I am a sample of one, but I've generally found exit interviews awkward and tedious. In my mind, they stink for all parties. The person leaving genuinely doesn't want to burn bridges, so they tend to overstate the positive and gloss over the negative.
When I manage people, I prefer going out for coffee/a walk with someone once a week. I ask them for candid feedback on what I'm good at, what I suck at, and how I can make their jobs easier/more rewarding. And, after they leave, I like to invite them out for a pint/coffee a few weeks after they've been in a new gig. The pint/coffee is mostly social, but I've gotten some amazing feedback once the pressure of 'keeping the reference' has been removed.
But again, I'm a sample of one and I have a thicker skin than average. Heck, I was a fat kid who moved around a lot and stuttered. Hearing that I'm a shitty manager doesn't even register....:)
Yea, relying on exit interviews to find problems in your company rather than doing regular 1-on-1 feedback is bad. It is like refusing to write automated tests because you expect your end users to report problems.
there is no upside for the person leaving to be candid in an exit interview, nobody wants to burn their bridges, and the amount of change you can effect in the company by leaving is small most of the time (not to mention that having left the employee cannot drive the changes anyways).
I personally think the only thing that might be worthwhile is to have an 'exit questionnaire' where you only have a couple of options in 1-5 (strongly disagree / neutral / strongly agree) with very non-threatening / non-personal areas, something like
The following are areas that I feel contributed to my decision to leave, and put 'compensation', 'technology', 'recognition', 'career', 'life changes'
if your managers are good you should also be able to talk to the person's manager and get some more color on the above, if they have no idea it might be a signal that you might want to double check on how that manager interacts with their reports (regular 1 on 1s? how are the status reports? etc.)
If you see a lot of people leave for 'compensation' it's easy to see where the issue is, 'technology' might make you adjust the messaging you do in interviews (not everybody can work on the latest and greatest) for 'recognition/career' you can figure out if your promotions / career ladder are ok, and if somebody is leaving because their life circumstances change, well, not much you can do
I think this is better than having a forced session where the employee tries to not burn any bridges and you try to infer what they are really thinking
> there is no upside for the person leaving to be candid in an exit interview, nobody wants to burn their bridges, and the amount of change you can effect in the company by leaving is small most of the time (not to mention that having left the employee cannot drive the changes anyways).
That and their care factor has hit 0, their future and the companies future are no longer tied.
Quite right. Other problems include HR is not on your side, you may need references, etc.
I'm not sure how exit interview results overlap with glassdoor reviews. Do people feel glass door offers more anonymity? Perhaps people secure their next job then write a negative review once "burning bridges" becomes less consequential ?
1. HR is never on your side but on their employer's side. Plain and simple. You can spin it any way but that is the fact.
2. You don't want to burn bridges when leaving. Real negatives are difficult to share.
3. You are not going to take any actions anyway based on that. It is more of a paperwork formality I think.
If someone has already decided to leave a company, it is too late for an exit interview. People leave due to reasons such as bad boss, bad environment, shit money, better opportunity that they want to pursue elsewhere, start their own stuff etc. All these reasons have no use in an exit interview because as a company, it should be your job to ensure you focus on these issues while the employee is working for you.
7 comments
[ 4.4 ms ] story [ 31.1 ms ] threadWhen I manage people, I prefer going out for coffee/a walk with someone once a week. I ask them for candid feedback on what I'm good at, what I suck at, and how I can make their jobs easier/more rewarding. And, after they leave, I like to invite them out for a pint/coffee a few weeks after they've been in a new gig. The pint/coffee is mostly social, but I've gotten some amazing feedback once the pressure of 'keeping the reference' has been removed.
But again, I'm a sample of one and I have a thicker skin than average. Heck, I was a fat kid who moved around a lot and stuttered. Hearing that I'm a shitty manager doesn't even register....:)
I personally think the only thing that might be worthwhile is to have an 'exit questionnaire' where you only have a couple of options in 1-5 (strongly disagree / neutral / strongly agree) with very non-threatening / non-personal areas, something like
The following are areas that I feel contributed to my decision to leave, and put 'compensation', 'technology', 'recognition', 'career', 'life changes'
if your managers are good you should also be able to talk to the person's manager and get some more color on the above, if they have no idea it might be a signal that you might want to double check on how that manager interacts with their reports (regular 1 on 1s? how are the status reports? etc.)
If you see a lot of people leave for 'compensation' it's easy to see where the issue is, 'technology' might make you adjust the messaging you do in interviews (not everybody can work on the latest and greatest) for 'recognition/career' you can figure out if your promotions / career ladder are ok, and if somebody is leaving because their life circumstances change, well, not much you can do
I think this is better than having a forced session where the employee tries to not burn any bridges and you try to infer what they are really thinking
That and their care factor has hit 0, their future and the companies future are no longer tied.
I'm not sure how exit interview results overlap with glassdoor reviews. Do people feel glass door offers more anonymity? Perhaps people secure their next job then write a negative review once "burning bridges" becomes less consequential ?
1. HR is never on your side but on their employer's side. Plain and simple. You can spin it any way but that is the fact.
2. You don't want to burn bridges when leaving. Real negatives are difficult to share.
3. You are not going to take any actions anyway based on that. It is more of a paperwork formality I think.
If someone has already decided to leave a company, it is too late for an exit interview. People leave due to reasons such as bad boss, bad environment, shit money, better opportunity that they want to pursue elsewhere, start their own stuff etc. All these reasons have no use in an exit interview because as a company, it should be your job to ensure you focus on these issues while the employee is working for you.