Study notes on academic ideas about employee turnover

Study notes on academic ideas about employee turnover

Academic ideas are bolded

Tracey, J. B., & Hinkin, T. R. (2008). Contextual factors and cost profiles associated with employee [Electronic version]. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 49(1), 12-27. Retrieved [insert date], from Cornell University, School of Hospitality Administration site: http://scholarship.sha.cornell.edu/articles/214/.

“Research has identified the following five major cost categories that contribute to the total cost of replacing an employee: predeparture, recruitment, selection, orientation and training, and lost productivity (for a more detailed discussion of these categories, see Hinkin and Tracey 2000, 2006)”;

Aharon Tziner Univetsitb de Mon trkal Assa Birat i Bar-l/an University. “ASSESSING EMPLOYEE TURNOVER COSTS: A REVISED APPROACH” Human Resource Management Review, Volume 6, Number 2, 1996, pages 113-122.

“To the best of our knowledge, Cascio (1991) would seem to have made the most significant contribution in this respect, demonstrating the extent to which turnover costs are significant. His turnover costing model consists of several categories of expenses. Separation costs, with the following components:

l exit interview- the financial value of both the inteviewer’s time and the departing employee’s time;

l administrative-the cost incurred by the activities of removing an employee from the payroll, termination of benefits, and the return of company equipment; and

l seuerunce pay-the compensation paid to a departing employee.

Replacement costs, including: advertising position availability in various media; processing candidate applications and reviewing references; conducting screening interviews; assessing candidates’ compatibility with the vacant job; holding decision making meetings; and medical examinations and orientation activities for the hired employee.

Training costs, including: disseminating relevant information for organizational socialization, organizational regulations, norms of conduct and performance, and core organizational values; attending formal training programs; and participation in on-the-job training activities”;

Rodger W. Griffeth Georgia State University Peter W. Hom  Arizona State University Stefan Gaertner Georgia State University. “A Meta-Analysis of Antecedents and Correlates of Employee Turnover: Update, Moderator Tests, and Research Implications for the Next Millennium” JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, VOL. 26, NO. 3, 2000.

“As we enter the new millennium, a final review of turnover research conducted in the 20th century is warranted. Specifically, this review updates and refines our previous meta-analysis (Hom & Griffeth, 1995). Until that time, the 1995 meta-analysis represented a more thorough review than other turnover meta-analyses, which generally examined a few predictors. It also extended Cotton and Tuttle’s (1986) first large-scale meta-analysis by estimating the size and variability of predictor-quit relationships rather than only their statistical reliability. The current meta-analysis summarizes the numerous studies published since Hom and Griffeth’s (1995) review including all studies conducted during the past decade. Given 500 correlations from 42 studies in the 1990s, this updated meta-analysis may change Hom and Griffeth’s meta-analytic estimates. Going beyond Hom and Griffeth’s review (Hom & Griffeth, 1995), we further specify various moderators of antecedent-turnover relationships”;