Rethinking Turnover: The Upside(s) of Saying Goodbye

1 day ago

10 min read

For years, we've treated employee turnover as one of those workplace metrics where lower is automatically better. When employees leave, we tend to view it as bad news. When turnover is low, we celebrate it as evidence of a healthy workplace culture, strong leadership and happy employees. But what if we've been looking at turnover through the wrong lens? What if our obsession with keeping people is preventing us from recognizing some of the opportunities that come with letting them go?

Don't get me wrong. Losing great employees can be expensive, disruptive and well, downright heartbreaking, particularly when you've invested considerable time and resources into helping them grow. And when people are leaving because of unreasonable workloads, communication problems or an unhealthy workplace culture, that's absolutely something we need to pay attention to. But not every resignation represents an organizational failure. Sometimes turnover is healthy, sometimes it's necessary and sometimes the person walking out the door creates an opportunity for someone else to walk in with exactly the fresh ideas, energy and perspective your organization needs.

The Workforce Has Changed. Have Our Expectations?

The labour market looks vastly different today than it did even just a decade ago. Frankly, we're unlikely to see the same patterns of employee retention that many organizations were once accustomed to. The days of assuming someone will join an organization early in their career and remain there until retirement are largely behind us, particularly when it comes to younger workers.

Once upon a time, it wasn't unusual for someone to join an organization, work their way up through the ranks and retire 30 or 40 years later with a gold watch and pension. Today, people are navigating a very different employment landscape. They're exploring opportunities, developing transferable skills, seeking meaningful work and making career decisions based on factors that extend well beyond job security. Changing employers isn't necessarily a sign of disloyalty or dissatisfaction. Sometimes it's simply part of building a career.

Statistics Canada reported that in 2023, less than 8% of employed Canadians aged 25 to 34 had been with the same employer or business for at least 10 years, while 48% had been there for between one and five years. Of course, younger workers have always had less time to accumulate long service, and historical job tenure trends are more complicated than the popular narrative that everyone is suddenly job-hopping. Nevertheless, we need to consider the expectations we're placing on today's workforce.

What if someone joins your organization, contributes meaningfully for four years, develops valuable skills, builds strong relationships and then moves on to pursue another opportunity? Was that a failed employment relationship, or was it a successful four-year chapter? I'd argue that it can absolutely be the latter.

The Company That Paid Employees to Quit

One of my favourite examples of an organization challenging traditional thinking about employee retention comes from Zappos.com, the online footwear and clothing retailer known for its distinctive workplace culture. Back in the mid-2000s, the company introduced a practice that most employers would find absolutely bonkers: offering new employees money to quit their jobs. What started as a $100 incentive eventually grew to $2,000 by 2008 (equivalent to about $3,000 in today's dollars). Yes, you read that correctly. Rather than offering people a financial incentive to stay, Zappos offered them money to walk away!

During their onboarding and training period, new employees were given the opportunity to leave with a $2,000 bonus, in addition to the wages they'd already earned. This practice, which became known as The Offer, was designed to help determine whether employees genuinely wanted to be part of the organization and its culture. The philosophy was that if someone was willing to walk away for a relatively modest one-time payment, perhaps the employment relationship wasn't the right fit in the first place. And when you consider the ongoing costs of employing someone who's already mentally checked out, contributing less than they're capable of and simply sticking around until something better comes along, a couple thousand dollars starts looking like a drop in the bucket. Historical reports suggested that only about 2% to 3% of employees accepted the offer.

Now, I'm not suggesting that every organization start handing out cheques to encourage employees to hit the road. Nor does accepting a financial incentive automatically mean someone is disengaged. People have different financial circumstances, motivations and priorities. But I love the thinking behind this experiment because it challenges us to consider what we're actually trying to accomplish through our retention efforts. Is the objective simply to keep as many people as possible for as long as possible, or is it to build a team of people who genuinely want to be there and contribute to the organization's success?

Fresh Faces = Fresh Perspectives

One of the most overlooked benefits of employee turnover is the opportunity it creates for fresh thinking. Long-serving employees bring tremendous value through their institutional knowledge, established relationships and deep understanding of how an organization operates. But familiarity can also create blind spots, particularly when people become so accustomed to existing systems and processes that they stop questioning whether those approaches are still effective.

