I really liked this article and have never thought of turnover from this perspective. It is easy to demonize companies for eliminating jobs, but they don’t really want that to happen either. This seems extremely relevant to the current organizational climate in the US, especially with the finding that RIF turnover has more destructive power on organizational performance? Is this a motivational issue? How can we motivate the “survivors” of an RIF, assuming many are bitter and nervous about their own professional futures?
Why might the RIF turnover lead to greater reductions in performance? What social factors might influence this relationship? Additionally, how might we better categorize voluntary and involuntary turnover?
How might where the layoffs occurring affect employee reactions? That is, how might layoffs happening in upper levels of the organizations compared to lower levels of the organization affect employee reactions? Think about the number of people in each of these positions.
One conclusion seemed to be that downsizing has different consequences from voluntary and involuntary turn-over and that this is an important dimension to add to future studies of turn-over.
When an organization believes they must do a RIF, what psychological factors do they need to consider in order to improve the probability that the initiative will result in better productivity and reduced costs? Do you think management decisions, such as executive pay levels that were in place prior to the RIF might impact employees and customers (sometimes these two categories contain the same individuals or at least related individuals) perceptions of the fairness of the RIF decisions?
I found the negative relationship between RIF turnover and performance to be interesting since most companies use this type of turnover b/c of poor profits (i.e., finances). Yet, doing this results in instant, further reduction of profits. What is an alternative solution to RIF turnover? Couldn't I/O professionals help to make employees more efficient to increase profits to avoid RIF turnovers?
I really liked this article and have never thought of turnover from this perspective. It is easy to demonize companies for eliminating jobs, but they don’t really want that to happen either. This seems extremely relevant to the current organizational climate in the US, especially with the finding that RIF turnover has more destructive power on organizational performance? Is this a motivational issue? How can we motivate the “survivors” of an RIF, assuming many are bitter and nervous about their own professional futures?
ReplyDeleteWhy might the RIF turnover lead to greater reductions in performance? What social factors might influence this relationship?
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, how might we better categorize voluntary and involuntary turnover?
How might where the layoffs occurring affect employee reactions? That is, how might layoffs happening in upper levels of the organizations compared to lower levels of the organization affect employee reactions? Think about the number of people in each of these positions.
ReplyDeleteOne conclusion seemed to be that downsizing has different consequences from voluntary and involuntary turn-over and that this is an important dimension to add to future studies of turn-over.
ReplyDeleteWhen an organization believes they must do a RIF, what psychological factors do they need to consider in order to improve the probability that the initiative will result in better productivity and reduced costs? Do you think management decisions, such as executive pay levels that were in place prior to the RIF might impact employees and customers (sometimes these two categories contain the same individuals or at least related individuals) perceptions of the fairness of the RIF decisions?
ReplyDeleteI found the negative relationship between RIF turnover and performance to be interesting since most companies use this type of turnover b/c of poor profits (i.e., finances). Yet, doing this results in instant, further reduction of profits. What is an alternative solution to RIF turnover? Couldn't I/O professionals help to make employees more efficient to increase profits to avoid RIF turnovers?
ReplyDeleteDid you come up with any of you own interpretations for why reduction in force was the only form of termination that negatively affected performance?
ReplyDelete