Employee Retention Management. Instruments of Human Resources in the view of current developments

List of Contents

II. List of Tables

III. List of Figures

IV. List of Abbreviations

1 Introduction
1.1 Purpose of the Study
1.2 Structure

2 Definition

3 Relevance of Employee Retention Management
3.1 Economic Perspective
3.1.1 Globalisation
3.1.2 Demographic Change
3.1.3 Employee Turnover
3.1.4 Shortage of Skilled Labour
3.2 Financial Perspective
3.2.1 Value of Human Capital
3.2.2 Costs of Turnover

4 Implementation of Employee Retention Management
4.1 Identification of Key Employees
4.1.1 Classification of Workforce
4.1.2 Process of Classification by the Example of Forced Rankings
4.2 Identification of Motivation
4.2.1 Motivation as Initial Point
4.2.2 Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs
4.2.3 Measurement of Motivation
4.3 Instruments
4.3.1 Selection of Instruments
4.3.2 Financial Compensation
4.3.3 Leadership
4.3.4 Communication
4.3.5 Job Design
4.3.6 Job Environment
4.3.7 Summary of Employee Retention Instruments

5 Critical Reflection of the Applicability in Organisations

6 Conclusion

V. List of References

II. List of Tables

Table 1: Employers’ Possibilities of Fulfilment according to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs

Table 2: Comparison of SMEs and Major Corporations

III. List of Figures

Figure 1: List of Direct, Indirect and Opportunity Costs

Figure 2: Consequences of Employee Turnover on Customer Behaviour

Figure 3: Classification of Employees into High, Mid and Low Performers

Figure 4: Hierarchy of Needs by Abraham Maslow

Figure 5: Summary of Employee Retention Instruments

IV. List of Abbreviations

illustration not visible in this excerpt

1 Introduction

“We have to get used to the thought that companies are much more dependent

on their best employees than the good people from the company.” ^[1]

With reference to this statement made by Peter Drucker^[2] in 2002, the contribution of employ­ees to a company’s success and their growing independence from current employer takes on greater significance in the management of human resources. Already in the 1990s, the war for talents has been declared on the basis of decreasing resources of employees who own valuable qualifications on behalf of organisational success. Employers nowadays are growingly confronted with economic circumstances influencing the quantity and quality of their workforce. Thus, demographic changes will modify the composition of employee workforces, while globali­sation will enable employees to rapidly change their place of employment. In addition, organisations are likely to counteract skill shortages and increasing readiness of employees to leave an employer for a more profitable offer. With regard to these global develop­ments, the work of human resource management is to implement a specified form of manage­ment strategy in order to maintain experienced and valuable employees within the organisation, as well as to ensure continuing productivity. Similar to the common prac­ticed customer relationship management aiming at establishing a stable customer base and associated higher profitability^[3], employee retention management transfers experiences in retaining promising customers to human resource pro­cesses and therefore focuses on employees as an additional crucial element in cor­porate success. Basically, there is a growing consensus that the retention of employ­ees is a key de­terminant of further strategic competitiveness and long-term success of a company. In fact, various surveys among human resource departments agree in their findings that the retention of employees will be prioritised in further human resource strat­egies. According to Hays, 74% of decision-makers have indeed realised the significance of retaining employees by answering that the topic has high or very high significance within their organisation. Therefore, employee retention counts as one of the top three topics in future-oriented personnel policies.^[4] Likewise, in an empirical examination among 1,000 compa­nies in Germany, the development of employee retention measures is consid­ered a major challenge for human resource management.^[5] However, despite the fact that averagely half of the interviewed employees in Germany and Europe are willing to change jobs^[6], only 4% of companies state to have a written con­cept for the implementa­tion of specific retention measures.^[7]

In order to coun­teract em­ployees’ willingness to leave their current employer, em­ployee retention management intends to respond appro­priately to employees’ needs by means of individualised incentives which are consid­ered to improve the employees’ conformity and loyalty with the em­ployer. Thus, the elaboration of the variety of possi­ble instruments presented in this thesis may lead organisations in their development towards a strategic concept en­hancing the organi­sations’ attractiveness as an employer which will enable organisa­tions to react to current economic influences.