We've all encountered the classic workplace expression, "That's just how we've always done it." Sometimes those words reflect a tried-and-true process that continues to serve the organization well. Other times, they're essentially code for "Nobody remembers why we started doing it this way, but we're all too comfortable to question it." When everyone around the table has spent years working within the same environment, it can become surprisingly difficult to recognize opportunities for improvement.

Enter the new employee, who hasn't spent the past 15 years becoming accustomed to your processes, systems and unwritten rules. They're bringing experiences from other organizations, industries and environments, along with different approaches to solving problems. They may introduce more efficient processes, challenge outdated assumptions or identify opportunities that others have simply stopped noticing. Sometimes all it takes is one person asking, "Why do we do it this way?" to spark meaningful change.

Of course, new perspectives aren't automatically better perspectives, and constant turnover can undermine continuity, collaboration and organizational knowledge. But a healthy mix of experience and fresh thinking can be incredibly valuable. The key is creating a workplace culture where new voices are welcomed and employees feel psychologically safe enough to question established practices without being dismissed.

When Leaving Is the Best Thing for Everyone

Have you ever known someone who stayed in a job long after they'd stopped enjoying it? Perhaps they'd outgrown the position, their interests had changed or the role that once energized them had become repetitive and uninspiring. Maybe they no longer felt aligned with the organization's direction, but they stayed because leaving felt risky or because they'd convinced themselves that remaining with the same employer was what responsible, loyal employees were supposed to do.

Now imagine that person spending another five years in a role that no longer challenges or fulfills them. Is that really a win for the organization? Is it a win for the employee? Not necessarily. When someone feels stuck, their motivation, creativity and enthusiasm can suffer. Retaining someone indefinitely isn't necessarily beneficial if the employment relationship is no longer meeting the needs of either party.

Sometimes a new opportunity is exactly what someone needs to rediscover their enthusiasm and sense of purpose. Their departure may also create room for another employee who's been eagerly waiting for an opportunity to grow. A resignation can open the door to an internal promotion, a different team structure or an opportunity to rethink how a role is designed.

I'd also love to see more employers celebrate the contributions people made during their time with the organization rather than interpreting their decision to leave as a betrayal. Someone moving on doesn't mean their time with your organization was wasted, nor does it erase the value they brought to the team. If an employee leaves feeling respected, supported and grateful for the experience, you've accomplished something meaningful. And who knows? They might become a future client, referral source, collaborator or even a returning employee.

Healthy Turnover vs. Preventable Turnover

Before anyone gets too excited and decides that a revolving door is actually a brilliant organizational strategy, we need to make an important distinction. There's a BIG difference between healthy turnover and turnover that signals something is wrong. When employees leave because they've found exciting new opportunities or discovered that a particular role isn't the right fit, that's one thing. When they're leaving because they're exhausted, unsupported, disrespected or struggling under unreasonable demands, that's an entirely different conversation.

As a Psychological Health & Safety Consultant, I spend a great deal of time helping organizations understand the workplace conditions that influence employee well-being, engagement and organizational culture. One thing I regularly emphasize is that we cannot afford to dismiss preventable turnover as simply the cost of doing business. When employees repeatedly leave the same department, the same manager or the same type of role, we need to get curious about what's happening beneath the surface.

When high performers are walking away, we need to understand why. When new hires consistently leave within their first six months, we need to examine whether there's a disconnect between what they were promised during recruitment and what they're actually experiencing on the job. And when employees identify excessive workloads, poor communication, disrespectful behaviour, lack of recognition or limited opportunities for growth as reasons for leaving, we need to listen rather than simply replacing them and moving on.

These aren't necessarily just retention issues. They may be indicators of psychosocial hazards within the workplace, and those hazards deserve attention whether employees are leaving or not. The National Standard of Canada for Psychological Health and Safety in the Workplace, CSA Z1003, provides a framework for identifying and addressing workplace factors that can affect employees' psychological health and safety. Organizational culture, clear leadership and expectations, recognition and reward, workload management and opportunities for growth and development are among the factors that influence the employee experience.

We shouldn't be trying to retain people at all costs, but we absolutely should be trying to create workplaces that people don't feel they need to escape.

Are We Measuring the Wrong Thing?

