Reducing Turnover at Bubba Gump Shrimp Company

Reducing Turnover at Bubba Gump Shrimp Company

Name:

Institution:

Reducing Turnover at Bubba Gump Shrimp Company

The dynamic nature of the business environment has increased the need for a company to have a low turnover. The increased level of competition and regulatory variability in the globalization process requires a firm to have a stabilized human resource in order to elevate in external and external degrees of performance. Given the nature of established and present changers in the business market, past interventions employed by a company cannot reduce the turnover rate to zero percentages. Traditional approaches in reducing turnover centered on development of a friendly work environment through trust and reward schemes. Firms need to incorporate modern management methods that not only focus on employee preservation but also key in internal performance indicators for the firm.

Interventions to be Applied

Early Intervention

Time is a factor in performance management thus its importance in effective mitigation of turnover. According to Hauenstein, large numbers of employee turnovers have been recorded in the first six months of recruitment (Hauenstein, 2011). Employees find difficulty in adjusting to new set roles highlighting the need of early intervention. Intervention will entail the use of onboard programs that will provide optimum platforms for conflict resolution and introduction of the worker to the novel work environment.

Skill Intervention

Skill intercession is the provision of betterment opportunities to employees such as training to facilitate development. Traditional companies intensively invested in employee training and skill specificity to elevate retention rates. Novel intercessory procedures employ strategic assessment metrics to identify degrees of required expertise levels and to categorize workers according to attainable skill levels (Aamodt, 2007). In this, an employee is not trained further from attainable levels and is not handed jobs not in the set expertise category.

Leadership Intervention

In leadership, low turnovers are recorded where there is a better boss. The purpose of intervention is to develop an algorithm that improves leadership with time. The metric employed in modern leadership intercession evaluates the strength of the relationship between the leader and his or her subjects. In identifying the strengths and weaknesses, the intervention encompasses suitable feedback and training methods that address the faults in the relationship. Employees give their perspective concerning the leadership present and state their behavioral expectations. The worker response is used as a performance indicator of the leader (Snowdon & Vane, 2005). Intervention strives to meet the set behavioral expectations.

Recognition Intervention

There exists numerous processes or strategies employed to recognize and reward employees given there is elevated performance. Most rewards schemes use monetary bonuses and end pay offs to motivate and retain workers. Rewards enable a worker to achieve the highest possible amount of income. The superior levels of performance are beneficial to both the firm and the employee as it improves the bond between the two. Recognition is done through measurement of objective attainment or improvement.

Selection Intervention

Described as the most effective method in reducing turnover, employee selection and recruitment should entail an improved and detailed procedure. To facilitate improvement in the selection process, the intervention used will follow the recruitment process in lean management. The system used by assembly firms gives a structured form of employee capture, recruitment, training, and positioning.

Differences in Set Interventions

The major difference in the proposed intervention is the shift from the traditional approach to a modern perspective. Traditional methods centered on the relationship between the worker and the job environment in an attempt to better the surroundings. The depiction of a good working environment in reducing turnover is accurate, but it does not consider secondary factors that mitigate turnover to zero and maximize performance. In early intervention, the dissimilarity is manifested in the consideration of time to mitigate turnover. An onboard program in addressing early turnover provides the employee with a support system that eliminates the unfamiliarity that comes with moving into a new work environment (Wells, 2012). The support system is in the form of a senior worker who acts as a ‘buddy’, mentoring the novel employee until he or she settles.

The skill intervention is dissimilar as it employs performance indicator to increase its effectiveness. In the process, an employee is positioned specifically according to expertise levels. Training done improves the skills of the worker, but it does not place them with functionality beyond their skill in a firm (Hauenstein, 2011). An employee becomes content with their capabilities and grows in a personalized rate. The recognition and reward system set is different because it uses symbolic schemes to bonus the performance of workers. The symbolic means are non-monetary in form and include awards such as time offs and company vacations. Symbolic rewards develop certain values in a relationship that money is unable. The lean selection process captures the right person for the right task prior to training and development. Workers are already multidisciplinary and competent. They cope well with the new environment and enjoy increased rates of personal and company growth.

Conclusion

The use of performance metrics in reducing turnover is more effective as it does not focus only on the employee, but includes secondary factors that address both worker and firm requirements simultaneously. Modern interventions are systematic encompassing technology in performance measurement and identification of areas of intervention integration. Worker relationship with the firm is strengthened through development of ethical bonds, monetary benefits, and individual growth.

References

Aamodt, M. G. (2007). Industrial/organizational psychology: An applied approach. Belmont, CA: Thomson-Belmont Wadsworth.

Hauenstein, Patrick. (2011). Five Strategies for Reducing Unwanted Turnover. Omni View. Retrieved form http://www.theomniview.com/pov/blog/five-strategies-for-reducing-unwanted-turnover/

Snowdon, B., & Vane, H. R. (2005). Modern macroeconomics: Its origins, development and current state. Cheltenham, UK: E. Elgar.

Wells, Brent. (2012). Ten Ways to Reduce Employee Turnover and Improve Retention. Talent Cone: Talent management System. Retrieved from http://www.sayitcommunications.com/talent-clone-blog/bid/206046/10-ways-to-reduce-employee-turnover-and-improve-retention