Skip the exit interview when you leave your job | Hacker News Reader

Skip the exit interview when you leave your job

blog.petdance.com

45 pointsohjeez38 comments

> Sometimes people say that “Well, how will the company get any better?” I suggest that that’s no longer your concern, and that the time for that has passed anyway. If you’re unhappy enough with the company to leave, then they’ve been doing things wrong for the duration of your employment.

And if we all do this, companies will blindly keep doing things poorly making it increasingly hard to find places worth working at. I would say that if you're in the position where any negative consequences from being candid at an exit interview are inconsequential, then by all means share.

Exit interviews aren’t the only means of companies soliciting feedback. Many companies I’ve been at have a anonymous survey taken every 6 months of everyone in the company run by a third party. Surely if they have bad turnover they can look at the feedback in those kinds of things that led people to leaving.

Which are bs because the vendor can attribute feedback to your identity thereby causing a chilling effect.

The only real way to stop these issues is to be proactive, not reactive.

Shut up and work, citizen!

Pick up that can!

We’ve used a couple different vendors in this space and I was impressed with the overall anonymity preserving attempts. It’s not perfect (especially in free text fields where “this comment was translated from Dutch” when you have only one Dutch employee is a pretty fair “tell”).

Our current tool is Peakon and it’s by far my favorite HR tool (which, to be fair is almost a content-free sentence, but Peakon is quite good IME).

I have no reasonable way to reverse-engineer your score or your comments in general (I have some employees who sign theirs, preferring to put their name to their comments, which is fine by their choice).

Psssj, many companies solely organise them to give those that need a place to cent a place to vent.

same can be said about exit interviews

Can it? I would think you’d want to let people vent so they don’t leave. If they’ve already decided to leave, why not let them vent on their own time?

The import bit to me is “the time for that has passed”: make the effort to better the company before leaving. Talk candidly (but politely) to your manager about things you think are going wrong and try to work out something from there.

Don’t wait your exit interview to burst the dam, and don’t make your leaving a revelation that you were serious about these issues.

In that sense, the exit interview should be useless.

In my experience this may put a target on your back. Some emperors do not like to be told that they have no clothes, even if the feedback is thoughtful and would improve the business.

The (recently collapsed) startup I worked for thought their core technology was a differentiator, and I’d been suggesting benchmarks for a year so that we could publicly highlight advantages. A new head of QA benchmarked along a few dimensions. The results didn’t match what the leadership team had been telling customers, and it was taken very personally.

I hear you. Not all feedback is welcome.

I would also expect those to be met with anger wether you’re leaving or not, so that wouldn’t be good at an exit interview feedback either, in my opinion.

Believe me, exit interviews rarely change anything and they have a high risk of burning bridges. People are petty. You may think you don't need bridges with those people, but you might. In my experience, you will.

Why do we label people as complainers when they’re just giving (negative) feedback? Why has it become bad practice and a no no, to point out bad things? If someone is giving genuine feedback, with some kind of evidence and is doing it with good intentions (to fix something in the company), why is he/she finger pointed and we say that he/she’s burning bridges? Please start giving honest feedback in exit interviews, avoid sending spiteful goodbye emails and be considerate to your ex-colleagues :-)

And how much good do you think it will do? Everyone knows the rules. Your exit interview and your resignation letter should be banal platitudes.

By the time I leave, I’ve already made known the things that I thought should change.

Recently left a startup I worked at for around 5 years and decided I would do a proper exit interview, telling my manager and HR exactly why I was leaving (I was unhappy with engineering leadership [no people singled out] but in general listing all the things I didn't agree with and not wanting to work with leadership anymore).

2 months later they shakeup the engineering leadership and getting rid of them. Granted no one liked the VP and the yes cronies he hired inside of engineering (plus several other senior people had left), so I have no idea if my interview contributed to it in any way, but it sure made me feel much better.

In a startup maybe. But in an established company there is nothing that can change the status quo.

I can't get behind this. You can be objective about why you're leaving and still be seen on good terms without burning any bridges.

Companies need to learn. They can't do that if everyone skips the exit interview.

