Employee retention

Report on Employee Retention
Why do employees stay with a company?
Prepared for Professor J. Vogel
St. Joseph’s College
Patchogue, New York
Prepared by John F. Rossi

Table of Contents
Summary 1
Introduction 3
Methods Used 6
Analysis 8
Limitations of Study 11
Conclusions and Recommendations 14
Appendix A - Employee Retention Survey and Response Percentiles 19
Appendix B - Summary of Collected Data 22
Appendix C - Scoring Profiles 26
Appendix D - Weighted index of scores by all respondents for all statements 32
Appendix E - Top Responses for Each Analysis Group 33
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF THE AUTHOR. NO PORTION OF THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE
REPRODUCED, COPIED OR CONVEYED IN ANY FORM OR MEDIA TYPE; KNOWN OR UNKNOWN WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT
OF JOHN F. ROSSI.
COPYRIGHT 2000 - JOHN F. ROSSI
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS NOT INTENDED FOR GENERAL RELEASE.

Rossi 1
John F. Rossi
Professor Vogel
Business 471 - Research Seminar in Organizational Management
April 1, 2000
Employee Retention: Why do employees stay with a company?
Summary
During the Spring of 2000, a study was undertaken to determine the reasons
why workers desire to remain employed by an organization. Without regard to sex,
race, education or economic status, the researcher endeavored to discover those
other types of satisfaction that are most often sought by employees. If people seek
more than pure economic reward from the working environment, it might then be
possible to create a profile that could be used to reduce or eliminate undesired
employee turnover.
To accomplish this research, a one page survey was distributed to capture the
feelings of workers concerning twenty dimensions of their work environment. Some of
these dimensions being under the total or partial control of the employee. Still others
would find the employee having little or no control. Next, each individual responding
to the survey would be asked whether they expected to be employed by their
current organization in three years. Finally, each respondent is asked to clarify how
long they had already served with the organization, whether it had been profitable
in the prior year, how many people are employed by the organization and if they
managed or supervised other employees.

Rossi 2
Responses were collected from individuals in various settings. To broaden the
scope of responses the researcher developed the survey in both paper and
electronic formats. Using traditional collection methods and the Internet, one hundred
and fourteen surveys were assembled and analyzed.
Indeed the results of this analysis reveal support for the theory of profiling as a
method of lowering undesired employee attrition. With continued study, this theory
could become a beneficial reality in the workplace.

Rossi 3
Introduction
As the ‘Bull Market’ of the 1990’s continues to rage into the next millennium,
employers across the United States are finding it increasingly difficult to attract the
qualified employees necessary to occupy the plentiful positions available in their
individual corporations. To cope with this shortage, some employers have developed
creative employment incentive programs. Others have cultivated labor in new and
sometimes foreign markets. Many have resorted to the use of technology as a means
of diminishing the severity of the shortage on their individual organization.
Perhaps the best method of filling important vacancies is to insure that current
qualified employees remain a part of the corporation. After all, current employees
are a known factor. They a familiar with the internal workings of the organization.
They have been previously trained in the use of the many methods and systems
used by the organization and they have established the formal and informal
networks that are required to help them remain productive within the context of the
organization. Further, there are no recruitment costs associated with retaining a
current employee.
The research conducted for this report endeavors to discover those personal
internal factors that motivate the employee to remain with an organization. A
customized survey was created to accomplish this research. Each person taking the
survey was asked to rank how true certain statements where in their individual
circumstance. The survey then made specific queries concerning the number of
employees in the respondents company, the number of years that the respondent

