We still had him work out his last two weeks and took him out to happy hour his second to last night... and then his last day he never showed up to do an exit interview and finish some handoffs.
This is why companies should always be proactively adjusting compensation, perks, etc to retain the people they can't afford to lose, though very few actually do this. In the end though, even if a company does keep up on the retaining side there are lots of reasons (eg. more interesting technical stack, new project instead of maintaining old one, etc) why someone who is mostly happy may still leave a job for another.
Having said all of that, it sucks that the dev didn't show up for the last day. I hate exit interviews, but I'll still do them.
"Exit interviews fascinate me like cockroaches do. An exit interview is the meeting a company's human resources department has with an employee who has been terminated or who has resigned. Like the Top Ten Stupid Interview Questions, exit interviews are the cockroaches of the human resources world: no one knows why they exist, no one can justify or eliminate them, and they will likely survive into the third millennium."
My feedback provided a written-down justification for investing in some much-needed improvements to the way they built software. A few things tangibly improved as a direct result, and that is valuable to me.
At that point you have a risk/reward trade off, and an absolute "NO!" rule that's based on the generally correct perception there's no reward is less relevant. BTW, did you give this feedback to HR or to a manager type? Headhunter Corcodilos is particularly inveighing against the former, although a lot of his points apply in all circumstances. And he does allow for doing this with the right person, with a strong recommendation of waiting a couple weeks after you're gone.
To finish, there's always the question of "Why will they listen this time?", but, hey, I was born, raised and have retired to Missouri, where we're famous for our mules. And I was told the first rule in interacting with them is to get their attention with a sturdy piece of wood. I'm sure in some situations, especially the ones where you know all the players, that can actually work, even if it takes something even more drastic like resigning.
Hmmm, you might even point out that they should try playing this game before they lose the next person....
I suppose the flip side is that people will say I should be eliciting that feedback all the time, and I do, but there's a difference between giving feedback to your superior and your former superior.
If you think they're useless (which they are), there's nothing forcing you to give them honest or straight answers to their questions.
After researching the topic online, I found that there's negative value to the employee in those interviews. For example: complaints will get back to managers, reducing their value as references.
They serve no higher purpose other than to make things easier for the employer in the event of a post-departure lawsuit.
Isn't it a good practice to only use references who are already in your back pocket?
>> They serve no higher purpose other than to make things easier for the employer in the event of a post-departure lawsuit.
In my mind, the only purpose they serve is to justify the existence/value of the HR department.
You guys must not have any management or team lead experience. I'm an engineering manger who does a lot more engineering than managing but that said, if someone is leaving my team I'd like some time to sit and discuss why for my own benefit. Feedback on things we can improve, things that work well, etc. I'm sure big companies have shitty exit interviews but if you're a team lead or manager and you don't want to discuss why your employee is leaving then you seriously need to reexamine your management philosophy.
You don't need an exit interview. I usually know when people are unhappy before they even quit. While I do not try to be friends with people who have worked for me, they've known me to be straightforward and honest and to not be a puppet of the higher ups. Most of them have had no issue letting me know their grievances as they occur during normal working life, and they have a good idea of what changes are within my scope of control and those that are not.
Also, the best time to ask those questions is when you're being handed the resignation letter. If your track record with the employee is good, i.e., they know you don't get bitter about them leaving, you'll probably get pretty honest and truthful responses. A formal exit interview in my mind is a waste of time.
Precisely. It's amazing how quickly some companies will only take a reactive approach to retaining top employees, then sit stunned when they walk out the door.
The last job I left, my current employer counter-offered to match my new salary, and tossed out a "discretionary bonus" they supposedly had been planning to give me as an incentive to stay. I politely declined.
What's funny is if they had taken me aside before I even considered looking for a new job, and simply said something like, "Hey, you're doing a great job. We want to give you /raise|bonus|perk/ to let you know you're appreciated" it would have meant the world, at least in my eyes, and I wouldn't have begun considering other opportunities.
As was pointed out earlier in the thread, sometimes good work finds you, and in cases like that there really isn't much your employer can do, but I think the larger point is often there are a lot of things they CAN do to retain good employees and a lot of companies aren't doing them.
A junior dev that perceived everyone else as being okay with the status quo probably thought it was easier to find another opportunity than to rock the boat. Add to it that strategic job hopping virtually guarantees a raise or promotion faster and better than waiting for your current employer to do so and I would totally do what your junior dev did.