3 ms·

My guess is lack of metrics. If they could tell what it cost and justify it as a savings then they would do it. Most leadership is as rational as they can manag

My guess is lack of metrics. If they could tell what it cost and justify it as a savings then they would do it. Most leadership is as rational as they can manage. The reality is that companies can't measure impact of individuals or small groups particularly well. Certainly they can't tell the difference between good and bad employees so how can they tell who to attempt to retain? More or less attempting to retain everyone at their market value is not on the table at pretty much every company even if they have the money. Maybe some day someone will apply some science to the whole thing and we can find out which strategy is optimal and when.

sokoloff 5y ago
> Certainly they can't tell the difference between good and bad employees I have a much easier time telling the difference between "these are the people with whom I'd form a 3-person startup [vs those that I wouldn't]" than I do telling the difference between "these are the top 50% of my org who are diligently keeping everything running well [vs those who aren't pulling as much weight]". Which is the category of "good vs bad" that matters for a company's success? I think the latter one would be more impactful if solved.