A reader writes:
A buddy of mine simply give up her job, and her boss, a very evil particular person, countered with a elevate and a promotion. My good friend refused, after all, as a result of, really evil particular person. Nevertheless it obtained me considering, this isn’t the primary time I’ve seen bosses provide too little too late to save lots of a stellar worker, and I’m wondering why.
Why don’t bosses preemptively suppose that in the event that they don’t deal with their finest individuals nicely that these individuals will depart for somebody who will? Why do they suppose that making such a proposal solely after the worker provides discover will work?
Good bosses are conscious of that. Good bosses do proactively take into consideration the way to maintain onto good workers, after which they do these issues. In addition they ask straight, as a result of whereas cash is one apparent reply, there are different issues individuals need too and typically these are much less apparent.
However sure, unhealthy bosses usually don’t even think about that good workers may depart, after which are shocked once they do. I feel it stems from energy dynamics — unhealthy managers usually have an unhealthy relationship to energy that blinds them to the truth that the individuals working for them have choices. (This isn’t a logical worldview! As a supervisor, it’s best to need to rent individuals who have a lot of different decisions as a result of they’e good at what they do. That displays nicely on you.)
Unhealthy managers — by definition — additionally have a tendency to not be considerate about administration usually, and the way to appeal to and hold good workers, and the way to create an surroundings good individuals will need to work in, and so they’re usually not paying a variety of consideration to individuals’s morale and satisfaction. As a result of they’re not excited about it lots, they’re extra prone to be blindsided when somebody resigns, after which they scramble to make a counteroffer to resolve the rapid drawback that’s in entrance of them (“I have to hold this particular person to keep away from disruption”) somewhat than inspecting it extra broadly (“what drove this particular person to start out wanting? had been there issues I missed?”).
Generally, too, counter-offers stem from excited about pay in a manner that doesn’t embrace a lot understanding of how people work — i.e., “we’ll pay this particular person the minimal we have to pay them till the precise second that preserving them would value extra after which we’ll improve to that.”
None of that is to say that each counter-offer is the signal of a nasty supervisor. That’s not the case. Generally good managers miss issues, or they rightly wanted to prioritize placing their capital elsewhere, or they’re hamstrung by insurance policies from above them. However undoubtedly any good supervisor who finds themselves eager to make a counter-offer needs to be reflecting on whether or not they missed alternatives to retain that particular person earlier on.