1.1 Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study is to examine the possibilities of human resources in the correlation between employee and employer. In fact, the reader will be given an impression of the scope of action an employer is able to use in order to exert positive influence on em­ployees’ satisfaction and motiva­tion with regard to a long-term employment. Moreover, the relevance of em­ployee retention management in response to increasing internal and ex­ternal chal­lenges an employer is con­fronted with, will be outlined and the further implementation of a specific system will be illustrated. For this reason, this thesis will give or­ganisations guidance in utilising retention methods and will hereby con­sider theo­retical ap­proaches regarding employees’ motivation as well as practical ex­amples in econ­omy. By means of recent studies, it will give a compact insight of to­day’s situation on labour markets and their influence on human resource management.

1.2 Structure

Whereas this chapter introduces em­ployee retention management and outlines the structure of this thesis, the second chapter will precisely define the term “Employee Retention”.

The further chapters will then examine the background of the title: “Instruments of Human Resources in the view of current developments”. Thus, the third chapter will illustrate the “Relevance of Employee Retention Management”; on the one hand by means of the economic perspective including current trends such as globalisation, demographic change, employee turnover and shortage of skilled labour, followed by the financial perspective on the other hand based on i.a. the value of employees for corporate success, the relation between employee and customer satisfaction and a consideration of turnover costs. Therefore, this chapter intends to clarify the significance of em­ployee retention management today.

In contrast, the fourth chapter “Implementation of Employee Retention Management” will then focus on the question how to implement a specific em­ployee retention management system and which aspects are therefore to be taken into account. For this purpose, the process of identifying key employees and their associated motives will be examined. Based on this background, practical methods for employee retention management will be derived leading to a comprehensive presentation of specific employee retention instruments in consideration of the following five principal areas: financial compensation, leadership, communication, job design as well as job environment. Hence, this chapter intends to provide insight into the existing possibilities which organisations are able to use in the context of em­ployee retention management.

Furthermore, the fifth chapter will critically assess probable differences in the ability of organisations to actually use the presented instruments in their organisational surroundings by considering their size and financial means, before ending up with the conclusion in the sixth chapter summarising the main points in order to give a final view on the topic: “Employee Retention Management - Instruments of Human Resources in the view of current developments”.

2 Definition

This chapter will give a definition for the term “Employee Retention” in order to create a consistent basis for further explanations.

The term “retention” derives from the Latin word “retentio” and describes a “continued possession, use, or control of something”^[8]. In the context of human resources, retention is considered to be the opposite of turnover^[9]: whereas turnover describes a permanent loss of employees from an employer^[10], retention expresses an organisation’s intention of encouraging qualified employees to remain in an organisation for the maximum period of time.^[11]

For this reason, the management of employee retention, further named “Employee Retention Management” (ERM), characterises a process aiming at creating a comfortable working environment which the employee is not willing to leave.^[12] It is therefore the sum of advantages of an organisation exceeding those of changing the workplace^[13], which has impact on employees’ decision whether to stay in an organisation or to rather change the employer. Hence, ERM concentrates on psychological factors^[14] increasing employees’ solidarity towards the employer including the interaction between different influences such as i.a. working conditions, social benefits and salary as well as human resource management, leadership style and career advancement.^[15] Consequently, ERM takes into account various appropriate methods in order to keep employees in an organisation, focussing on those high-quality employees who bring in their intellectual capital which ensures competitive advantages and long-term corporate success^[16].

As the term ERM has been clarified in this chapter, the following chapter “Relevance of Employee Retention Management” will present information about current developments in the environment of human resource management.

3 Relevance of Employee Retention Management

This chapter focuses on two perspectives affecting the relevance of ERM. On the one hand, the economic perspective will be outlined by means of current economic devel­opments on labour markets which justify the implementation of ERM from an eco­nomic point of view. On the other hand, the loss of employees and associated costs will have direct impact on the financial situation of an organisation. For this reason, the financial perspective of employers will present monetary aspects which define the correlation between individual employees and corporate success by means of human capital and possible costs occurring as a consequence of employee turnover.

