Unpredictable schedules are so disruptive to the lives of employees that even 30 days of high shift variability in a year increases the chances a worker will quit by 20%, according to a new study from Wharton experts.
Employers use just-in-time scheduling to cover peak demand and raise both productivity and profits, but they may want to reconsider such policies in light of the research, which points to schedule volatility as a major factor in employee turnover.
“Operationally, a just-in-time approach sounds like a good thing, but that’s assuming it’s not going to lead to costs elsewhere,” said Wharton professor of operations, information and decisions Hummy Song, co-author of the study. “When you think of all the costs associated with high rates of turnover and quitting — the recruiting, the training, and the time it takes for new hires to ramp up their productivity — it’s quite substantial.”
It’s also a cost that most firms don’t appear to be taking seriously, the scholars said, based on their interviews with industry leaders and a wide review of the literature.
“We think companies are not internalizing the implications of schedule volatility on turnover,” said Alon Bergman, co-author and Wharton assistant professor of health care management. “When large corporations think about changing the benefit structure or the pay, they make calculations to think about how that could affect turnover. But nobody quantifies the impact that schedule volatility has on workers’ decisions to quit.”
The study, titled “’I Quit’: Schedule Volatility as a Driver of Employee Turnover,” was published in March in the journal Manufacturing & Service Operations Management. It was also co-authored by Guy David, who is a Wharton health care management professor and chair of the department.
In their paper, the professors examined data on salaried, full-time nurses in the home health care industry. But they believe their findings directly apply to other sectors with shift work or with salaried employees who conduct field visits, such as sales representatives. The research is especially meaningful on the heels of last year’s Great Resignation, when more than 4 million U.S. employees quit or changed jobs, and in the current tight labor market.
“We started this project before ‘Great Resignation’ was even a phrase. To our surprise, it was very interesting to see over the course of our work how widespread these issues of turnover became,” Song said. “Alon and I care about doing work that is practically relevant, and that’s one of the reasons we wanted to study this. As we got deeper into the pandemic and saw a lot of industries struggling, it brought the relevance to the forefront.”
“Operationally, a just-in-time approach sounds like a good thing, but that’s assuming it’s not going to lead to costs elsewhere,” said Wharton professor of operations, information and decisions Hummy Song, co-author of the study. “When you think of all the costs associated with high rates of turnover and quitting — the recruiting, the training, and the time it takes for new hires to ramp up their productivity — it’s quite substantial.”
It’s also a cost that most firms don’t appear to be taking seriously, the scholars said, based on their interviews with industry leaders and a wide review of the literature.
“We think companies are not internalizing the implications of schedule volatility on turnover,” said Alon Bergman, co-author and Wharton assistant professor of health care management. “When large corporations think about changing the benefit structure or the pay, they make calculations to think about how that could affect turnover. But nobody quantifies the impact that schedule volatility has on workers’ decisions to quit.”
The study, titled “’I Quit’: Schedule Volatility as a Driver of Employee Turnover,” was published in March in the journal Manufacturing & Service Operations Management. It was also co-authored by Guy David, who is a Wharton health care management professor and chair of the department.
In their paper, the professors examined data on salaried, full-time nurses in the home health care industry. But they believe their findings directly apply to other sectors with shift work or with salaried employees who conduct field visits, such as sales representatives. The research is especially meaningful on the heels of last year’s Great Resignation, when more than 4 million U.S. employees quit or changed jobs, and in the current tight labor market.
“We started this project before ‘Great Resignation’ was even a phrase. To our surprise, it was very interesting to see over the course of our work how widespread these issues of turnover became,” Song said. “Alon and I care about doing work that is practically relevant, and that’s one of the reasons we wanted to study this. As we got deeper into the pandemic and saw a lot of industries struggling, it brought the relevance to the forefront.”