Why people leave, and why you don't hear about it

Every resignation happens in a team, and whatever is said stays there.

When someone leaves, the only person likely to ask why is the manager they are leaving — if anyone asks at all. Whatever they say stays in that team. Nothing adds up to a picture you can see across the organisation.

People also tell an independent party things they won't tell whoever signed their payslip. The manager hears that the hours didn't suit. An independent survey hears that the roster changed every week and nobody explained why. Knowing why people leave is how an organisation learns to keep them, and much of what they say turns out to be about the person who managed them.

What the person leaving does, and what you get

A short online survey when someone leaves, and an organisation-wide picture of why.

The questions cover what usually decides whether someone stays: how clear the job was, how they were inducted and trained, working conditions and workload, the chance to progress, how they were supervised and managed, recognition and reward, communication, and how satisfied they were with the work itself.

Sending the answers to us rather than to their manager does two things. It makes them more honest, because the person leaving isn't telling their boss to their face what went wrong. And it makes them comparable, because every team is asked the same thing and no answer passes through the person it is about.

You can use our questions as they stand, or have our psychologists build them around your organisation — your roles, your induction, your working arrangements. For the roles that matter most, such as your senior managers, a one-on-one interview can sit alongside the survey.

Asked the same way in every team

Identical questions turn scattered resignations into a pattern you can act on.

Because every team is asked the same thing, the answers can be compared: this team against the organisation, this quarter against the last. One resignation is an anecdote. Forty across an organisation is a pattern.

The patterns are usually specific and fixable, and often not what anyone assumed. A rostering habit in one department. An induction that leaves people on their own in their first week. A pay rate that has quietly fallen behind in one market. None of these shows up in a single exit conversation. All of them show up once the answers sit side by side.

A small team may lose only a few people a year, and reporting those answers on their own would identify who said what. So small teams are reported within their department or the whole organisation until there are enough answers to protect the people giving them.

Run periodically, the survey also shows whether a change worked — whether the thing people kept naming stops being named.

What happens once the answers are in

Our psychologists analyse the answers and tell you what to change — and who needs to change it.

We analyse the data statistically, identify where your organisation is doing well and where the concerns are, and recommend what to change to keep people longer.

Those recommendations don't all go to the same place. Some belong in policy, because they apply everywhere. Some need support from HR or operations, because they affect several teams. And some are for one manager, about one team.

Results work best shared. Each manager can see their own team against the organisation average, which gives them something to act on rather than a ranking to argue with. Publishing what people said, and what is being done about it, also tends to motivate the people who are still there.

The evidence behind it

Designed and analysed by psychologists, to fix the reasons most exit programs fail.

When Harvard Business Review looked at how organisations run exit interviews, it found that many programs neither improve retention nor produce useful information — largely because the data is poor and there is no agreed way to collect it. (Spain and Groysberg, Harvard Business Review, 2016.)

Our exit surveys are built to avoid both problems. The questions are designed by organisational psychologists, asked identically across the organisation, and analysed statistically rather than summarised by hand. They sit within wider retention work that draws on job satisfaction and climate surveys, interviews and focus groups.

Psych Press has developed and published psychometric instruments since 1995, in-house and in partnership with universities and international test publishers.

Who it suits, and who it doesn't

Organisations where staff turnover is a recurring cost and nobody can say for certain why.

The same approach runs across our other staff surveys. The climate survey asks the people who are still there, and the culture survey shows how far each team has drifted from the way your organisation means to work.

Frequently asked questions

Why people leave your network, and why you don't hear about it

Every resignation happens in a franchisee's business, and whatever is said stays there.

When someone leaves a location in your network, the only person likely to ask why is the owner they are leaving — if anyone asks at all. Whatever they say stays in that location. Nothing adds up to a picture you can see from head office.

People also tell an independent party things they won't tell whoever signed their payslip. The owner hears that the hours didn't suit. An independent survey hears that the roster changed every week and nobody explained why. Knowing why people leave is how a network learns to keep them, and much of what they say turns out to be about the person who managed them.

What the person leaving does, and what you get

A short online survey when someone leaves, and a network-wide picture of why.

The questions cover what usually decides whether someone stays: how clear the job was, how they were inducted and trained, working conditions and workload, the chance to progress, how they were supervised and managed, recognition and reward, communication, and how satisfied they were with the work itself.

Sending the answers to us rather than to the franchisee does two things. It makes them more honest, because the person leaving isn't telling the owner to their face what went wrong. And it makes them comparable, because every location is asked the same thing and no answer passes through the person it is about.

You can use our questions as they stand, or have our psychologists build them around your network — your roles, your induction, the way your locations roster. For the roles that matter most, such as your own area managers, a one-on-one interview can sit alongside the survey.

Asked the same way in every location

Identical questions turn scattered resignations into a pattern you can act on.

Because every location is asked the same thing, the answers can be compared: this location against the network, this quarter against the last. One resignation is an anecdote. Forty across a network is a pattern.

The patterns are usually specific and fixable, and often not what anyone assumed. A rostering habit in one region. An induction that leaves people on their own in their first week. A pay rate that has quietly fallen behind in one market. None of these shows up in a single exit conversation. All of them show up once the answers sit side by side.

A small location may lose only a few people a year, and reporting those answers on their own would identify who said what. So small locations are reported within their region or the whole network until there are enough answers to protect the people giving them.

Run periodically, the survey also shows whether a change worked — whether the thing people kept naming stops being named.

What happens once the answers are in

Our psychologists analyse the answers and tell you what to change — and who needs to change it.

We analyse the data statistically, identify where your network is doing well and where the concerns are, and recommend what to change to keep people longer.

In a franchise network, those recommendations don't all go to the same place. Some belong in the operations manual, because they apply everywhere. Some are for your field team, because they cluster in a handful of locations. And some are for one franchisee, about one location.

Results work best shared. Each franchisee can see their own location against the network average, which gives them something to act on rather than a ranking to argue with. Publishing what people said, and what is being done about it, also tends to motivate the people who are still there.

The evidence behind it

Designed and analysed by psychologists, to fix the reasons most exit programs fail.

When Harvard Business Review looked at how organisations run exit interviews, it found that many programs neither improve retention nor produce useful information — largely because the data is poor and there is no agreed way to collect it. (Spain and Groysberg, Harvard Business Review, 2016.)

Our exit surveys are built to avoid both problems. The questions are designed by organisational psychologists, asked identically across the network, and analysed statistically rather than summarised by hand. They sit within wider retention work that draws on job satisfaction and climate surveys, interviews and focus groups.

Psych Press has developed and published psychometric instruments since 1995, in-house and in partnership with universities and international test publishers.

Who it suits, and who it doesn't

Networks where staff turnover is a recurring cost and nobody can say for certain why.

The same approach runs across our other staff surveys. The climate survey asks the people who are still there, the culture survey shows how far each location has drifted from the way your brand means to work, and the job satisfaction survey asks your franchisees themselves how the relationship with your business is working.

Frequently asked questions