3.1 Economic Perspective

3.1.1 Globalisation

The global integration of economic areas has effected an orientation on international benchmarks. In order to keep pace with worldwide competition, companies are con­fronted with growing cost pressure and have to react rapidly to changing markets.^[17] In this regard, globalisation has transformed the general framework on labour markets in the last twenty years and induces flexibility to dynamic market conditions.^[18]

In fact, globalisation is to be regarded from two perspectives: from an employer’s perspective, recruiting measures will take place on a broader platform and allows human resource departments to choose from a global pool of candidates.^[19] Likewise from an employee’s perspective, the integration of global economies has opened the markets and thus provides various possibilities for employees to change their workplace in case of a broader conformity with their personal needs without being dependent on one organisation; indeed organisations compete with labour markets worldwide.^[20] Consequently, employees benefit from growing mobility on labour markets in times of globalisation which enhanced the increasing emigration of qualified German employees during the last years.^[21]

Though the significance is not yet perceived by human resource departments as it rates on minor position in terms of prior influences on human resource work in the next years^[22], in times of growing global competition, companies are to develop competitive advantages as well as further growth in order to meet the requirements of increasing competitive pressure and to sustain their productivity. Indeed, innovative employees are even considered the key factor of productivity in the further development of globalisation.^[23] Enhanced with globalisation, technological progress is accelerated^[24] in the process of a knowledge-based society in which personnel are declared to be a crucial resource.^[25] As a consequence, globalisation actually redefines human resource priorities: ERM gains in importance as the retention of key employees is prevailing in order to cope with the effects of globalisation. Because of the fact that constant knowledge in employees is relevant in a surrounding of flexible working conditions, and that technological innovations require continuous updates of personnel’s skills, the loyalty of employees is considered to be a significant factor of success in globalised markets.

3.1.2 Demographic Change

Demographic change is considered to be a further crucial component in the development of labour markets in the near future. In fact, demography is influenced by three major components which are fertility, mortality and migration processes.^[26] The effect of demographic change is due to a growing disequilibrium between these components. In contrast to stable mortality rates and rising life expectancy^[27], fertility in form of the average number of children actually decreased in the last 40 years to approx. 1.4 per women and is therefore about one third smaller than the necessary minimum of 2.1 children in order to maintain the number of total population.^[28] In addition to that, migration gains to Germany are indeed regressive and consequently not sufficient to balance declining birth-rates and increasing ageing of population.^[29] For this reason, it is to observe a continuous decline of population since 2003.^[30]

With regard to labour markets, the number of German labour force will be reduced from 2010 to 2060 about one third from 43 million to 31 million people.^[31] This development of a general decrease of available employees on labour markets indicates the growing importance of ERM in ensuring the required need for personnel in organisations.

By taking into account a short-term period until 2030^[32], German labour markets will be expecting a decrease of 15% of employed people at the age of 20 to 65 years (approx. 7.5 million people) in comparison with 2008, whereas the proportion of elderly people will experience a forecasted increase of about 33% (approx. 5.6 million).^[33] This development will result in a change in the composition of future workforce: on the one hand, personnel will consist of a broader range of age groups. Whereas the largest group of employees so far consists of employees between 35 and 49 years, the future workforce will primarily be composed of elder employees at the age 50 to 64 years.^[34] On the other, a demographic variation of employees by recruiting new target groups, such as i.a. women and immigrants, will be in the focus of future human resource management in order to balance the fewer number of available workforces.^[35]

Consequently, demographic changes have become subject in the awareness of organisations: firstly, demographic change is perceived to be the prior reason for further consequences in human resource work.^[36] In a survey by PWC with 46 German companies of various sectors, 97% consider demographic changes as “very important” to “rather important”.^[37] Similarly, Towers Watson examined that 70% of 116 interviewees in charge of human resources in Germany and Austria value the demographic change as crucial influence on future business success.^[38]

In the context of ERM, demographic changes will have notable impact on organisations across a variety of industries and associated human resource strategies. Due to a basically elder society, organisations will have the opportunity to benefit from experienced employees on condition that they will be able to keep the experience within the organisation. Additionally, declining fertility rates will reduce the amount of labour entering the markets^[39] and will therefore cause a growing need for employees with their existing qualifications as well as for the development of new potential with existing workers from within.

