Paul also states that with business commentators starting to talk of “green shoots”, it is crucial that employers continue to invest in talent.  I agree again with the statement but I don’t agree that graduates are the only people to be able to offer this, there are a lot of talented people who never go to university. I believe that graduate schemes should not exist and that there should be one common “fast/acceleration” route giving the employer the option to add employees that have been identified during employment or direct from school/collage. Having one talent identification scheme can also be linked easier to an affective retention strategy.

The employees will have a bad view of the company affecting the culture, they know that the company will hire and fire as needed for short term gains. The cost of making someone redundant and then hire them again will mean that the business has spent quite a bit of money when it might of been able to better plan its HR resources ; save time, money and giving employees a positive image of the employer.

Planning a retention strategy is not just about the short term, when devising schemes and planning other aspects of HR practices retention should always be in the back of the employers minds to make sure it does not get neglected and lead to a negative impacted on the business.

A recent article in the People Management magazine regarding The War on Talent report found that while a quarter of the 705 respondents have had to downsize, 97 per cent have consciously preserved their top talent. A further 18 per cent of firms are actually placing more emphasis on identifying, developing and retaining talent.

It is time that HR professionals show they can deliver what they preach, but helping an employee retain their job through this difficult period also means that they keep them when the recession is over and other businesses don’t tempt them way once the economy has recovered.

As previously mentioned the banking industry is openly stating they will keep paying bonuses despite making a loss and being bailed out by government. However, what if the publicly known retention strategy turns customers away for life? A true HR professional these days has to be aware that things they do affect the business directly, having no customers as a result of a public HR strategy has to be a bad move.

I personally feel that within the banking industry the HR professionals have not thought about the greater impact on the business, yes they will keep the top talent but they might not have any customers!

Could they not have altered their long term thinking and offered an “on hold” policy on the incentive scheme, which would then reward employees more in the future as a way of thanking them? Therefore, their retention strategy would be more affective because when the economy has recovered, their employees could possibly end up being greater rewarded and the business would regain customer support.

When we think of retention we need to remember we need a business to employ the employee.

Some businesses might make some redundancies as a quick win solution for cutting costs but this will negatively affect the company in the long run. Good examples are what Vauxhall and other car companies have had to do. They are being open and honest with their employees and hopefully the employees will recognise this and in the long run it will benefit the company. Too many companies will terminate employees contract, but will find it more expensive to replace them in the long run and lose confidence in staff they keep and future potential employees.

Business is not about the quick win solutions!

Will answer the question soon!

I believe that utilising Knowledge Banks and working directly with the education system to guarantee education is relevant, using your experienced employees to bridge the gap solves many problems in a cost affective and efficient way.

FULL ARTICLE COMING SOON!

We aim to have our website and blogs fully running by 2008!