About the “shelf life” of the employee

The other day, a friend asked me to take a fresh look at his resume. As it turned out, his current job was the first and only, and he worked on it for almost 14 years. IT company, middle management. In the summary, he indicated only his last position and it seemed from all these 14 years that the person worked in the same position ... I recommended him to paint his vertical-horizontal growth, and she thought about the stories of employees with 10+ years of experience. Let's look at them from two points of view: from the side of the company and from the side of the employee.

Experience as a news occasion

In many companies (including IT companies), sooner or later, such a “news occasion” appears as the number of years worked by an employee for corporate good. As a rule, it turns into a holiday in a more or less traditional form: every year on the day of hiring an employee is congratulated and given a gift in accordance with the number of years worked.

If there are 300 people in a company, and there are only 30-40 people in the “five-year plans”, then gifts can be given for each “birthday”, and the budget, even when planning for two years in advance, does not seem large. Usually everything is whole, fun and corporate: a bag, cards with numbers, branded utility. In start-ups and family-owned companies, cash bonuses and options are boldly “presented”.
')
In companies, larger ones practice the presentation of insignia (badges, flags, certificates), that is, they “put on” recognition and fame. The presentation of such distinctive signs takes place in a solemn format: the director shakes hands, the "birthday boy" flaunts the honor rolls. If a content plan that promotes the value of these signs is buried under a pile of information OSes, then a niche of insignia may be formed spontaneously. As a rule, they can be seen at the top management, with a sales-presentation "appearance", or on amateurs of badges on the lapels of the jacket, whose corporate sign is "one of ...".

But whatever the form, the declared value remains the declared value: companies chorus say: “Employee, we really like that you have been working with us for so long!”

Experience as a business value

Holiday holiday budget budget, but is everything so clear with the value of the experience itself? Whether authors / business owners are puzzled to think long and seriously: what problem will be solved after we start in one way or another to encourage our employees for long years of work? Is experience really a business value for your particular company? How many employees out of 100 will work longer and better after receiving a gift? Do we need an employee who wants to work for a long time? And this question is not about postcards.

Incidentally, the isolation of motivational programs from real problems is not such a rarity. “Oh, everyone has it!” - works very well. And one cannot even say that this is not an argument, because the employee's basic motivational package is huge (especially in the IT field) and here we have the balance: the real business problem or the rejection of offers at the entrance?
My personal statistics say that there is no correlation between the number of layoffs and the “age”. There are no crises for 1, 3, 7 years either. Everything is individual.

I remember the reasoning of a colleague who dreamed of adapting the life cycle of an employee of a certain position under 2 years. It is not intuitive to understand that there is just as much effective for everyone here, but at the level of explicit expectations and formal procedures. There is something very sensible about this approach.


Corporate gifts for employees. Recognition program for the "oldies" called On Board

"Period of efficiency"

How many years does it cost to work in one place to be as efficient as possible (and for yourself as well)? Obviously, the answer to this question is also individual: in different businesses in different positions, the time when an employee works in one place has a different “period of effectiveness”.

The monotony of support, accounting functionality, narrow expertise - here, perhaps, the longer, the better. But this is also provided that a number (in direct interaction with these posts) people will change, passing through these sustainable processes. Otherwise, the business or part of it begins to grow faint (and here we are with our “thanks, dear, for so many years with the company” and firmly press the hand).

The most ambivalent moment is people in leadership positions. It is especially important to maintain a balance. In general, I am against the management to grow long and hard from their own. It seems to me that if a person has not seen any other systems except his company, then criticality is lowered, loyalty is increased, and the horizon is still overwhelmed. Let 50% be "adopted children", and 50% - their own :-) Because any successful business - it is more about efficiency culture, and an employee who has never entered the market for a long time definitely doesn’t work on its competitive advantages.

Professional and relative

And here you can imagine two polar types of relations "employee - company". Both types - about loyalty.

Some, let's call them “professionals,” made it a rule for themselves to regularly “look around”: evaluate themselves and the company around. In my idealistic opinion, this is rather good for all parties. Firstly, often when you go to an interview, you have to seriously prepare - the company gets a slightly more advanced employee. And secondly, their choice of the company becomes more conscious, as well as the movement inside. Such employees can work for a long time and be very loyal and self-confident, as they have the opportunity to compare, they understand that there are no ideal companies.

And the second type, "relatives" - employees who are literally afraid to enter the market. They are not sure that they will appreciate it. And such loyalty to the company is based on the fear of their own indecision. Often, self-esteem has nothing to do with real value, but the comfort zone / laziness / circumstances force them to remain in the company and often whine in her direction. When asked, “Why are you crying, find another job!” Such comrades merge.

And over time, they often turn into not so direct ballast, but certainly not in those who flourish themselves and lead the company to success. And no quality jumps. And certification in this case does not help much: a low-grade employee with medium efficiency knows the system well and the system is also loyal to his assessment. After all, he has been with the company for so long! What is his experience! He is almost like a relative! (And how can you tell a relative who has fixed the tap for you that the tap is already flowing?) And people are looking for a “more suitable” place.

And there are top managers, hired, trapped. They have been holding the whole company for many years, their ties are stretched and implanted, but they have no strength. And where is he now? So many years, so many winters, with a decrease in who? .. They are loyal, working for 25 years, but is it always definitely about efficiency?

Father's Testaments

I don’t know what kind of psychophysiological literature my dad read, but once he told me very confidently that in one place (in one position) you shouldn’t work longer than three or four years.

“This,” he said, “is enough for everyone: for you and for that business.” Yes, during this time we are doing so well the investments we have been making, are still ready to stay late at work and still catch the most dopamine drive. And then a new story. And my father was born in 1953. And this gives me reason to ignore the theme of Soviet vs European values.

The topic is not new at all, but I have not yet come across the experience to be correlated with business efficiency and systematically let “new blood” into the departments.

Tell us if you know such stories. And another very interesting experience in the implementation of programs that encourage experience, where there really was a business problem. And so that such a program was successfully (or at least measurable) solved.

findings

Well, as a dry boring residue - for comparison, two corporate dialogue. This is about the point of view of the company.

one.
- Let's somehow celebrate those who have been working with us for a long time!
- Oh, cool, come on! I know that in the office across the road, a trip to the Canaries is being played out among such employees.

2
- Let's somehow celebrate those who have been working with us for a long time!
- The idea is interesting. But why do we need it? What problem will we solve this?

And if we are talking about an employee, I would recommend that you define your own “term of effectiveness” for yourself. Well, look around: does the employer know that it is time for the department to give "new blood"?