3.1.3 Employee Turnover

During the last decade, turnover of employees has become a serious issue for organi­sations. In literature, employee turnover is regarded in different variations:^[40]

- All kinds of personnel departures
- Personnel departures because of bilateral agreements
- Personnel departures as autonomic decision by employees

With the third factor complying with voluntary turnover of employees which is defined as a change of workplaces between businesses intended by the employee itself^[41], this enumeration can be added the dimension of involuntary turnover on the part of the employer, such as permanent layoff.^[42]

The consideration of turnover without taking into account such a differentiation has been critically discussed in literature, stating that the inclusion of turnover caused by transfers of personnel within the company or by the termination of employment due to e.g. retirement, death or illness, would undermine the effectiveness of turnover studies.^[43] However, the further consideration of employee turnover within the framework of this study focuses on the effects of voluntary turnover by employees.

In addition to that, voluntary turnover is also to be divided into dysfunctional and functional turnover, meaning the question whether the departure of an employee has even positive effects on an organisation’s value (functional) or if the value is indeed reduced due to the employee’s turnover (dysfunctional).^[44] Whereas functional turnover on the one hand describes a situation of losing a low performer whereby an organisation actually benefits from the departure, dysfunctional turnover on the other hand implies the loss of valuable employees whose departure brings disadvantages for the future performance of the organisation.^[45]

In the context of ERM, retention measures aim at a reduction of employee turnover in order to keep relevant knowledge within the organisation.^[46] In this case, it is also to consider potential positive effects of functional turnover for a company’s development, such as the integration of new qualified personnel with innovative energy and probable reset of salaries.^[47] Hence, a reduction of turnover to zero in first view may be considered a positive achievement: however, it is rather to concentrate on reducing unintended turnover and therefore lead the organisation to a healthy level of turnover on the basis of the particular industry and size of the company.^[48]

In fact, a reduction of turnover rates can be achieved by legal measures, for instance by extensions of the period of notice and repayment agreements.^[49] However, as legal measures are restrictive and cannot guarantee honest dedication of employees^[50], it is therefore advisable to focus on internal possibilities to increase employees’ satisfaction and commitment to keep valuable employees. Whereas high employee satisfaction may result in low turnover rates, commitment of employees for the organisation can even prevent employee turnover.^[51]

Nevertheless, studies agree in the assumption that global turnover rates will experience significant growth in the near future. Thus, i.a. Hay Group determined the average turnover rates per region between 2013 and 2018.^[52] Accordingly, the average turnover in Europe is estimated about 18% in comparison with global turnover of approx. 23% and slightly above average turnover rates in Asia-Pacific (24%) and Latin America (25%). Though Germany having an estimated turnover rate of about 14% in 2013 and therefore an even under average level in comparison with European rates, Germany will be experiencing a growth in turnover of about 1.2% to a total of 15.2% until 2018. Whereas 2014 will be assumed to be the year with the highest increase of turnover in developed countries such as Germany, the US and Canada, as well as in emerging markets like Indonesia and Peru, other developed countries like Spain and Italy will experience their peak in employee turnover later in 2016 and 2018. Even though the time of occurrence of significant increases may vary according to specific countries, organisations are to be prepared for potential lack of employees.

Basically, employee turnover is influenced by various factors: besides personal reasons for which people change their workplace, it is estimated that approx. 75% of the reasons for which employees leave a company can be previously influenced by the management, such as career development or working conditions.^[53] Therefore, ERM is able to exert direct influence on the company’s turnover rate. Several studies confirm that committed employees show less likeability to leave an organisation than uncommitted.^[54]

Accordingly, Towers Perrin observed that 71% of “highly committed” employees have no intention to leave the organisation. This conviction declines in the course of their level of commitment: whereas 53% of “moderately committed” employees do not intend to leave, it is only 35% of “slightly committed” employees and even 22% of those who consider themselves as “not committed”.^[55] Likewise, Gallup shows that the intention of staying in an organisation depends on employees’ emotional commitment, as 81% of those interviewees stating to have “high emotional commitment” predict to stay in the company for the next three years and even 93% for the next year, whereas those claiming to have “no emotional commitment” indicate lower predictions: 58% are willing to stay for another year and even lower 44% can imagine to stay for another three years.^[56] This clearly indicates a relation between emotional commitment and employee turnover. Hence, employers are able to achieve a minimisation of dysfunctional turnover by exerting positive influence on employees’ emotional commitment.

