HR Director says no problem with turnover at ICANN.
Perhaps responding to questions about some high profile departures lately, ICANN Director of Human Resources Steve Antonoff just released an analysis (pdf) of turnover at the non-profit.
His bottom line: turnover is less than the typical high tech company and has mostly to do with factors outside of ICANN.
In the financial year ending June 2010 the company had 8.73% turnover with 10 departures. Antonoff compares this to the U.S. high tech industry average reported by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) of 25.8%. (Show me a high tech company with that sort of turnover in their professional ranks and I’ll show you a sinking ship.)
For the first 11 months of the current fiscal year turnover is 11.38% with 14 departures.
For fiscal year 2010 more of the departures were from involuntary departures (i.e. firing) whereas 2011 has seen more voluntary departures than involuntary.
Why have so many people left during the current financial year, just as ICANN gets ready to embark on a massive expansion with new TLDs?
Antonoff writes:
Exit interviews confirmed that these departures were not due to issues at ICANN, but generally were motivated by external opportunities, family issues, and retirement. None of the staff members who left voluntarily over the two years indicated in their exit interviews dissatisfaction with management or with ICANN in general. Many continue to actively support ICANN and its management team.
That his statement directly refutes people leaving for dissatisfaction with management or ICANN suggests that there are concerns of exactly this sort of issue. Exit interviews are OK, but not great at getting to the bottom of departures. At the end of the day, most people don’t want to burn bridges.
What would be more interesting is if an outside group came in an performed anonymous evaluations. You know, like “The Bobs“.
It would also be interesting to see if people who have offices overlooking the bay have lower turnover than those facing inland.
Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.
No related posts.