Rossi 4
was employed by the company, the profitability of the company during the previous
year and whether the respondent functioned in a managerial or supervisory
capacity. The answers provided by the many respondents where then analyzed in
an attempt to develop a motivational profile which could be adapted to assist a
corporation in determining which employees are at risk for departure within the
following three years.
There were a total of twenty-one statements listed on the survey. These
included seventeen affirmative statements, such as, ‘I work for a great company’
and ‘There is room to grow’. Three non-affirmative statements that are intermingled
with the affirmative statements, so as to maintain a more even tone in the total
survey. Finally, the respondent must react to the statement, ‘I will be with this
company in three years’. An analysis of the percentile responses to this survey are
presented in Appendix A of this report.
The individual completing the survey is at first instructed to consider why they
stay with a company. They are then asked to rank each statement on a scale of 1
to 5. Where 1 means that the statement is less true in their case and 5 indicates
that the statement is more true. Together the statements listed on the survey are
intended to capture the respondents reaction to different dimensions of their
individual working environment. These dimensions include items over which the
respondent will exercise most, some or little control.
A job dimension for which a respondent is likely to have the most control is
found in the statement, ‘The commute is easy’. In this instance a respondent faced
with an undesirable commute can choose to cope with the commute, relocate,

Rossi 5
change the method of commuting or perhaps find a different job closer to home.
Consider the statement, ‘My job matches what I do best’. Here the company and
the respondent must interact to determine how this person can use their natural
strengths to be most productive within the current context of the organization. A job
dimension over which the majority of respondents will normally have little control is
noted in the statement, ‘This company has a clear mission and positive values’.
The dimensions viewed by the survey touch upon many aspects of the
employment environment. When classed together they group into the larger
categories of compensation and benefits, interpersonal relationships, personal growth
and external factors. While each individual will have a customized mix among the
dimensions, individuals having like intentions to stay with or leave the corporation,
would be expected to exhibit similar behaviors in their individual responses to the
survey.
If this is true, an organization would have the ability to positively intervene
with those essential employees exhibiting behaviors that tend to indicate that they
are contemplating a jobs change. It may also be possible to determine those
employees who are too far gone to retain. In these cases, the organization might
determine to minimize any negative impact these individuals are having on other
employees in the organization.

Rossi 6
Methods Used
This study relies entirely on primary data collected in the form of a single page
self directed survey distributed using traditional collection methods as well as being
collected via the Internet in an electronic format. It is a cross-sectional study,
attempting to capture responses from several demographic groups of employed
American workers.
All survey responses were tabulated and entered separately into spreadsheet
and database programs. These entries were cross referenced to capture and
eliminate systematic recording errors. After having been cross referenced all entries
were then again audited to ensure the accurate recording of the collected data
and to eliminate the possibility of analysis errors resulting from this type of system
fault.
It is important to note that due to time and budget constraints, random
sampling techniques could not be utilized. For the same reasons, non-respondents
have not been accounted for in this study.
The survey itself is designed to be highly structured and self directed. This was
considered to be the best method of obtaining and recording the honest
perceptions of respondents. Additionally, statements appearing on the survey were
designed to take an extreme position to which the respondent would react. The
researcher aspired to mitigate the effect of respondents who might otherwise

Rossi 7
themselves take the extreme position and skew the scoring of their individual
perceptions relative to one another.
All responses were collected with the intention of providing absolute anonymity
for the respondents. This was a simple manner when using the paper form of the
survey. However, the electronic form of the survey relied on e-mail to deliver
responses to the researcher. To maintain the anonymous nature of the study for these
individuals, electronic responses were recorded onto paper forms. The transcription of
responses was verified for accuracy. The original e-mail was then deleted to protect
the privacy of the respondent.