3.1.4 Shortage of Skilled Labour

Human resources stand in a dynamic environment surrounded by the just-mentioned aspects of globalisation, demographic change as well as high turnover rates. As a result of these trends, companies increasingly face shortages of skilled labour which is described as a discrepancy between the offer and the demand for specific skills, i.a. in high-technology and engineering sectors.^[57] This indicates a development which concentrates on specific industries and is therefore not observed in all areas in Germany.^[58]

Though the general existence of labour shortages is questioned due to the absence of salary increases and still existing unemployment^[59], there is a prevailing consensus that shortage of skilled labour, estimated about two million until 2020^[60], will have impact on companies’ structures.

The perception of labour shortage depends e.g. on the period needed to fill a vacancy.^[61] Indeed, labour shortage is perceived the most important factor of influence in human resources: Hays states that 60% consider the influence of shortages in skilled labour as “very strong” to “strong”.^[62] Likewise, a survey among 1,000 top German companies agrees by placing labour shortage on second place of the most important trends for human resources, following the demographic change.^[63] Especially in the technology sector, this survey discloses a significant labour shortage as it estimates that six of ten IT positions will not be filled in 2013 due to a lack of qualified applicants.^[64]

Moreover, 70% of human resource managers interviewed in a working paper by DGFP prevailingly report that labour shortages are already noticeable in their organisation and are also expected to have effect on the companies’ innovations and future flexibility in dynamic markets (45%).^[65]

For this reason, labour shortages and tight labour markets require long-term continuance of skilled workers in organisations in order to sustain growth and prosperity.^[66] Consequently, probable countermeasures are either realised by recruiting new employees, e.g. women and migrated workers as new potential particularly depending on the industry^[67], or by intensifying the efforts in existing employees^[68] which complies with ERM. In this context, ERM is considered to be the efficient measure which counteracts the shortage of skilled labour.^[69]

After having regarded the economic perspective by means of the just-mentioned economic trends, the following chapter will now focus on the financial aspects which influence the relevance of ERM.

3.2 Financial Perspective

3.2.1 Value of Human Capital

Already in the 19th century, the Scottish-American industrialist Andrew Carnegie, known for having established one of the most influential US companies, was quoted by emphasising the value of human workforce for organisational success:

“Take away my factories, my plans, my railroads, my ships, my transportation.

Take away my money, strip me of all these, but leave me my men

and in two or three years I will have them all again.” ^[70]

According to this statement, the success of an organisation depends on the contribution of employees by use of their key function in productivity and competitiveness of organisations.^[71]

In literature, human capital forms part of the intellectual capital of a company^[72], whereas the term “intellectual human capital” unifies the sum of valuable skills of employees^[73] determined by their commitment and their competences.^[74]

In the context of human capital, employees are regarded as valuable asset in optimising financial results.^[75] In particular, the current process towards a prevailing knowledge-based society implies a growing significance of employees owning crucial know-how valuable for organisational success. With loyal employees being considered key factors contributing to core competences of an organisation by developing and maintaining competitive advantages^[76], intellectual human capital implies the importance of ERM in favour of valuable employees. Conversely, a loss of relevant employees by increasing turnover likewise induces a loss of human capital.

