News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The quitting economy by pm90 on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @11:22AM (#14856944)
A lot of this can be mitigated by managers having genuine conversations with their employees. The ideal manager I would work with (I've seen some managers come close but never hit all the right notes) would first and foremost be genuinely interested in my career progress as an employee. Different employees have different ambitions and expectations and there is just no way for a manager to know all of this just by observing someone; they really need to actively communicate and find out, to have a genuine conversation about how much raise they can provide or why they can't, what future they see for the employee. Especially if the employee is performing below expectations... that conversation can be tough, but I think one of the qualities of being a good manager is to convey this information in a way which makes the employee try to remedy the situation rather than just disparage them.
Re:The quitting economy by wyc on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @11:28AM (#14857026)
One on ones are important to me, and have been among the most enjoyable interactions in my professional life. My favorite point on this was by Andy Grove, who suggested that there's a limit to the number of your direct reports because you owe each of them about half a day per week to properly manage and support them.
Re:The quitting economy by ryandrake on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @03:42PM (#14859509)
I firmly believe part of this conversation needs to be clear, measurable goals. At most places I've worked it's "Your performance is good, but you're not getting a raise/bonus. In order to get a raise, you need to do subjectively better in some vaguely described area or in some other nebulous way that I cannot articulate. Good luck--you won't know if you've done it until next review time!"

A better conversation would be: "In order to get raise X% you need to do A, B, and C. In order to get raise Y% you also need to do D and E. We will checkpoint 4 times per year on progress, and you'll know well in advance if you've made it." Where A-E are things the employee has direct control over, i.e. not dependent on things like overall team success or company stock price.

Re:The quitting economy by VLM on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @11:37AM (#14857124)
That would imply the hiring process didn't select a perfect match 100% of the time, which is a slap in the face of a large budget item, that's not going to happen.

The fiction must be maintained at all costs that the employee was the perfect fit at hiring time; neither overqualified aka too expensive or underqualified aka the manager screwed up.

Re:The quitting economy by HeyLaughingBoy on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @02:55PM (#14859055)
Not at all.

People change, companies change, the business changes. The person you needed when you hired him might not be the exact person you'll need in a year, but a good manager will first see if that person can grow into a new role instead of firing him and hiring someone else.