Rossi 8
Analysis
In analyzing the results of the survey, the researcher first grouped all surveys
based on how each respondent reacted to the statement, “I will be with this
company in three years”. Respondents scoring either 4 or 5, More True, became one
group (4/5 Group). Those scoring 1 or 2, Less True, became a second (1/2 Group).
Finally surveys scoring 3 were assembled into a third analysis group (3 Group). A
summary of the collected data for the three analysis groups appears in Appendix B.
Each survey statement was analyzed and response percentiles were calculated
for each analysis group. The five statements answered most often as being either
more true or less true in each group were separated from the total responses. These
statements are listed for each group in Tables 1 through 6 of Appendix E. Surprisingly
three statements consistently appear among the top five, More True, responses for all
three groups. These statements are:
• (S4) I need the benefits
• (S6) I control how my work is accomplished, and,
• (S14) What I do is important to the company.
Of the 54 respondents in the 4/5 group, 49 (90%) also scored at least two of
these three statements as a 4 or 5. In the 3 group 19 of the 23 (82.6%) scored in
this manner. Among the 1/2 group only 40% of the 37 respondents scored at least
two of these three statements at the 4 or 5 level.
Among all three groups two statements appear consistently in the top five
responses for statements ranked as, Less True, by respondents. These include:
• (S18) I cannot earn this much elsewhere, and,

Rossi 9
• (S20) The atmosphere is relaxed.
As there seemed to be minimal like patterning among all response scoring in
each analysis group, it was decided to analyze the number of times that each
respondent scored 1,2,3,4 or 5 for each statement on the survey form. When the
survey responses are analyzed in this manner, it is discovered that individual
respondents in each group tended to have similar response patterns.
Individuals in the 4/5 Group tended to respond to more statements with a 4
or 5 and less with a 1,2 or 3. Among the 3 Group, these individuals tended to have
a relatively equal number of statements scored as 3,4 or 5 and fewer scored 1 or 2.
Within the 1/2 group, more statements were scored as 1 or 2 and less were scored
as 3, 4 or 5. Scoring Profiles based on the respondents scoring of statement 21, have
been graphed and appear in Appendix C.
A combined weighted analysis of scoring for all survey statements appears in
Appendix D. Weighting of responses was desired to ascertain the relative importance
of each statement across all responses.
Having completed the rudimentary analysis of the survey statements, attention
was next given to the questions appearing on the survey. The questions,
“Approximately how many people work for this company?” and “Was the company
profitable last year?” , did not appear to affect how the respondent reacted to the
statement, “I will be with this company in three years”. In the case of the question,
“How many years have you worked for this company?”, there appears a correlation
between time with a company and appearance in any of the three analysis groups.
The greater the number of years with a company, the more likely that a respondent

Rossi 10
would be in the 4/5 group. Indeed respondents in the 1/2 group tended to have
the least time with the organization.
The population in the 4/5 and 3 analysis groups tended to be evenly split on
the question, “Do you manage or supervise others?” However in the 1/2 group, 70.3%
of the respondents answered “Yes”.
Analysis
Group
Approximate #
of employees
# of years with
this company
Profitable last
year
Manage or
Supervise others
4/5 10659 (Average)
300 (Mode)
400 (Median)
8.7 (Average)
5.0 (Mode)
8.0 (Median)
68.5% (Yes)
13.0% (No)
18.5% (N/A)
53.7% (Yes)
46.3% (No)
3 8519 (Average)
3000 (Mode)
500 (Median)
7.8 (Average)
3.0 (Mode)
4.0 (Median)
78.3% (Yes)
13.0% (No)
8.7% (N/A)
52.2% (Yes)
47.8% (No)
½ 11428 (Average)
300 (Mode)
350 (Median)
5.7 (Average)
1.0 (Mode)
3.0 (Median)
83.8% (Yes)
16.2% (No)
0.0% (N/A)
70.3% (Yes)
29.7% (No)
Table 1 - Question responses for each analysis group

Rossi 11
Limitations of Study
While every attempt has been made to compile and validate the collected
data, certain limitations exist which must now be examined.
The single greatest limitation placed on this project has been the restricted
period available for data collection and continued study. For this reason only 114
completed surveys have been collected for this project. This constitutes a limited
sample size from which to perform analysis.
The surveys themselves were collected from three sources. These include:
• Students of the St. Joseph's College New York Accelerated Weekend
Bachelors of Organizational Management program. These students tend to
be more career oriented and are likely more motivated than would be
members of the general population. A large percentage of individuals in this
group manage or supervise others. This group accounts for 60 of the 114
(~55.26%) responses collected.
• Internet based employment bulletin boards and randomly selected e-mail
addresses. Typical internet users tend to be from middle & upper economic
groups. They are also more often from White(non-Hispanic) segments of the
general population. The bulletin boards available on the internet site,
‘www.iVillage.com’ were used to solicit responses for this project. This site is
designed to attract mostly women. Also, one of the bulletin board forums
on this site was selected precisely because it catered to Black Females. 33
(~28.94%) responses where generated by individuals in these groups. The

