Collective turnover: organization design and processes or contagion effects?
| Published date | 29 November 2019 |
| Pages | 492-506 |
| Date | 29 November 2019 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-01-2019-0055 |
| Author | David Kraichy,Joseph Schmidt |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour,Industrial/labour relations,Employment law |
Collective turnover: organization
design and processes or
contagion effects?
David Kraichy and Joseph Schmidt
University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada
Abstract
Purpose –Using organization-level data, the purpose of this paper is to investigate whether and how
turnover spreads at different job levels (i.e. managers, non-managers) and how vacancy rate and manager
span of control precipitate continued turnover.
Design/methodology/approach –Organization-level longitudinal data were collected quarterly from
40 Canadian organizations on various HR metrics from 2009 to 2012, totaling 232 observations. The authors
used covariate balance propensity score (CBPS) weighting to make stronger causal inferences.
Findings –The organization-level data provided limited support for turnover spreading at different job
levels. Instead, vacancy rate predicted subsequent non-manager turnover rates, whereas span of control
predicted subsequent manager turnover rates.
Practical implications –The implications of this re search are twofold. First, to of fset continued turnover
among non-managers, it may be wise for organizations to fill vacancies promptly, particularly
when unfilled position s affect job demands and res ources of those who remain. Second, to minimize
ongoing manager turn over, organizations m ay benefit from redesi gning work units to have smaller
manager-to-employ ee ratios.
Originality/value –This study adds to the collective turnover literature by demonstrating that
organizational factors play a substantive role in predicting continued manager and non-manager turnover.
Moreover, by using longitudinal data and CBPS weighting, this research allowed for establishing temporal
precedence and greater confidence that these factors play a causal role. Lastly, this research highlights how
the factors precipitating collective turnover differ between managers and non-managers.
Keywords Employee behaviour, Line managers, Group behaviour, Human resource management
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Over the past severaldecades, scholars investigating turnover have increasinglyshifted their
analytical focus from the individual to the collective level (Hausknecht, 2017). Collective
turnover is concerned with “the aggregate levels of employee departures that occur within
groups, work units,or organizations”(Hausknechtand Trevor, 2011, p. 353).This shift directs
attention to the social nature of turnover within work units and organizations and considers
turnover events as related vs independent. That is, we cannot dissociate employee turnover
decisions fromelements of their work environment. For example,researchers have found that
turnover snowballs within groups due to contagion of attitudes, perceptions and behaviors
(Bartunek et al., 2008; Felps et al., 2009; Krackhardt and Porter, 1986), and it increases job
demands and reduces resources for those who remain (Della Torre et al., 2018; Reilly et al.,
2014; Wynen and Kleizen, 2019).
Despite advancements in understanding the antecedents, processes and consequences of
collective turnover, research in this area uses various levels of analysis (e.g. unit,
organization) and job levels (e.g. managers, non-managers; Hancock et al., 2017). These are
important distinctions as collective turnover at different levels of analysis and job levels,
respectively, are thought to have different antecedents and consequences (Hausknecht and
Trevor, 2011; Nyberg and Ployhart, 2013). Indeed, a recent collective turnover meta-analysis
revealed that both the level of analysis and job level moderated the relationship between
personnel changes (e.g. transfers, discharge rates) and collective turnover (Hancock et al.,
2017). Accordingly, in this paper, we investigate collective turnover at the organization-level
Employee Relations: The
International Journal
Vol. 42 No. 2, 2020
pp. 492-506
© Emerald PublishingLimited
0142-5455
DOI 10.1108/ER-01-2019-0055
Received 9 January 2019
Revised 24 September 2019
5 November 2019
Accepted 7 November 2019
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0142-5455.htm
492
ER
42,2
To continue reading
Request your trial