In some companies, it is embedded in their process to conduct EXIT INTERVIEWS with any employee who leaves, not just employees who quit.
The precaution for a confidential written exit interview, means it creates the feedback framework to outline why employees are leaving. This would be wise for organizations who hold everyone accountable corporate wide for wasting company resources. Essentially, the costs and resources for a lengthy hiring process that is suppose to be used to avoid bad hires is money and resources spent by bad eggs by interactively sharing statistics or numbers on where there is high turnover, whether by employees quitting or being fired.
When EXIT INTERVIEWs are conducted with integrity, with final signature by the manager’s immediate boss, and then copied up to the senior leadership, bad managers could be exposed. Or, at least, managers who do a lot of firing may finally be held accountable.
It could expose the simple alarm bell that the middle management team has been able to zero out the employees who give their management team honest feedback, negative to the detriment of the supervising boss, that is provable from the employee’s perspective. It can then be flagged and then a bullying culture exposed that allows those in power to make their employees’ lives miserable so that they will quit first. The management team gets a reprieve and is able to manipulate better numbers in order to earn bonuses.
It could also expose the practice of managers who create a toxic work culture that includes co-managers and teams of managers who have each other’s backs.
It could also expose the breeding of managers who are able to tarnish the reputation of whistle blowers who follow the organization’s Code of Ethics.
There are bad managers in good companies.
Serious companies ask questions when employees leave after they’ve heavily invested in training leave.
A “Bad Hire” becomes to have meaning.
Good companies wonder how they have been able to give a pass to a bad hire. Managers are made accountable and bonus factored when there is a number of employees leave by quitting or leave by being laid off through work force reduction, or fired.
The onus on such companies could mean that they don’t squander money fruitlessly hiring people who end up being fired. No, you can’t always catch the employees who give companies bad names.
You can, however, show serious commitment to your words. It demonstrates a dedication towards ensuring a company’s reputation is one that everyone has responsibility in keeping it from being tarnished.
It also shows an organic process that exposes the REAL bad eggs. They may not always be the employee, but the weakness of their managers.
Imagine if government agencies who are meant to police companies who get away with rotten managers who sexually harass or bully employees?
Thankfully, there are a few areas available to expose those sickly psychos we only read about or watch exposes on bosses who abuse employees by the mainstream media who love to uncover abuse of any kind.
Sometimes, rarely, the courts recognize when employees have a bad rap.
Other times, companies end up paying a lot more than just lost resources and training expenses. Courts are waking up to the manipulation of bosses who think that they can hide and it is never known why an employee is fired simply because they didn’t like inappropriately unprofessional comments or ridiculed where bad culture huddles around to protect the real culprit..
The bad companies’ cost to their reputations can be more damaging when whistle blowers are written off as disgruntled former employees. Real companies who take their reputations seriously, take matters into their hands to expose bad culture.
Victims of such bad culture often leave quietly. The toxic practices are never exposed because the employee is told to and often adopt the fear that nobody else will hire them ever again if they, themselves, end up with the bad rep when they risk telling the truth formally, through the courts or in employee feedback formulas. Instead, they keep quiet.
New employees end up in the middle of this toxic work environment when if they’d known, they would never have been desperate enough in wasting their own talent, where ideas are squashed as they aren’t far enough up the chain to be recognized.
Most companies are squandering resources to open up the communications channels. They go as far as creating internal social media channels, where problems are solved collaboratively, good news is recognized internally. They aren’t tracking the managers who respond to employees posts on those channels in negative conduct — injecting themselves to answer their employees’ questions or comments during one-on-one coaching sessions that are anything but mentoring.
Censorship breeds when employees feel afraid to be open and honest. Censorship is crowned when a whistle blower gets no where other than being shown the front door, made to feel unwelcome, bullied by managers, made to feel uncomfortable by teammates politically aligning themselves to the bad bosses as a means to survive.
It can sometimes even itself out. Rarely does it disclose the discontent.
Ignorance by companies is not bliss.
Leadership is lost.
Reputations are damaged.