Rossi 12
geographic region of the these respondents is unknown. It is taken for
granted that at least some of these responses arrived from geographic areas
other than New York and the Northeast U.S. but this cannot be verified.
• A sampling of residents of the town of Central Islip, New York. This town has
a population that is predominantly upper lower and lower middle economic
blue and white collar workers. However only 18 (~15.78%) responses were
received from this group.
• A minimum of 78 (68.42%) of the 114 responses were generated in the Long
Island, New York area. Long Island is a generally affluent suburb of New York
City in the Northeast of the United States.
• There is a high probability that the majority of responses are from individuals
having a middle class and white collar status.
The survey used for this project made no attempt to distinguish the age, sex,
education, location, or economic status of any of the respondents. It is possible that
the sample may not be reflective of the demographics of the general U.S.
population.
Due to the limited time, scope and budget of this research effort, it will not
be possible to track respondents over the next several years. As this is the case, the
researcher will have no opportunity to determine whether respondents have remained
with or departed from their current company during the next three years.
Finally, the unusual state of the U.S. economy may have a euphoric effect on
answers provided by respondents. As the unemployment rate in the United States is

Rossi 13
at historic lows, many people may for the first time have the opportunity to be less
concerned with the pure economics of working. Therefore, their responses might be
atypical during less advantaged economic periods. Without the ability to survey
similar groups during other economic cycles, it will not be possible to determine if the
current conditions are stimulating respondents higher order needs and desires.

Rossi 14
Conclusions and Recommendations
The research performed for this report indicates that factors beyond mere
economic reward, do indeed influence the decision of an employee to remain with
an organization. There is also evidence to support the theory of profiling as a
practical device in determining which employees are at risk for departure from the
organization.
In reviewing the responses of those who participated in the survey, several
themes were consistent among the various analysis groups. Many respondents
believed that they could earn more by joining other organizations. Despite this, they
still responded favorably to the notion that they would remain with their current
employer.
There seemed a strong need in all analysis groups to feel that what they did
at work was important to the organization. Also, personal autonomy in accomplishing
tasks was very significant. In a practical sense, properly training managers to promote
these beliefs, should have a significant impact on the psyche of every employee.
A considerable number of respondents felt that the workplace was not relaxed.
Maybe this meant that the pace was too furious, or that the work space was
somehow lacking. Perhaps they had an overbearing co-worker or supervisor.
Considering the number of hours most people spend in the workplace, it seems
obvious that this would be an important dimension for many, if not, most people.
From a practical standpoint, every company can take simple steps to create an
environment that is more favorable to the employees ability to perform well.

Rossi 15
Most surprising in this study, was the fact that the majority of those indicating
the strongest desire to leave the organization were individuals who manage or
supervise others? Respondents in this group were least likely to think that they work
for a great company. Many indicated that their company was less likely to have a
clear mission and positive values. These are factors over which the organization
exercises significant control. Most respondents in this group felt they could earn more
elsewhere. They also felt it less true that there was room for them to grow in the
organization. A person in this group was the least likely to feel that their work
matched their best abilities. In viewing these responses, it seems more obvious why
people fall into this analysis group. Most of those in this group seem fixated on
fulfilling their personal higher order needs. This group clearly had the most muted
unenthusiastic responses.
This study confirms that the longer a person is with an organization, the more
likely they are to want to stay with that organization. The number of years with the
company dropped in order from the highest scoring analysis group to the lowest. This
characteristic of each group may explain why respondents desire to remain with an
organization over the long term. It stands to reason that the longer someone is with
a company the more competent they are likely to be in their position. This alone
could permit individuals to focus on more personal than economic needs. Driving
down the time required for an individual to feel most competent in their job would
seem to be in the best interests of both employee and employer.
The researcher found it most alarming that nearly 3/4 of respondents felt that
they needed the benefits supplied to them by their organization. There was an

