Resignations as a reflection of corporate culture
What do 31 March, 30 June, 30 September and 31 December have in common? These dates mark the end of the month and the end of the quarter. And many companies and their HR departments dread these days. This is because it is precisely on these dates that resignations take effect and employees take the opportunity to move on to new opportunities.
Companies that know little about the actual needs of their workforce are then faced with three problems: They don’t really know why the resignation occurred. They can’t learn anything from it. And they suddenly have to deal with the additional workload somehow.
Organisational challenges and mere hope for improvement
In times of ever faster transformation, when even companies that have hesitated for (too) long are realising that they need to move, it is now time to get down to business. Several transformation processes are running in parallel:
- digitalisation,
- general review of processes,
- integration of artificial intelligence into everyday work and
- transferring more responsibility to employees.
Oh yes, and of course, managers still need to be taught to quickly empower their teams, because every idea could be valuable.
Even if companies conduct annual employee surveys, they should not rest on their laurels, because these surveys are only a snapshot, a feedback window of a few days. But what about the other 51 weeks? What remains unsaid? What happens to the survey results? Are they systematically analysed and are appropriate formats initiated to turn a mood into real change? Or are they forwarded to managers with a note saying ‘look, these are the challenges you have in your team’ and hope that things will be better next time?
An example of a resignation
I would like to give you a very recent example that really makes me angry: A loyal skilled worker – let’s call him Peter – from a sheet metal workshop with a full order book resigns after many years. The decision is not an easy one for him. He hardly sleeps the night before, his stomach is in knots. Because he actually identifies with his job. He goes the extra mile. He works overtime when necessary. He gives his all for the customers and his team.
First, he informs the operations manager. He is surprised. Peter offers to work full-time until his last day – an unusual offer. Most employees want to take their remaining holiday entitlement at the end of their employment to rest before starting their new job.
Why is Peter resigning? Because of his boss. [1] For months, he systematically ignored him, belittled his performance and disregarded his opinion. And when the notice came? No conversation, no pause for reflection. Instead, the boss immediately called in HR – not to accompany his departure in a respectful manner, but as a shield. The next day, Peter learns that he is to take leave with immediate effect. Without having requested it.
Instead of a clarifying discussion, HR informs him that he will be presented with a resignation agreement to sign immediately. Allegedly with the approval of his supervisor. Except that his supervisor won’t speak to him anymore. No discussion. No thanks. No plan.
Peter feels overlooked, goes to his desk, quietly packs his things, takes a shower, clocks out and drives home. The next day, he calls in sick. Is this goodbye to the team? Impossible. After all these years and all the successful projects they have ‘rocked’ together.
This is how someone who actually wants to stay leaves when no one cares about them. No goodbye, no thanks, no dignity. Coldly pushed aside.
The retrospective in the team
Now is the right point for a team retrospective. Not as a wish list, but as a review:
- What went wrong?
- Where were there tensions?
- What do we need to learn to prevent further resignations?
A cleverly moderated retrospective takes around 90 minutes to clarify issues, stimulate change and show the remaining team that we are paying attention and taking them seriously.
This innovatively designed separation process can be actively integrated into the recruitment process.
Why is this important? Because young people in particular plan to change employers every two to three years in order to develop further. It is important for them to know that their future employer will deal with this constructively. But many companies do exactly the opposite! They protect themselves legally, avoid clarifying discussions and thus miss the opportunity to further develop their corporate culture.
The risk of losing trust and domino effects within the team
Peter leaves his employer for good. The remaining team also withdraws internally and struggles with the avoidable loss. Not to mention the costly damage to the company’s image.
Two colleagues sit in the canteen, stunned. One asks the other: ‘Did anyone tell you that today is Peter’s last day?’ ‘No. He just said goodbye quickly. He looked pretty shaken up.’
What remains is irritation. The loss of trust quietly spreads. Conversations become more superficial. The operations manager doesn’t mention the resignation at all, but simply distributes Peter’s work among the rest of the team. Sick leave increases. The next colleague is already asking Peter how things are going at his new employer. They are actually still looking for skilled staff with exactly his qualifications! He arranges an interview and will start there in two months. A domino effect, as described in numerous studies. [2]
Dealing constructively with resignations
The separation of employees or the change of employers is the rule rather than the exception in the course of a professional life. Consequently, offboarding – the structured process of separating employees who have worked for an organisation – is more the norm than the exception.
Offboarding can be a strategic learning moment. A space for reflection. A place for feedback that you would never have received otherwise.
An opportunity to say thank you and let the gratitude linger. And for new clarity within the team:
- How do we want to work together?
- What needs to change so that the next person doesn’t leave?
That would not only be smarter, but also more humane.
So what should managers, HR departments, company management and teams do?
Managers should learn that it is part of their job to deal with resignations and the associated separations professionally and constructively, rather than ignoring the issue and leaving separation management to the HR department.
And the HR department must finally become more than just an administrative function. It should become a bridge builder between people and establish resignation as an opportunity for cultural and corporate development. That is its strategic task.
Company management is invited to take a closer look at the strategic implications of a tarnished corporate image. If opportunities are missed during offboarding, the image suffers, and if the image suffers, future onboarding becomes more difficult.
And the remaining team must also be involved: in the review, in the farewells and, above all, in shaping the future. After all, they know what is really going on on site – in the workshop, in the office or on the shop floor. They know what is needed to improve the parameters so that everyone wants to contribute productively instead of quitting. I consider it increasingly negligent not to consult them.
Perhaps Peter would then have said: ‘It wasn’t an easy decision. But I’m leaving with a good feeling. And who knows: maybe I’ll come back one day.’
Because that’s also what offboarding is: asking whether a return is conceivable. Whether the farewell was fair and open, so that the door isn’t closed forever.
Offboarding is a test of culture. If companies pass it, they not only gain respect, but may also win back former employees.
Notes:
[1] According to a 2019 survey by Compensation Partner & Gehalt.de, 45% of employees quit because of their boss. See: Capital: Kündigung: Warum Beschäftigte ihren Job aufgeben. Another study by Appinio/XING from 2023 cites the boss as the reason for resignation in 43% of cases. See t3n: Kündigung: Mitarbeiter verlassen keine Unternehmen, sondern ihre Chefs.
[2] Sueddeutsche Zeitung: Gibt es einen Dominoeffekt bei Kuendigungen?
Would you like to find out more about the topic of value-adding and appreciative offboarding? Then we recommend the book Arbeitszeugnisse erstellen in agilen Organisationen by Natalia Hoffmann-Demsing.
And if you would like to talk to Mrs Hoffmann-Demsing, it is worth visiting her informative website.
Would you like to be a catalyst for discussion on this topic? Then feel free to share this article within your network or on social media.
Natalia Hoffmann-Demsing has published another post on the t2informatik Blog:
Farewell as a leadership task
How does value-adding offboarding work?
Natalia Hoffmann-Demsing
Natalia Hoffmann-Demsing is an HR mentor, independent business coach and loves people. Her mission is to increase employee satisfaction in companies and reduce staff turnover. She takes a structured, step-by-step approach. She delves deep, identifies pain points and supports companies in finding their own unique path to an enthusiastic workforce.
She has been working for many years with companies in a wide range of industries, including manufacturing, telecommunications and finance. She is a trained systemic business coach, licensed MBTI trainer, trainer (IHK), Agile Coach and author of specialist books (Haufe and ManagerSeminare).
She sees herself as a link between the traditional and agile worlds of work and moves playfully between the two. People are always at the centre of her work, as is the creation of parameters in which people can effectively contribute their strengths and work with intrinsic motivation.