That's effectively what TFA advocates:

Say nothing negative about anyone or anything. Tell them that you’ve found another opportunity that you need to take, and that it’s been a privilege to work with them all. And that’s it.

Not really. That’s just taking an exit interview and displaying professionalism. You can also provide constructive feedback while doing the same thing.

Short and sweet is great for the individual. But nothing is going to change if everyone doesn’t speak up.

If these companies wanted to learn from you -- they would have availed themselves of that opportunity while you were still working there.

As the blogger himself put it:

If you have suggestions on how things should work differently at the company, the time to tell your boss is while you work there. If they can’t bring themselves to act on it during your tenure, telling them at the exit interview isn’t going to do any good.

That’s assuming your boss has enough influence to change something and also is the right person for the feedback. That sadly is not the case in most big companies. So telling people at exit interviews is the best way to get the feedback across.

It’s not having a bad boss either, it’s just the right context for the feedback.

Who's to say that companies do not also ask those questions while you are there ?

I am a manager at my current company, we regularly ask feedback to employees. Partly thanks/because of this, we have a very high employee retention rate. But we also conduct exit interviews when someone leaves.

In my experience, exit interview yield good result if the employees leaves on good terms, and if he tends to be a bit "secretive/corporate" during his time. If the employee leaves on bad term, you get nothing, or nothing of value (just "rants"). If the employee was already outspoken, you get a repeat of what he already said in the past. But once in a while, you get plain and honest feedback that an employee didn't really "dare" to give while working, by fear of (real or made up) repercussions.

People are taught to "play the corporate game", keep to themselves and not make too much waves. For some people that also means "not saying what they really think", unfortunately. Being in a position where they are gone anyway and are off the hook can sometimes liberate their voices. And that feedback is extremely valuable because it's so hard to get in any other way.

Yeah, I can imagine there are environments where exit interviews are actually meaningful, and yield valuable data. And that these are also the places that manage to attract managers who actually know what they are doing.

But I was thinking more average case, i.e. environments with non-high retention rates, and the usual "if we want you to have an opinion we'll give it to you" atmosphere that seems to rule the vast bulk of the corporate world.

Which is what keeps many people from being outspoken in the first place.

You can if the other party is rational. That's not something you can control. What you can control is doing the interview or BSing the interview (my suggestion).

I am the founder / CEO of a company with 270+ full time employees and many more contractors. I have done exit interviews for years and find them extraordinarily valuable as a source for ideas to improve. You would be surprised at how many employees NEVER speak up during their employment, then share their thoughts after. I wish they would share them before they leave. I have never had my opinion of a former employee lowered as a result of an exit interview, even when they say they hate me.

I have had my opinions of employees INCREASE as a result of an exit interview. I recently had one salesperson who laid out a brilliant critique of my business that I learned a lot from. I offered him a senior position to stay and help me fix things (sadly he turned it down).

This is extraordinary. At most companies I think the risks outweigh the rewards, but you show that it isn't the case at every company.

It is probably the exception. The issue is you cannot control how someone will react even to the best constructive criticism. You can control what you say to people to ensure there isn't any reason for them to react negatively. Or. Just not interact with them at all.

Lots of people complain about companies being toxic, but they give advice that you shouldn't act on it.

Most of them tell, that, because "you may burn the bridge". We're working in industry where it's hard to open fridge without encountering a recruiter - why would you care? Because you may, maybe miss single opportunity to earn 20% more in the future?

Then we can assume that people are simultaneously, so repulsed with company, they are unable to give professionally sounding feedback and considering going back for mediocre raise?

Guess what is the status quo originating from that. Also I have little hope for humanity if, even in so comfortable position we prefer not to act, due to some distant minor risks.

Disclaimer: Mostly through my career I've been on receiving end of the exits. I took all of them seriously and acted on many. If someone wasn't re-hireable we usually have known long before the exit interview.

Going through life so afraid of consequences that you can't give your honest opinion politely in an exit interview sounds terrible to me.

What's the theory why a company would want an exit interview? Maybe to dig up reasons not fondly remember the person leaving?

To try and find ways to prevent people from leaving in future. They are looking to improve retention.

