Making Exit Interviews Meaningful

I like the idea of exit interviews but their execution is seldom impressive. Asking people about their reasons for resigning and their experience with the organization may elicit no candor whatsoever if the person is worried about references or, in the case of entrepreneurs, gaining future business with the organization.

Who is doing the asking can also raise problems. If it isn't a person who is trusted, then candor is likely to shrink. So too if the interviewer is someone who is just going through the motions. Even a soon-to-be former employee can scent indifference.

Timing is another obstacle. The person who left four months ago may have a better grasp of why he or she departed than will someone who is going through the turmoil of a job change. Distance usually provides perspective.

It can pay to have more than one exit interview: One with an HR person and another with a peer. Have these two interviews before the person leaves, compare notes, and then have the HR person follow-up around four months later with a "Now That You've Had More Time" follow-up interview.

If a good performer turns in a resignation, rather than searching for a farewell gift and waving as a bundle of talent walks out the door, the organization should be meeting with the person to see if anything can be done to persuade the person to stay.

 A person's decision to leave is not a minor decision. It is wise to discover what was behind it and whether something needs to be fixed. A simple questionnaire won't cut it.