.
The total number of employees leaving can't be determined until one week prior to the separation date, as determined by human resource standards. A significant number of the agents have already unofficially stated they are leaving, and are some of our most valued and experienced employees. This will have a tremendous impact on everyone in the center, because the center, as a whole, will need to maintain the service level set by the executive branch. Chronologically, I feel there is already a jeopardy situation due to the fact that it takes approximately 2 months for a newly hired employee to become a true contributor. Our scope of interaction with the customer requires desktop support knowledge, advanced networking knowledge, and a thorough understanding of the telecommunications industry. If we started to hire today, 2 months would place us three weeks after the voluntary separation exodus. .
I would like to approach this problem for an analogical standpoint. The two ways of I"d like to explore are proactively and reactively. The proactive measure would show a chronological element, identifying that we need to start hiring immediately to insure we have employees prepared to take up the slack when vacant seats appear. Laying out a calendar and mapping training will clearly show there is an immediate need to hire. A forecast of loss must be assessed to lost headcount in addition to looking at the same loss from the aspect of lost expertise. A reactive approach is more of a casual approach, known as a wait and see attitude. Using this method, we would have an exact number of employees for forecasting hiring and training. Additionally we could measure the effects after the loss of head-count. Maybe a loss will just cause others to work harder, and maybe some of the agents that left were not very efficient. .
Loss of talent can only be measured by looking at the lost contributions as units of work.
