Green Grass

As I was commuting into the office the other day – for the 4th time in 2 years, who would have thought a couple of years ago this would be the new reality – I was catching up on some professional social media browsing in Fishbowl. Fishbowl being anonymous, people don’t shy away from sharing what they really think, which for me as a Talent director provides interesting insights into employee opinions, as long as you’re happy to wade through posts about relationship advise, people boasting about sharing the savings they have accumulated by the age of thirty wondering if it’s enough and people asking whether THAT dress is suitable for a friend’s wedding (tip: if you have to ask a forum like Fishbowl whether it is suitable, it probably isn’t…). It was here that I came across a question which had amassed a flurry of responses, so naturally peaked my interest:

Is longevity and loyalty to a company dead, in favour of people (read: millennials) job hopping and moving up the ladder quicker than they deserve?

The generational reference and (self-proclaimed) GenX-bitterness of the poster aside, it’s a question I have pondered myself. What is it that makes people stay with a company? What are the costs and benefits of an increasingly nomadic workforce? How much of an organization’s core needs to be stable to preserve a certain company culture? How do we balance people’s need for recognition and progression on the one side and the reality on the other that some experience simply needs time to mature? As a Talent profession, is it still worth investing in career paths or should we focus on something else?

According to many articles, including Sacha Graggs blog The new face of company loyalty millennials and the new up-and-coming workforce, Gen Z— have an entirely different philosophy when it comes to their career path and loyalty than say boomers or gen X-ers. ?According to Graggs, statistics show that the millennial worker changes jobs with a high frequency, earning them the title of “Job-Hopping” generation. A study from?Deloitte?that surveyed 7,700 millennials from across the globe discovered?44 percent of millennials would leave their job within two years and only 16 percent of millennials see themselves with their current employers a decade from now.

The pandemic of course hasn’t helped. Many recent articles are predicting a mass-exodus of workers post-pandemic for various reasons such as lack of investment in learning, a salary war and people rethinking what they really want out of live. As Dana Wilkie states in the SHRM article The Executive View - worker exodus: “this has not been a year in which companies have focused on people’s professional growth and development.?Instead, many employers have had to focus on urgently adapting, pivoting or simply surviving the pandemic. As a result, people are more likely to feel stuck in their roles, and believe they need to change employers?to grow and learn new skills. This is in line with the general languishing?that is surfacing on our emotional landscape during the pandemic.”

New terms such as “rage quitting”, first used by gamers, are now being bandied about in the context of employees: people so done dealing with their work or so disillusioned with their colleagues or management that they don't care about any of it anymore — they quit in that moment.

Add into the mix the impact of remote working on our feeling of belonging to a company and colleagues, and it is no wonder people are tempted away when the grass seems greener elsewhere especially when, given the war on Talent, companies are very happy to paint their grass a little greener to get someone through the door. And if said grass turns out to be as patchy as everywhere else? With an increasing acceptance of the “boomerang” employee, there is no shame in returning to the same employer after a year or so, with a significant pay hike and often in a more senior position of course. Win-win for the job-hopper.

But what about those who do stay? Who see people come and go, with salaries and positions growing much faster than theirs and (in their view) disproportionate to what is fair or justified by experience? ?Who are left holding the fort and picking up the pieces when things get tough, who spend time onboarding and training a constant flow of new people on top of their day job. Who feel their loyalty and resilience should count for more than opportunistic behavior?

I don’t have all the answers of course. I do have an opinion. In my view, a transient workforce is the new normal and brings with it many benefits of knowledge sharing and freshness of thinking. Organizations need to get on board with that whether they like it or not and start thinking differently around career paths, focusing less on how long people stay and more on shaping an environment that brings the best out of people whilst they’re there. And at the same time, a loyal core is also beneficial for a company culture. If tended to properly, with continuous investment in growth, learning and development, this loyal core is the meadow attracting the bees who come and go to do their cross-pollinating.

Talents come in many shapes and sizes. We need both. And we need to acknowledge that until we build that inclusive environment, where people are appreciated for what they bring and what they know and do instead of who they know, people will vote with their feet, especially now the economy is opening up again. As one of the Fishes states in their response to the question I mentioned in the beginning: “It is too often against the backdrop of politics, favoritism, nepotism and other isms, resilience and dues paying grows stale. I am not waiting for anyone to promote me when I am ready and so far the market has not disappointed me. “

I would love to hear your thoughts on this complex topic.