Frequently, organisations’ core competences depend on specific knowledge of individual key employees. For this reason, intellectual human capital is to be combined with traditional management strategies concerning profitability and financial performance.^[77] In addition to that, human capital is to be continuously improved in order to sustain the innovation capacity of an organisation.^[78]

The significance of human capital as core competences varies in particular organisational surroundings.^[79] Especially in the service sector, with employees being the precondition for any added value, e.g. in banks or consulting agencies, intellectual human capital is considered to be an important asset.^[80]

Besides the service sector, also employees in technology businesses use their specific knowledge and create new intellectual property on behalf of the company, e.g. software programs.^[81] For instance, HP experienced increasing turnover rates of highly qualified technicians in Silicon Valley who rather preferred to start their own business.^[82] As a response, HP encouraged outgoing employees in their new venture, but simultaneously offered them the possibility of return to their employment in case of failure. Despite the awareness of employees’ possibility to use their knowledge for own ventures or even competitors, HP indeed appreciated the value of individual intellectual capital and therewith strengthened the quality of their human workforce by welcoming external experiences. In combination with the consciousness of a certain rate of failure of new ventures at this time, HP was able to even benefit from the turnover of their skilled employees to a certain level.

Even though some businesses depend more on human capabilities than others, human workforce is deemed to be the executive component of any business strategy.^[83] Therefore, updating intellectual capital will be a crucial instrument for organisational success in the near future.^[84]

In order to develop human capital, it is to define the abilities which are crucial for the organisational success followed by a determination of related valuable employees. Subsequent employee retention measures will then focus on particular key employees.

Whereas the procedure of identifying key employees will form part of the fourth chapter: “Implementation of Employee Retention Management”, the financial consequences of losing valuable employees will be presented in the following chapter: “Costs of Turnover”.

3.2.2 Costs of Turnover

By taking into account the financial aspects of employee turnover, the consequences of employees’ departure are not entirely negative. Indeed, employee turnover has various positive effects: besides new ideas which will be brought in by new employees, the organisation will benefit from annual bonuses which will not be paid out and from the possibility to reset salaries by declining the starting salary of the successor.^[85]

Nevertheless, the negative impacts of employees’ departure outweigh the positive aspects. For instance, the shortage of skilled labour and associated losses in sales produce costs of approx. € 33 billion in SMEs.^[86]

In terms of turnover, it is to differentiate between three kinds of costs: whereas direct costs result from the resignation of employees and replacement efforts associated therewith, indirect costs are particularly attributed to the performing areas and relate to the time spent by human resource departments to organise the resignation of the outgoing employee as well as to manage the replacement process of a successor.^[87] In addition, opportunity costs define the loss of gain incurred for the employee’s decision of resignation.^[88]

The following illustration lists various examples of direct, indirect and opportunity costs which occur as a result of possible or final resignation of an employee and consequent recruiting expenses for the search of a successor

[...]

---

^[1] Drucker, P. (2002): p. 108; translated by the author, Original: “Wir müssen uns an den Gedanken
gewöhnen, dass Unternehmen weit mehr von ihren besten Mitarbeitern abhängen als die guten
Leute vom Unternehmen.”

^[2] Peter F. Drucker (1909 - 2005) determined the exploration of management during his work as
author, consultant and professor and influenced organisations across all sectors of society. In
1952, he published “The Practice of Management” which led him to be considered as pioneer in
management studies.

^[3] cf. Hawk, E. J., & Sheridan, G. J. (1999): p. 43.

^[4] cf. Hays (2012): p. 20.

^[5] cf. Weitzel, T. et al. (2013): p. 28.

^[6] cf. Towers Perrin (2007): p. 14.

^[7] cf. DGFP (2012): p. 23.

^[8] cf. Oxford Dictionaries (2013): Retention.

^[9] cf. Mathis, R. L. et al. (2013): p. 167; Phillips, J. J., & O. Connell, A. (2003): p. 2.

^[10] cf. Lussier, R. N., & Hendon, J. R. (2012): p. 8.

^[11] cf. Phillips, J. J., & O. Connell, A. (2003): p. 2.

^[12] cf. Knoblauch, R. (2004): p. 103; Business Dictionary (2013): Employee Retention.

^[13] cf. Lohaus, D., & Habermann, W. (2006): pp. 48.

^[14] cf. Kolb, M. (2010): p. 149; Wolf, G. (2013): p. 37.

^[15] cf. Kolb, M. (2010): p. 149.

^[16] cf. Armstrong, M. (2012): p. 205; Sims, R. R. (2002): p. 26.

^[17] cf. DeCenzo, D. A. et al. (2012): p. 4; Ernst & Young (2011): p. 47; Kolb, M. (2010): p. 27.

