quit-their-jobs

newsyyswen 5y ago

Not necessarily. It's not easy to find a boss who you genuinely trust to consider your best interests, for example. Out of curiosity, what sort of "non-monetary" benefits were you thinking about? There's usually not a reliable way to turn (small amounts of) money into the sorts of things that really build loyalty.

epicureanideal 5y ago

That works if this is a "one time game" (game theory) as opposed to a repeated game. If an employer does do training, it means they'll probably continue to do more training over time, which helps the employee become more valuable. If the employer doesn't do training, yes they may be able to allocate the training budget to salary, but they are not going to spend anything training you or letting you work on projects to increase your skills while you're there, unless they absolutely must. I think people also have some human perception of how they're being treated, and prefer to work for people that invest in them.