How about the Employee Engagement Management?

I agree with Deja answer but believe that many other factors contribute to employee retention such as supportive organisational culture

Yes, Haffar...you are right...especially in coming decade where the millennial generation will be the major force in driving economy. These people growing up and being influenced by the ideal moral sense from movies such as Iron Man, X-Men together with the example from real life persons such as Bill Gate, Mars (face-book), Elon Musk and Jack Ma. These generation may not really know what is called "culture" but if the philosophy behind the organization is not in line with what had been presented and promoted in public, if it is against what they had been perceived from their hero ....they will not stay long with the organization...and the organization will not be able to grow, left alone being survived.

Cheers,

I'm not sure what you mean by quality recruitment processes and digital savvy? These are not the only dimensions impacting turnover. Today, organizations are struggling to redefine their business models in order to stay competitive. This is a complex and difficult process that in many cases requires iterating in real time. And that means that the employee experience will continue to evolve - all the while that employees' needs and expectations become increasingly diverse and the labour market becomes increasingly competitive. In this environment, turnover will continue to be an issue for organizations regardless of the quality of their recruitment processes and technology.

Because we have poor managers who are more concerned with financial goals and less concerned with making sure people are trained and motivated.

First of all, I would think it is necessary to strip Your thinking from unnecessary presumptions/prejudices. You state that recruitment is of high quality and that there is a high degree of digital savvy. Both these assumptions are highly controversial to a point where I do believe it will be quite difficult to substantiate them.

It would be necessary to look into the research that has already been done in the area of turnover, which is quite substantial: You're area of interest is neither new nor unresearched.

Building on previous colleagues’ answers, perhaps you could look into the recruitment phase first. That seems to have become more and more unpersonal over the years. Not sending in a letter, but an email. The email is not read by a human but judged by an algorithm, their social media checked to get as much information about the the jobseeker before they are eventually seen. The profiles and photographs on the social medis have been carefully constructed to give as good an impression as possible, all marketing tricks and not representative of reality.

In a nutshell, the recruitment has taken place in a more or less virtual “reality”, without very much real human interaction. The process has become dehumanized, which has its effects so that when the reality happens of a warm, breathing, living human being entering a workplace with other humans, this could turn out to be a very different experience than the image and expectations that were formed “in the mind”. A work environment is a social system. Intervening in a social system by bringing in someone new is a sensitive operation.

instead of dropping your assumptions about the recruitment phase, why not research them? Is the recruitment savvy? What is savvy? what role does technology play? Can it capture enough information to really help place humans in a work situation that is a good fit between a newcomer and the settled co-workers? Etc etc. Also look at the presumptions around recruitment, what is the organisation looking for, how do they know such a specific person is needed, or only the qualifications? Are they hiring a human being or a degree?

You might want to look at depth psychology or psychoanalysis applied to organisations such as developed by the Tavistock institute in London, or self-psychology, all theories developed by actually studying people. A lot of management jargon does not have a scientific grounding, or completely ignores science and just promotes an ideology. Look at critics of technology, because there is an idealogy of tech being positive, no matter what is does or how it is done, whereas the drawbacks and negative outcomes are ignored or gaslighted.

High turnovers are the results of disappointment, frustration, lack of meaning of work. If your employees don`t feel welcome in your organization or don`t have a meaningful job task they leave faster than the time needed to recruit them :-(

Did you do leaver interviews? That might be helpful to discover the reasons?

For more details you can read the results of the Google project ARISTOTLES.

That is a great question tbh. I'm thinking maybe it's the time to reexamine the employment mechanism. We are all very delicate beings, once we reach certain level of "unbalanced" status in terms of unfulfilled needs, even if it's some super trivial stuff, like I have a friend who hopped job simply because the new company has a much fancier snack bar....which to most people is unreasonable but it is reasonable to him. So my thought on this keeping down the turnover is basically maintaining a somehow inner equilibrium of an org that presumably is ideal for their employees, however, human needs changes so fast over time, so unless an org is able to keep up super fast, or think ahead of the changes, it still do exist.

because the selection procedures are neither reliable nor valid in a scientific sense: the instruments used don`t measure the abilities needed for a job appropriately, or the wrong instruments are chosen to "measure" certain traits or capabilitites. State of the art would be to measure intelligence by tests or qualification by sample work and diligence. Further, it needs a resource oriented onboarding to establish safety within a team.