^[18] cf. Knoche, M. (2007): p. 23.

^[19] cf. Knoche, M. (2007): p. 21.

^[20] cf. Robert Bosch Stiftung (2013): p. 61.

^[21] cf. Bundesministerium des Inneren (2011): pp. 84.

^[22] cf. DGFP (2013): p. 4; Weitzel, T. et al. (2013): p. 26.

^[23] cf. Bonn, G. (2002): p. 38; Sims, R. R. (2002): p. 2.

^[24] cf. DeCenzo, D. A. et al. (2012): p. 4.

^[25] cf. Knoche, M. (2007): p. 17; Robert Bosch Stiftung (2013): p. 29.

^[26] cf. Bundesministerium des Inneren (2011): p. 13; European Foundation for the Improvement of
Living and Working Conditions (2010): p. 2; Meier, J., & Esche, A. (2006): p. 4.

^[27] cf. Bundesministerium des Inneren (2011): p. 22; Robert Bosch Stiftung (2013): p. 20;
Statistische Ämter des Bundes und der Länder (2011): pp. 12; Vaupel, J. W. (2008): p. 47.

^[28] cf. Bundesministerium des Inneren (2011): p. 14; Robert Bosch Stiftung (2013): p. 21;
Statistische Ämter des Bundes und der Länder (2011): p. 10.

^[29] cf. Haufe (2011): p. 3; Robert Bosch Stiftung (2013): p. 9; Sachverständigenrat zur Begutachtung
der gesamtwirtschaftlichen Entwicklung (2011): p. 15; Statistische Ämter des Bundes und der
Länder (2011): p. 6.

^[30] cf. Haufe (2011): p. 3; cf. Robert Bosch Stiftung (2013): p. 9; Statistische Ämter des Bundes und
der Länder (2011): p. 6.

^[31] cf. Sachverständigenrat zur Begutachtung der gesamtwirtschaftlichen Entwicklung (2011): p. 8.

^[32] The figures base on predictions by Statistische Ämter des Bundes und der Länder based on
figures since 2008. Various studies basically agree in these statements though the percentages
vary according to the particular base of calculation.

^[33] cf. Statistische Ämter des Bundes und der Länder (2011): p. 8.

^[34] cf. Statistische Ämter des Bundes und der Länder (2009): p. 11.

^[35] cf. Bundesagentur für Arbeit (2011): p. 11; European Foundation for the Improvement of Living
and Working Conditions (2010): p. 9; Robert Bosch Stiftung (2013): p. 14.

^[36] cf. DGFP (2013): p. 5; Weitzel, T. et al. (2013): p. 26.

^[37] cf. PWC (2011): p. 17.

^[38] cf. Towers Watson (2011): p. 1.

^[39] cf. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (2010): p. 9;
Haufe (2011): p. 3; Vaupel, J. W. (2008): p. 47.

^[40] cf. Olfert, K. (2012): p. 343.

^[41] cf. Kolb, M. (2010): p. 170; Phillips, J. J., & O. Connell, A. (2003): p. 2.

^[42] cf. Cascio, W., & Boudreau, J. W. (2010): p. 83.

^[43] cf. Abelson, M. A., & Baysinger, B. D. (1984): p. 331; Kolb, M. (2010): p. 170; Phillips, J. J., & O.
Connell, A. (2003): p. 24.

^[44] cf. Abelson, M. A., & Baysinger, B. D. (1984): p. 331; Cascio, W., & Boudreau, J. W. (2010):
p. 83; Phillips, J. J., & O. Connell, A. (2003): p. 43.

^[45] cf. Cascio, W., & Boudreau, J. W. (2010): p. 83; Phillips, J. J., & O. Connell, A. (2003): p. 43.

^[46] cf. Arthur, D. (2004): p. 157; Ernst & Young (2011): p. 40; Phillips, J. J., & O. Connell, A. (2003):
pp. 14.

^[47] cf. DGFP (2012): Fluktuation - Bindung durch das Gegenteil verstehen; Hansen, F. (2005): pp.
34; Olfert, K. (2012): p. 344.

