So, what does this all mean for HR professionals. No pressure HR, but CEO's are risk adverse these days and demanding of data for fact-based decisions. HR will have to step up its measurement game where talent is concerned. I believe workforce planning and analytics will become critical from a supply and demand of talent perspective.
I also believe that tracking and measuring current talent becomes critically important so companies sustain a competitive advantage over its competition.
I believe there are several critical measures when it comes to talent. If I had to choose my top 5, it would be these:
1) Quality of Hire
2) Employee Performance
3) Goal Attainment
4) Turnover by performance, by engagement
5) Employee Engagement scores by performance, manager, department
It is important to know if you are getting quality candidates in the door. There is not one measure for quality of hire, but you can use a combination of new hire performance rating, new hire failure rates and retention rates.
A strong performance management system that allows for an objective quantitative way to measure performance is also critical for organizations to know who is contributing and who isn't. The performance management system should also enable the organization to see who is reaching goals and who isn't.
Turnover is a critical measure but not in its usual form. I think turnover should be segmented just like marketing segments their markets and customers. Look at turnover in a more granular way. For example, analyze turnover and employee performance. Are your HIPO's leaving at a great rate than non-HIPO's? Look at turnover by employee engagement scores, are your highly engaged leaving at a higher rate than your non-engaged staff? Better yet, look at turnover with engagement and performance scores. Are your highly engaged and HIPO's leaving at a higher rate?
The answers and actions to the questions above could make you an HR Rock Star in your organization! Tell me what you measure in regards to your talent...
Posts
8 comments:
Cathy - Thanks for the thought-provoking list. I'd like to toss out another, and ask you and your readers for perspectives on this one: Retention. It is not just the opposite of turnover, yet all the focus seems to be on turnover. Is retention the "forgotten metric?"
Thanks,
Bonnie
Bonnie:
Thanks for reading and posing your question regarding retention. I do have an opinion on that...but let's see what some of the readers think prior to me chiming in.....
Cathy
Bonnie:
Thanks for reading and posing your question regarding retention. I do have an opinion on that...but let's see what some of the readers think prior to me chiming in.....
Cathy
Retention is NOT the inverse of turnover rate? Tell me more please.
Cathy - In your experience, which of these metrics is most difficult for organizations to measure?
Regarding Retention not being the opposite of turnover: this was meant to mean that if you have 90% retention, you don't necessarily have 10% turnover. You could have 90% retention and 120% turnover. Suppose you have 10 salespeople, and 9 stick with you all year - 90% retention. The other slot is a revolving door as you seek to find the right candidate, and you hire (and fire) a new person every month. That's actually 12 people, for 120% TO.
So the idea is more about the math: Retention + TO do not necessarily = 100%.
Hope that clarifies!
Bonnie:
That is how I have interpreted the retention calculation as well. That's why it's important to look at both...I believe, so I think I should add that to the list!!!
Cathy
Traci:
That is a great question, in my experience the one that gives most organizations the most heartburn is performance. Many organizations feel that their performance management system is either not measuring what it should be measuring or there is too much bias in the process. It's hard to get to quality of hire, if you don't have good performance data.
Thanks-
Cathy
Post a Comment