Rossi 16
almost manic reaction by respondents to this statement. Only about twenty percent
of the individuals indicated that this was less true for them. Why this particular
perception exists, should be thoroughly studied. This is particularly the case in the
small business setting where an organization may not have the resources required to
present a robust benefit package to current or prospective employee. This is also very
troubling as it speaks to the dependence individuals feel with regard to benefits. It
would seem from these responses that benefits such as medical insurance, are well
beyond the reach of most workers. This has great potential to harm employers,
because the group scoring highest on the statement "I need the benefits" was also
the group most likely to indicate a desire to stay with the organization. It is possible
that a change or reduction in benefits could have a tremendous effect on the
perceptions of these employees. The cost implications of this are disturbing.
When considering the twenty dimensions of the workplace examined in this
research study, it is safe to conclude that altering even a few of an employees
perceptions can help increase the desire to stay with the organization. The proper
training of managers and supervisors to recognize the profile of each individual,
coupled with training in how to turn around perceptions that the organization
controls can considerably improve retention efforts.
It is very unlikely that a current employee would honestly complete the survey
used for this report for their current employer. However, understanding the dimensions
which motivate retention, it is possible for an organization to create mechanisms to
help each manager capture this important information while there is still time to
positively intervene.

Rossi 19
Appendix A - Employee Retention Survey and Response Percentiles
Please take a moment to consider why you stay with a company. Next, read each
statement and indicate how true the statement is in your case. Place an XX in the box to
the right of the statement which best describes how the statement applies to you.
All survey responses will be kept in the strictest confidence.
Statement Less True
<<<
More True
>>>
(S1) I work for a great company. 6.1% 14.9% 32.5% 30.7% 15.8%
(S2) This company has a clear mission and positive
values.
7.0% 14.0% 25.4% 32.5% 21.1%
(S3) My job is exciting. 10.5% 14.9% 32.5% 27.2% 14.9%
(S4) I need the benefits. 13.3% 8.0% 13.3% 22.1% 43.4%
(S5) My effort is appreciated. 11.4% 8.8% 27.2% 30.7% 21.9%
(S6) I control how my work is accomplished. 4.4% 7.0% 18.4% 36.0% 34.2%
(S7) Work life and home life are easily balanced. 11.4% 15.8% 34.2% 23.7% 14.9%
(S8) My job matches what I do best. 11.4% 19.3% 21.1% 25.4% 22.8%
(S9) The people I work with are very professional. 8.8% 23.0% 29.2% 24.8% 14.2%
(S10) My coworkers are wonderful. 4.4% 13.2% 34.2% 31.6% 16.7%
(S11) I really like my boss. 14.9% 12.3% 25.4% 36.0% 11.4%
(S12) I live paycheck to paycheck. 17.5% 24.6% 20.2% 14.9% 22.8%
(S13) There is room to grow. 19.3% 21.1% 12.3% 28.1% 19.3%
(S14) What I do is important to the company. 3.5% 5.3% 19.3% 38.6% 33.3%
(S15) The commute is easy. 13.2% 8.8% 17.5% 22.8% 37.7%
(S16) My compensation is fair and reflects my efforts. 16.7% 15.8% 27.2% 28.9% 11.4%
(S17) The fringe benefits are more than adequate. 11.5% 18.6% 31.9% 21.2% 16.8%
(S18) I can not earn this much elsewhere. 27.2% 23.7% 22.8% 16.7% 9.6%
(S19) My job is secure. 7.9% 14.0% 27.2% 31.6% 19.3%
(S20) The atmosphere is relaxed. 15.8% 22.8% 26.3% 20.2% 14.9%
(S21) I will be with this company in three years. 21.1% 12.3% 19.3% 23.7% 23.7%
Approximately how many people work for this company? Average=10641 Median=400 Mode=300
How many years have you worked for this company? Average=8.36 Median=5 Mode=1
Was this company profitable last year ? (Y or N) Yes=75.44% No=13.16% N/A=11.4%
Do you manage or supervise others? (Y or N) Yes=58.77% No=39.47% N/A=1.75%