^[48] cf. Abelson, M. A., & Baysinger, B. D. (1984): pp. 332; DGFP (2012): Fluktuation - Bindung durch
das Gegenteil verstehen; Hansen, F. (2005): pp. 34; Wolf, G. (2013): p. 156.

^[49] cf. Wolf, G. (2013): p. 40.

^[50] cf. Wolf, G. (2013): p. 50.

^[51] cf. Wolf, G. (2013): p. 224.

^[52] this passage: cf. Hay Group (2013): pp. 2.

^[53] cf. DeCenzo, D. A. et al. (2012): p. 123; Marburger, G. (2004): pp. 302; Olfert, K. (2012): p. 343.

^[54] cf. Gallup (2013): p. 28; Walker, S. (2012): p. 161.

^[55] cf. Towers Perrin (2007): p. 15.

^[56] cf. Gallup (2013): p. 28.

^[57] cf. Bundesagentur für Arbeit (2011): p. 7; Mathis, R. L. et al. (2013): p. 18; Phillips, J. J., & O.
Connell, A. (2003): p. 8; Weitzel, T. et al. (2013): p. 39.

^[58] cf. Bundesagentur für Arbeit (2011): p. 6.

^[59] cf. Bosbach, G. (2011): p. 7; Brenke, K. (2010): pp. 2.

^[60] cf. McKinsey (2011): p. 6.

^[61] cf. Bundesagentur für Arbeit (2011): p. 6; DGFP (2007): p. 6.

^[62] cf. Hays (2012): p. 8.

^[63] cf. Weitzel, T. et al. (2013): p. 26.

^[64] cf. Weitzel, T. et al. (2013): p. 17.

^[65] cf. DGFP (2007): pp. 6.

^[66] cf. Bundesagentur für Arbeit (2011): p. 3; DeCenzo, D. A. et al. (2012): p. 15; Jung, H. (2011):
p. 8.

^[67] cf. DGFP (2007): p. 12; Robert Bosch Stiftung (2013): p. 61.

^[68] cf. DeCenzo, D. A. et al. (2012): p. 131; Phillips, J. J., & O. Connell, A. (2003): p. 323.

^[69] cf. DGFP (2007): p. 10.

^[70] Carnegie, A. cited in: Scriven, D. (2008): p. 163.

^[71] cf. Bonn, G. (2002): p. 38; Knoblauch, R. (2004): p. 102; Mathis, R. L. et al. (2013): p. 6; Robert
Bosch Stiftung (2013): p. 51; Wolf, G. (2013): p. 28.

^[72] cf. Wolf, G. (2013): p. 28.

^[73] cf. Lussier, R. N., & Hendon, J. R. (2012): p. 264; Wolf, G. (2013): p. 28.

^[74] cf. Ulrich, D. (1996): p. 55.

^[75] cf. Armstrong, M. (2012): p. 72; Gallup (2013): p. 39; Kolb, M. (2010): 458; Ulrich, D. (1996):
p. 30.

^[76] cf. Armstrong, M. (2012): p. 72; Knoblauch, R. (2004): p. 102; Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G.
(1990): p. 89; Sims, R. R. (2002): p. 2.

^[77] cf. Ulrich, D. (1996): p. 14.

^[78] cf. Kolb, M. (2010): 458.

^[79] cf. Mathis, R. L. et al. (2013): p. 41.

^[80] cf. Burkart, B., & Schwaab, M. (2004): p. 400.

^[81] cf. Lazear, E. P., & Gibbs, M. (2009): p. 72; Mathis, R. L. et al. (2013): p. 6.

^[82] this passage: cf. Lazear, E. P., & Gibbs, M. (2009): p. 76.

^[83] cf. Mathis, R. L. et al. (2013): p. 41.

^[84] cf. Ulrich, D. (1996): p. 14.

^[85] cf. Hansen, F. (2005): pp. 34; Mathis, R. L. et al. (2013): p. 163.

^[86] cf. Ernst & Young (2011): p. 9.

^[87] cf. Armstrong, M. (2012): p. 244; Meifert, M. T. (2013): pp. 294; Stuehrenberg, L. (2004): pp. 38.

^[88] cf. Armstrong, M. (2012): p. 244; Meifert, M. T. (2013): p. 295.