Organizations love metrics, and turnover rates are relatively straightforward to calculate. But a turnover percentage on its own tells us surprisingly little about what's actually happening within an organization. Without understanding the circumstances surrounding employee departures, we risk drawing conclusions that aren't particularly helpful.

Imagine two organizations, both reporting an annual turnover rate of 15%. At Organization A, employees are leaving because of poor leadership, burnout and an unhealthy workplace culture. Some of their most talented people are accepting positions elsewhere, and those who remain are becoming increasingly frustrated. At Organization B, employees are leaving for promotions, career changes, retirement and opportunities that better align with their evolving goals. Departing employees speak positively about their experiences, internal talent is being developed and new hires are bringing valuable perspectives to the team.

Both organizations have exactly the same turnover rate, but those numbers tell two very different stories. One may be experiencing serious cultural and operational problems, while the other may be navigating a relatively healthy level of workforce movement.

Instead of focusing exclusively on how many employees are leaving, we should be asking who's leaving, why they're leaving, when they're leaving and where turnover is concentrated. Are we losing high performers or employees with critical expertise? Are people departing for career advancement or because of preventable workplace conditions? Is turnover particularly high among new hires? Are certain teams or leaders experiencing disproportionately high turnover? Most importantly, what are we learning from these departures?

While we're at it, I think we should spend a little less time obsessing over why people leave and a little more time understanding why they stay. Stay interviews, meaningful career conversations and regular check-ins can help leaders identify what employees value, what might be missing and what would make their experience even better. Because if the first time you ask someone what would have made their job better is during their exit interview, you're asking way too late.

Making the Time Count

Instead of measuring the success of an employment relationship primarily by its length, what if we measured it by its quality? Did the employee feel valued and respected? Were they given opportunities to learn and grow? Did they make meaningful contributions? Did the organization benefit from their skills, knowledge and perspectives? And when they eventually moved on, did they leave with positive relationships and a sense that their time there mattered?

An employee who spends five engaged, productive and fulfilling years with an organization may contribute far more than someone who spends 20 years simply going through the motions. Tenure and engagement are not interchangeable, and neither are loyalty and longevity. The employee who eventually moves on may still be one of the best hires you've ever made.

Imagine a workplace where leaders genuinely invest in their employees' development, even knowing those skills might eventually take them somewhere else. Where employees feel comfortable discussing their career aspirations without worrying that their honesty will be interpreted as disloyalty. Where people are encouraged to pursue opportunities for growth, whether those opportunities exist within the organization or beyond it. And where departures are handled with gratitude, professionalism and respect rather than resentment.

There's something powerful about an organization that can say, "We're going to do everything we can to make this a great place for you to work, and when the time comes for you to move on, we hope you'll look back on your experience here positively." That's not giving up on retention. It's recognizing that employment relationships can be meaningful and successful without necessarily lasting forever.

It's Time to Rethink Retention

The world of work continues to evolve, and our approaches to attracting, engaging and retaining employees need to evolve along with it. Of course, we should work hard to retain great people. We should invest in healthy workplace cultures, effective leadership, meaningful recognition and opportunities for professional growth. And we should absolutely be concerned when employees are leaving because their work environment is negatively affecting their well-being.

But we also need to accept that people grow, priorities change and careers evolve. Sometimes the right next step for an employee is outside our organization, and that doesn't automatically mean we've failed. Perhaps the real goal isn't to keep every employee for as long as humanly possible, but to create a workplace where people genuinely want to be, where they can do meaningful work and where they leave better than they arrived, whenever that day comes.

The measure of a great workplace isn't necessarily how long people stay. It's the experience they have while they're there, the contributions they make and the reasons they eventually leave. So the next time someone hands in their resignation, resist the temptation to automatically chalk it up as a loss. Get curious about their reasons, learn what you can, celebrate what they contributed and consider the opportunities their departure might create.

After all, not all turnover is bad turnover. And sometimes, a goodbye is actually the beginning of something pretty great.

Elizabeth Eldridge is a Psychological Health & Safety Consultant based in southern New Brunswick, Canada. In addition to keynote speaking, event emceeing, consulting services and corporate training on mental health in the workplace, she supports organizations across the country on the adoption of Canada’s best practice guidelines on psychological health and safety management. She is also the Founder & President of Arpeggio Health Services which provides standardized education programs like Mental Health First Aid, The Working Mind, QPR Suicide Prevention and more.