Even for those with the best intentions and the fastest learning curves, switching jobs still requires some time to get up to speed on what the hell is happening around you. Because even if you learn the software suites and the tools that the new job employs, well, you still need to learn about people and politics and processes, and those three Ps can be much harder to grasp — because maybe on Day 2, you intuitively know that Brad is useless and does nothing all week, but Brad is also the son of a guy worth $400M, and the senior executives rely on Brad’s connections, so Brad is untouchable. Brad might be useless, but useless to whom? Not to the decision-makers. Until you know stuff like that about Brad, you cannot be successful in a role.
I personally don’t even like “The Great Resignation” narrative. Feels like a bit of a sham. It ignores women, who are leaving the workforce for entirely different reasons, and it ignores Gen X, who we’ve been ignoring work-wise for about 15 years now anyway. If you are 47, with three kids and a mortgage, you are not going to just up and quit your job and scream “YOLO!” at your spouse. Maybe you should do that, and maybe life would be better if you did, but … it’s not likely to be the reality of the situation.
But while I don’t buy “The Great Resignation” personally, it’s happening somewhat. I’d auger it mostly happens in tech, retail, and service, and that’s logical. Tech people change jobs all the time for more money — why do you think we have “tech hubs?” It’s because talent needs to be clustered together. Listen to a podcast, ya wreck. Do I need to do all the work for you? Retail and service = also high turnover. Again, not a narrative, but is happening.
Every time someone leaves a tech job or a white-collar job, you have this equation where knowledge just exited one place, and new meat entered another place. When knowledge exits, someone has to cover that ass at Place 1. When knowledge enters, someone has to help indoctrinate that ass at Place 2. As all these complex psychological negotiations and interactions are happening at Place 1 and Place 2, you know what typically isn’t happening?
Strategy.
You could easily argue “strategy” barely exists as is, and is regularly confused with “operations” or “logistics.” You wouldn’t be wrong. No one really knows what a Chief Strategy Officer does, except “makes more money than you do.”
But as we transition people, we need to transition processes, protocols, products, and unwritten rules. We need to build some relationships and trust — paradoxically, because everyone might be gone again in six months. But as we do these things, which are no doubt important, what we typically don’t do is strategy and new thinking.
Instead, we just rely on legacy products and ignore most other things.
If you believe in “The Great Resignation,” then, aren’t you kinda believing in a constant stop-start/pause approach to strategy inside the walls of these orgs trading people like 1988 Topps cards?