Rossi 20
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Percentagethisresponse
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S12 S13 S14 S15 S16 S17 S18 S19 S20 S21
Statement
Percentage responses to each statement based on the score provided
5's 4's 3's 2's 1's

Rossi 21
Average, Standard Deviation, Median and Mode for Statements 1 to 21
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
Statement
Value
Average Standard Deviation Median Mode

Rossi 22
Appendix B - Summary of Collected Data
Table 1: Indicated below are the percentage of responses for each statement when the respondent
answered either 4 or 5 to the statement ‘I will be with this company in three years’.
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S12 S13 S14 S15 S16 S17 S18 S19 S20 S21 Size Years Profit Mgmt
Less True
(1 or 2)
5.6 9.3 16.7 16.7 9.3 3.7 18.5 22.2 22.2 14.8 14.8 44.4 29.6 5.6 18.5 20.4 20.4 37.0 5.6 25.9 0 10659 8.7 68.5 53.7 % Yes or AVG
3 22.2 27.8 20.4 5.6 24.1 9.3 35.2 16.7 27.8 33.3 22.2 20.4 5.6 13.0 11.1 24.1 29.6 33.3 27.8 25.9 0 300 5.0 13.0 46.3 % No or MODE
More
True (4
or 5)
72.2 63.0 63.0 77.8 66.7 87.0 46.3 61.1 50.0 51.9 63.0 35.2 64.8 81.5 70.4 55.6 50.0 29.6 66.7 48.1 100 400 8.0 18.5 0.0 % N/A or
MEDIAN
Table 1
answered 3 to the statement ‘I will be with this company in three years’.
Less True
(1 or 2)
21.7 13.0 26.1 30.4 26.1 8.7 21.7 26.1 34.8 17.4 30.4 39.1 30.4 4.3 13.0 34.8 21.7 56.5 21.7 47.8 0 8519 7.8 78.3 52.2 % Yes or AVG
3 43.5 21.7 39.1 13.0 30.4 21.7 26.1 17.4 21.7 34.8 26.1 13.0 17.4 17.4 34.8 30.4 39.1 13.0 26.1 26.1 100 3000 3 13.0 47.8 % No or MODE
More
True (4
or 5)
34.8 65.2 34.8 56.5 43.5 69.6 52.2 56.5 43.5 47.8 43.5 47.8 52.2 78.3 52.2 34.8 39.1 30.4 52.2 26.1 0 500 4 8.7 0.0 % N/A or
MEDIAN
Table 2
answered 1 or 2 to the statement ‘I will be with this company in three years’.
Less True
(1 or 2)
43.2 43.2 35.1 24.3 32.4 24.3 43.2 45.9 45.9 21.6 40.5 40.5 62.2 16.2 32.4 48.6 48.6 64.9 43.2 51.4 100 11428 5.7 83.8 70.3 % Yes or
AVG
3 40.5 24.3 48.6 24.3 29.7 29.7 37.8 29.7 35.1 35.1 32.4 24.3 18.9 29.7 18.9 32.4 32.4 16.2 29.7 27.0 0 300 1 16.2 29.7 % No or MODE
More
True (4
or 5)
16.2 32.4 16.2 51.4 37.8 45.9 18.9 24.3 18.9 43.2 27.0 35.1 18.9 54.1 48.6 18.9 18.9 18.9 27.0 21.6 0 350 3 0.0 0.0 % N/A or
MEDIAN
Table 3

