A version of this article originally appeared in Quartz’s Leadership newsletter. Sign up here to get the latest leadership news and insights straight to your inbox .
Employee churn costs U.S. businesses a collective $1 trillion per year. And it turns out about half of that painful spending might be avoidable.
Gallup found that 42% of voluntarily exiting employees say their managers or organizations could have done something to prevent them from leaving, and about half (51%) of U.S. workers are watching or actively seeking a new job as of May 2024. Some turnover is inevitable (retirements, relocations, etc.). But research suggests that about half of voluntary employee churn is preventable through more effective leadership — especially as it pertains to trust, growth opportunities, and legitimate channels for honest feedback.
Tyler Jensen, a leadership consultant and psychotherapist, said people have been burned in the past by speaking their minds at work. Leaders must be mindful of this and consistently demonstrate trustworthiness, he said.
“Besides the tried-and-true method of building trust over time, leaders can also implement self-directed criticism in front of the group, making it a process to be mirrored, rather than one initiated by the followers,” Jensen said.
It’s a conversation that demands specificity about what words mean. In this case, when we say criticism — defined as “the expression of disapproval of someone or something based on perceived faults or mistakes” — we’re talking the ability of a staff member to notify a manager of an unforeseen negative outcome, or some time of roadblock or pain point they might be experiencing at work. We’re not talking about toxic negativity, or encouraging a workforce that complains without trying to be part of the solution.
Tina Schust Robinson, founder and CEO of leadership coaching firm WorkJoy LLC, cautions against inviting criticism, and prefers the idea of inviting feedback.
“When we hear criticism, the brain often interprets it as a threat, potentially triggering fight, flight, or freeze responses,” Robinson said. “This shuts down the prefrontal cortex, the part responsible for reasoning, creativity, and learning, making it harder for us to absorb and act upon the received information productively.”
A key concept in building the kind of trust that results in workers not wanting to leave is psychological safety. When we build a culture of safety, people feel empowered to communicate honestly without negative consequences. And a lot of good can result from that, even beyond retaining employees.
“When a leader invites criticism, they invite collaboration to new, better ideas beyond the scope of their own initial state of creativity,” Jensen said. “When a team feels empowered to authentically collaborate, they churn out better products, better ideas, and with much more efficient speed. These are all active ingredients within high-powered earning cultural environments that employees rarely want to leave from.”
Robinson pointed to Harvard’s Amy Edmondson and her work on multi-decade research about psychological safety in the workplace leading to better business outcomes.
“Research consistently links psychological safety with higher innovation, faster problem-solving, and stronger financial results,” Robinson said. “Redirecting feedback, when welcomed, becomes a driver of both agility and performance.”
Jensen and Robinson both emphasized that leaders should clearly communicate the “why” — what purpose the criticism/feedback serves.
“The single largest failing of leaders when asking for feedback is that they do not make their ‘why’ fully transparent,” Jensen said. “For a leader to [garner] this kind of feedback from their employees, they need to make sure they have fully detailed its purpose. If they do not, they run the risk of their employees interpreting their intentions, which can only lead to miscommunication.”
Defining this “why” should be the first step for organizations lacking a culture of psychological safety, Robinson said.
“Without a clear connection to business results, without that clear ‘why,’ executives won’t hold their leaders accountable for shifting their behaviors — and those executives won’t start role modeling desired behaviors themselves,” Robinson said. “Once the organization has defined the ‘why,’ I recommend defining what psychological safety means in that culture. Make it real versus academic. Describe what it looks like in action. Highlight those who are doing it today. Make it easier for leaders to start demonstrating new behaviors.”
If employees aren’t providing feedback already, it’s safe to assume they don’t feel safe doing so, said Jeff Smith, COO of the performance management and HR software platform 15Five and author of The Meaningful Manager: How to Manage What Matters.
“I recommend approaching feedback like a scientist — with curiosity and not defensiveness,” Smith said. “There are a few ways to do this: labeling, mirroring, and silence. These approaches allow you to gather more information without interrogating or seeming combative.”
Smith says:
-
Labeling is saying “It sounds like…” or “It seems like…” before summarizing an important point someone made in a few words. For example, “It seems like creating safety is important to you because you’re reading this article.” This invites more sharing with less pressure.
-
Mirroring is repeating one to three important words you just heard with a slightly raised inflection in your voice to suggest a question. For example, you might respond, “Suggest a question?” after hearing the previous sentence. Mirroring shows that you are listening and curious.
-
Silence is exactly what it sounds like — staying quiet while an employee is giving feedback. This can be uncomfortable, but it invites people to keep sharing.
Smith recommends getting specific when asking for feedback.
“It’s important to invite feedback beyond just an open-ended, ‘Let me know if you have something to share!’” Smith said. “Instead, ask for something specific: ‘Hey, I’m working on being a better leaders and I’m focused on providing goal and role clarity for you and our teammates. How can I best support you there?’”