I think it's for liability or legal reasons?

Or maybe it's just a way of punishing you for leaving.

Usually the company forces you to go by withholding any severance payouts, so literally skipping them isn't an option.

The advice sounds good to me.

It's HR doing their job. Find bad managers and reduce attrition

Your call, but it's the last time anyone there will care about your opinion.

Better: This is my two weeks notice because...

Practice Game Theory: you've got nothing to gain, but you might possibly lose; therefore don't do it.

I don't like how this article turns communication into a means for career climbing. Sometimes we have something we need to express to someone simply because it's true. And speaking truthfully is beneficial in ways beyond the scope of a career.

A long time ago in a career far, far away:

I talked in an exit interview. I got exactly what I wanted but eventually regretted it.

I was tasked with building a data warehouse to replace our existing reporting process: a multi-day run access database.

I was young, excitable, and very talented. I was a sponge. It was easier to do things by myself than explain how a star schema worked to others, although I tried.

As the project proved successful and the team grew, I desperately wanted more responsibility and leadership. I had built the whole thing from the inception. But my boss and bosses manager, the VP of Engineering, didn't trust me. They lied, constantly moved the goal post, asked for ridiculous hours, expected me to work most weekends, and kept promising you'll be leading this team soon just hang in there.

Things degenerated to the point where the VP of Engineering was actively trying to fire me, but the COO and CEO wouldn't let him. The project was too high value and I built most of it. I know this because he taunted me with it. On two different occasions they tried to hire a replacement. "New guy is your peer. He's not your boss." Later I learned the new guy was told the opposite.

Still throughout the turmoil I had made friends with a many of my coworkers. I became especially close with the IT Director. At one time he out ranked the VP of Engineering and was his mentor. They still talked, but werent close like they used to be. The IT Director also became a kind of mentor to me. He was the first to prod me to leave.

And despite the toxic work environment our data warehouse had become a cornerstone of the companies business. We expanded from fixing a single long running report to being the database of record for all analytics in the company.

Still my title and salary remained the same as when I started the project.

Fed up, I finally got my resume together and found a new job. I had several documented incidents of their misbehavior. Eg anonymously, falsely accusing me of harassment. Or threatening to withhold pay for hours already worked unless some goal was met.

I laid it all out in my exit interview. Especially focusing on the things that could have had legal standing. The VP of HR soaked it all in, nodded and asked probing questions.

A few months went by. I met up with my old coworkers for lunch. They began to tell me how everything changed after I left. The CxOs became hyper focused on the team. HR started sitting in on meetings and executives would randomly show up to stand ups. But most revealing is they shared that the decision had been made by the COO to replace the VP of Engineering. Another VP had been hired and was quietly attending all meetings. The existing VP of Engineering had no idea he was training his replacement.

I was still in touch with the IT Director. I knew he still talked with the VP of Engineering on occasion. I shared with him, "You know that new guy? I have it on good authority that the COO hired him to replace the VP of Engineering." "How do you know" he asked? "I had lunch with most of my old coworkers and they said so."

I was being manipulate and hoping to cause drama. I wanted to cause the VP of Engineering as much grief as possible. No simple "you're fired" for him. This would be messy.

And I got exactly what I wanted. It caused chaos. The COOs plan for a quiet transition had been ruined. Multiple shouting matches ensued. The drama was so bad that the new guy replacement quit.

But what I hadn't considered was the fall out. Multiple of my coworkers really liked the new guy and were hoping he would fix things. After the new guy quit the VP of Engineering decided that switching to PHP from RoR for the front end would fix things. He fired many of my old coworkers.

They were furious with me. They didn't know how but they knew I was to blame. I burned multiple good references, professional acquaintances, and friends.

But most costly was my friendship with the IT Director. It ended our friendship.

I eventually tried to apologize. A few of them accepted my apology but for most the damage had been done.

It REALLY wasn't worth it.

What I really needed was an older more mature adult to guide me. I needed to learn healthy boundaries, how to communicate better, how to LISTEN, and think before I act. These are the skills that I needed and many "engineers" need to improve.

Be secure in yourself. You are enough. You don't need anyone to tell you that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com