Today I had a very nice discussion with a very old lawyer, and during, we start talking about people leaving companies and how much this has an effect on the organizations itself specially that in his set of mind, people leave companies all the time and still companies are surviving and making more profit every year, I will in this entry write both arguments, I will let you decide :)

The man point of view, turnover means having new blood, young people will have the possibility to advance in their career and receive more responsibilities which will motivate them more, new blood can be introduced into the organization which will allow for new ideas and improved practices, knowledge will be transferred and then enhanced with different prospective.

My point of view, turnover leads to loss in morals (usually), recruiting talents will cost money either for using recruiters, or for the interviewing and hiring expenses, replacement will need time to manager all responsibilities and this is a salary paid that can be saved if turnover did not occur, company needs always to build a team of loyal employees which has the culture embedded within them, new blood will need time to fit into the new culture and they might never fit in, finally, knowledge history cannot be transferred ever, people doing the work learn a history (learning curve) that can never be transferred to any replacement. basically, companies might not be losing money in the books, yet definitely it is losing efficiency which is a potential revenue (opportunity cost).

As i said, I will let you decide yet honestly, I believe both arguments are valid and it is always depending on the case itself :)

If you like this entry, please follow my blog

http://alaazaghmout.blogspot.com/