A version of this article originally appeared in Quartz’s Leadership newsletter. Sign up here to get the latest leadership news and insights straight to your inbox .
Employee churn costs U.S. businesses a collective $1 trillion per year. And it turns out about half of that painful spending might be avoidable.
Gallup found that 42% of voluntarily exiting employees say their managers or organizations could have done something to prevent them from leaving, and about half (51%) of U.S. workers are watching or actively seeking a new job as of May 2024. Some turnover is inevitable (retirements, relocations, etc.). But research suggests that about half of voluntary employee churn is preventable through more effective leadership — especially as it pertains to trust, growth opportunities, and legitimate channels for honest feedback.
Tyler Jensen, a leadership consultant and psychotherapist, said people have been burned in the past by speaking their minds at work. Leaders must be mindful of this and consistently demonstrate trustworthiness, he said.
“Besides the tried-and-true method of building trust over time, leaders can also implement self-directed criticism in front of the group, making it a process to be mirrored, rather than one initiated by the followers,” Jensen said.
It’s a conversation that demands specificity about what words mean. In this case, when we say criticism — defined as “the expression of disapproval of someone or something based on perceived faults or mistakes” — we’re talking the ability of a staff member to notify a manager of an unforeseen negative outcome, or some time of roadblock or pain point they might be experiencing at work. We’re not talking about toxic negativity, or encouraging a workforce that complains without trying to be part of the solution.
Tina Schust Robinson, founder and CEO of leadership coaching firm WorkJoy LLC, cautions against inviting criticism, and prefers the idea of inviting feedback.
“When we hear criticism, the brain often interprets it as a threat, potentially triggering fight, flight, or freeze responses,” Robinson said. “This shuts down the prefrontal cortex, the part responsible for reasoning, creativity, and learning, making it harder for us to absorb and act upon the received information productively.”
A key concept in building the kind of trust that results in workers not wanting to leave is psychological safety. When we build a culture of safety, people feel empowered to communicate honestly without negative consequences. And a lot of good can result from that, even beyond retaining employees.
“When a leader invites criticism, they invite collaboration to new, better ideas beyond the scope of their own initial state of creativity,” Jensen said. “When a team feels empowered to authentically collaborate, they churn out better products, better ideas, and with much more efficient speed. These are all active ingredients within high-powered earning cultural environments that employees rarely want to leave from.”
Robinson pointed to Harvard’s Amy Edmondson and her work on multi-decade research about psychological safety in the workplace leading to better business outcomes.
“Research consistently links psychological safety with higher innovation, faster problem-solving, and stronger financial results,” Robinson said. “Redirecting feedback, when welcomed, becomes a driver of both agility and performance.”
Jensen and Robinson both emphasized that leaders should clearly communicate the “why” — what purpose the criticism/feedback serves.
“The single largest failing of leaders when asking for feedback is that they do not make their ‘why’ fully transparent,” Jensen said. “For a leader to [garner] this kind of feedback from their employees, they need to make sure they have fully detailed its purpose. If they do not, they run the risk of their employees interpreting their intentions, which can only lead to miscommunication.”
Defining this “why” should be the first step for organizations lacking a culture of psychological safety, Robinson said.
“Without a clear connection to business results, without that clear ‘why,’ executives won’t hold their leaders accountable for shifting their behaviors — and those executives won’t start role modeling desired behaviors themselves,” Robinson said. “Once the organization has defined the ‘why,’ I recommend defining what psychological safety means in that culture. Make it real versus academic. Describe what it looks like in action. Highlight those who are doing it today. Make it easier for leaders to start demonstrating new behaviors.”
If employees aren’t providing feedback already, it’s safe to assume they don’t feel safe doing so, said Jeff Smith, COO of the performance management and HR software platform 15Five and author of The Meaningful Manager: How to Manage What Matters.
“I recommend approaching feedback like a scientist — with curiosity and not defensiveness,” Smith said. “There are a few ways to do this: labeling, mirroring, and silence. These approaches allow you to gather more information without interrogating or seeming combative.”
Smith says:
-
Labeling is saying “It sounds like…” or “It seems like…” before summarizing an important point someone made in a few words. For example, “It seems like creating safety is important to you because you’re reading this article.” This invites more sharing with less pressure.
-
Mirroring is repeating one to three important words you just heard with a slightly raised inflection in your voice to suggest a question. For example, you might respond, “Suggest a question?” after hearing the previous sentence. Mirroring shows that you are listening and curious.
-
Silence is exactly what it sounds like — staying quiet while an employee is giving feedback. This can be uncomfortable, but it invites people to keep sharing.
Smith recommends getting specific when asking for feedback.
“It’s important to invite feedback beyond just an open-ended, ‘Let me know if you have something to share!’” Smith said. “Instead, ask for something specific: ‘Hey, I’m working on being a better leaders and I’m focused on providing goal and role clarity for you and our teammates. How can I best support you there?’”