Rossi 23
Percentage responses for all statements when the respondent scored
either 1 or 2 to statement 21
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Statement
percentage
Less True (1 or 2) 3 More True (4 or 5)

Rossi 24
3 to statement 21
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Statement
Percentage

Rossi 25
either 4 or 5 for statement 21
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Statement
Percentage

Rossi 26
Appendix C -Scoring Profiles
Average number of responses at each scoring level by score for the statement,
"I will be with this company in three years
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
# of 5's # of 4's # of 3's # of 2's # of 1's
Level of statement responses
Numberofstatementresponses
S21=5 S21=4 S21=3 S21=2 S21=1

Rossi 27
Scoring profile when the respondent scored 5 to the statement,
'I will be with this company in three years".
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
# of 5 responses # of 4 responses # of 3 responses # of 2 responses # of 1 responses

Rossi 28
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16

Rossi 29
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18

Rossi 30
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16

Rossi 31
0
5
10
15
20
25

Rossi 32
Appendix D
Weighted index of scores by all respondents for all statements
4.9
5.0
4.6
5.4
5.0
5.6
4.6
4.8
4.5
5.0
4.6
4.4
4.4
5.7
5.3
4.4
4.5
3.7
4.9
4.3
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
(S1) I work for a great company.
(S2) This company has a clear mission and positive values.
(S3) My job is exciting.
(S4) I need the benefits.
(S5) My effort is appreciated.
(S6) I control how my work is accomplished.
(S7) Work life and home life are easily balanced.
(S8) My job matches what I do best.
(S9) The people I work with are very professional.
(S10) My coworkers are wonderful.
(S11) I really like my boss.
(S12) I live paycheck to paycheck.
(S13) There is room to grow.
(S14) What I do is important to the company.
(S15) The commute is easy.
(S16) My compensation is fair and reflects my efforts.
(S17) The fringe benefits are more than adequate.
(S18) I can not earn this much elsewhere.
(S19) My job is secure.
(S20) The atmosphere is relaxed.
Question
Score

Rossi 33
Appendix E - Top responses for each analysis group
S6 I Control how my work is accomplished. 87.0%
S14 What I do is important to the company. 81.5%
S4 I need the benefits. 77.8%
S1 I work for a great company. 72.2%
S15 The commute is easy. 70.4%
Table 1 - Statements answered most often as Most True among those scoring 4 or 5 to statement 21,
"I will be with this company in three years.
S12 I live paycheck to paycheck. 44.4%
S18 I cannot earn this much elsewhere. 37.0%
S13 There is room to grow. 29.6%
S20 The atmosphere is relaxed. 25.9%
S8/
S9
My job matches what I do best.
The people I work with are very professional.
22.2%
Table 2 - Statements answered most often as Less True among those scoring 4 or 5 to statement 21, "I
will be with this company in three years.
S2 The company has a clear mission and positive values. 65.2%
S8 My job matches what I do best. 56.5%
Table 3 - Statements answered most often as Most True among those scoring 3 to statement 21, "I will
be with this company in three years.

Rossi 34
S12 I live paycheck to paycheck. 39.1%
S16 My compensation is fair and reflects my efforts. 34.8%
S9 The people I work with are very professional. 34.8%
Table 4 - Statements answered most often as Less True among those scoring 3 to statement 21, "I will
be with this company in three years.
S10 My coworkers are wonderful. 43.2%
S5 My effort is appreciated. 37.8%
Table 5 - Statements answered most often as Most True among those scoring 1 or 2 to statement 21,
"I will be with this company in three years.
S13 There is room to grow. 62.2%
S17 The fringe benefits are more than adequate. 48.6%
S16 My Compensation is fair and reflects my efforts. 48.6%
Table 6 - Statements answered most often as Less True among those scoring 1 or 2 to statement 21, "I
will be with this company in three years.

Employee retention

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

Similaire à Employee retention

Similaire à Employee retention (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Employee retention