I'll add to that, the motivation to mentor someone really goes away the third or fourth time you see them hit the inflection point of the usefulness curve... just to be hired by someone else because $current_employer can't find an extra few grand to keep them.

I don't like training and mentoring people. I'm pretty good at it, but I try my damnest to avoid it now.

Yep, and why becoming one of the more senior members of a team is a reason I would leave a team. I wouldn't want to deal with on boarding people endlessly while still keeping up with my own work.

You should still do it. Those people leaving and going to other companies is good for you individually as it builds your network.

Not everyone likes the mentoring and pedagogy aspects as much, and that's fine IMHO. I do like it despite turnover and "wasting" resources on some people, but I'm coming from an education/instruction background. I can see how some profiles would not be really interested in doing that.

The GP said they didn't like it but did it anyway. They stopped because the developers they mentored would leave when they got good. My point is that it's better from them individually to mentor someone and have them leave because it builds their network.

> IMHO it's turnover that's the problem.

In software I've seen this to be a huge problem. In other disciplines my observations are that it's not as bad.

The turnover issues is something that could use a lot more exploration. Nothing is going to change until it impacts those who are distant from the front line engineers. The managers of the engineers know about the problems. The executives over them are distant from the problem.

> Nothing is going to change until it impacts those who are distant from the front line engineers.

What do you mean? Because companies are leaving a lot of money on the table, unable to complete software projects, and unable to solve the problems they care about just because of it.

You mean it in some way other than monetary impact?

No other industry has salaries that rise this fast. I tripled my salary over about 5 years going from Junior -> Senior (experienced) -> Team lead. Quadrupled if you count the 6 months I did as a trainee.

> The turnover issues is something that could use a lot more exploration.

It is about pay. If you switched jobs in the past year, you got a massive raise. If you stuck around, you got peanuts, if anything.

I mean... I stuck around and got a 20% raise, fwiw.

The question is why are they leaving after 24 months? Perhaps the company is lacking a clear path for development in terms of responsibility, impact, and renumeration. Not adequately training because they are expected to leave after 24 months is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

It's mostly because it is taboo to give a pay rise above 15% to retain someone (unless promoting) but most companies are willing to spend more than that difference on new hires to match the market rate.

I am sure there is some sort of game psychology explanation on HR's behaviour and equally, from an employee perspective, the cost/inertia of following through with a job change will probably weight in HR's favor.

My company has paid double digit raises regularly. I’ve still seen people leave for internal transfers because they think the grass is greener.

Money is why a lot of young devs quit, but it’s not the only reason.

You shouldn't dox yourself by answering this, but I sure wish you could tell us which company is giving double digit raises every year... I'm over here languishing at less than 2% at best, having to leave every year or so just to get the necessary bump.

Yes, but maybe it's time for companies to ask themselves why they have such high turnover

I think it really depends.

I've seen junior devs getting promotions in several cases because they were that good. On the other hand, I've seen several less performant junior devs that are treated as completely replaceable. This was in companies where mentoring actually happened.

Chicken vs Egg? Maybe the turnover is high because juniors aren't getting the support and mentoring they need to feel like it's worth sticking around. Is there evidence turnover has increased in the last decade or so? It's always been pretty high in the IT world anyway.

That's because their raises, if they happen, are factually pay cuts (aka lower than inflation).