Ask The Headhunter®: Exit Interview, Stage Right

Start Here

The Update

Features

How-To

Specials

Resources

Partners

Business

Exit Interview, Stage Right
By Nick Corcodilos

Exit interviews fascinate me like cockroaches do. An exit interview is the meeting a company's human resources department has with an employee who has been terminated or who has resigned. Like the Top Ten Stupid Interview Questions, exit interviews are the cockroaches of the human resources world: no one knows why they exist, no one can justify or eliminate them, and they will likely survive into the third millennium.

While most companies still conduct exit interviews, many human resources managers tell me they don't bother with them any more. For reasons I'll outline in this article, I think employers should be embarrassed to conduct exit interviews and employees should be smart enough to decline them.

The ostensible objective of the exit interview is to help the company "improve the way it does things" so fifty more employees won't quit in the coming weeks. In other words, If you'll just tell us why you are resigning, we'll see to it that no one else ever has to resign for those same reasons. Why, we'll change our company for the better, and thank you for your candor.

The credibility gap
According to a white paper titled "Exit Interviews" by Nina Drake and Ian Robb from the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM), "exit interviews represent a prime opportunity to gain candid information on employment conditions" within a company. This is purely wishful thinking, and very naïve at best. Exit interviews invade an employee's privacy and insult his intelligence. Employers can't possibly believe they're going to get credible information in such a meeting.

Invading privacy
The decision to quit a job (or the reaction to being fired) is personal and often complex. I believe it is utterly presumptuous of a company to require an employee to explain it. Unless the employee wants to talk about it, it's not the company's business. If the company had any right to this information, it was only while the employee was a committed member of the team, not after he has decided to leave. Any comments a departing employee makes – whether they are positive or negative – will be of questionable value. Is he being polite to avoid burning a bridge? Or, is he voicing exaggerated complaints because he's in an emotional turmoil?

An exit interview is insulting
The insult of the exit interview lies in the very questions that are asked. They are useless because it's too late to benefit the employee, and they are pointless because most managers never find out what the employee had to say. The SHRM white paper goes on to suggest that, "If you want to obtain factual and candid information, confidentiality or at least anonymity is important … Explaining to the terminating employee that his or her remarks will only be used as part of a general consensus [sic] and that no employee will be identified by name will help reassure the employee."

What is the point of baring your soul in an exit interview if, under the guise of protecting the employee from retribution by a manager, the human resources department renders your "factual and candid information" anonymous? (In Death By Lethal Reputation I outline how ineffectual HR practices like exit interviews can contribute to the demise of an entire company.)

Consider some typical exit interview questions:

Before deciding to leave, did you explore the possibility of a transfer?
Is there something you didn't like about your boss?
How would you rate our work environment?
Were you happy with your salary and benefits?
What did you think about your performance and salary reviews?
How should we change the way we do things to avoid losing other good employees?

These questions all have one thing in common: they should have been asked six months earlier because these issues all combine to determine the quality of the employee's life at the company. But, no one ever bothered to ask these critical questions while they mattered, except perhaps the headhunter who recruited away the candidate.

The ultimate insult lies in the fact that the employee's manager isn't in the meeting. If a company really wants a heart-to-heart, it should be a mutually-agreed-upon, meaningful, above-board discussion (no one says it has to be easy) between people who have worked together, not a cold debriefing after the fact by HR. (Maybe there's a bizarre logic to this: the HR department was the first to interrogate you before you were hired, so it should have the last crack at you, too.)

HR may argue that gathering such information – even if it is used only in aggregate, impersonal form – helps a company improve its employee relations, but that doesn't justify the risks an exit interview creates for the employee.

Advice for the employee
If you have resigned your job or been fired, be aware that you are not required to answer any questions during an exit interview. I can tell you from experience that a firm, polite "No comment" from the employee is usually respected by the HR rep conducting the interview. Even if you cooperate and answer the questions, you absolutely should not agree to sign the notes the HR rep has taken down during your meeting. (Being asked to sign the notes is common.) You could be signing away your rights.

Risks vs. benefits
If you are a departing employee, an exit interview offers you no significant benefits, other than perhaps allowing you to "unload" on a seemingly sympathetic HR rep. To the contrary, it represents a big risk.

Here's what the SHRM has to say to employers on this point: "Good exit interview practices may just help you avoid costly legal action by a disgruntled employee." What this means is that whatever you say in that exit interview can be used against you later in court. That sympathetic HR rep is a potential witness against you, and her notes are "Exhibit A."

As for confidentiality, the exit interview notes may be kept under lock and key by the HR rep, at least until she moves on to another job. Imagine a small company environment where the owner of the business (to whom you used to report directly) steps in to temporarily cover the HR function. Suddenly, the one person you never expected would read your comments is reading them with great interest. Did you say anything that might compromise the quality of a reference you're expecting?

But, you might argue, you said only nice things. In that case, why tell them to an HR rep? Go tell your boss, in the privacy of his office, where your comments will matter and your great relationship can be solidified. Likewise, if you really want to offer candid constructive criticism and suggestions, do it "off line" and in person – but be fully aware that you're still taking a risk. (My advice: contain your thoughts until two weeks after you've left. That will give you the benefit of time to consider the effect. If you still feel you want to share them, do it then.)

The best time for an employee to discuss concerns, dissatisfactions and suggestions with his employer is while he is a committed employee, not on the way out the door. There is no upside for an employee in doing an exit interview, other than having the chance to vent. And the potential risks are dramatic.

The employer's side
If you are an employer, reconsider the exit interview entirely. Common sense tells us that the emotional stress of parting company (under even the best circumstances) can stimulate wildly inaccurate and unreliable statements from both parties. If you think the information the interview provides will be useful, then ask every employee those questions every six months – not when they resign. The insight you garner can then be used to actually help the employee and your company, too.

A relationship between employer and employee requires frequent, candid exchanges about all the topics normally covered in an exit interview. Regularly discussing these issues can help you keep your best employees, and it can help you improve the way you run your company. That's the point, right? If you are concerned about maintaining a history of employee-relations information that you might need in the event of litigation, gather it responsibly.

Granted, if a company takes exit interviews seriously and actually uses the information effectively and responsibly, the practice can be useful to the company. But an exit interview protocol that leaves the employee's manager out of the picture is irresponsible while giving the appearance of being "non-threatening." And if HR conducts the meeting, it remains a "no-win" for the employee who is leaving.

Smart HR managers are coming to recognize that the post hoc debriefing of employees isn't a valid or reliable way to solve problems. Rather, the very practice of exit interviews is a symptom of larger problems within a company's HR philosophy.

Exit in respectful silence
As an employee, make sure you understand what an exit interview is, and how your comments might and might not be used, before you start baring your soul (or placating your employer with politeness). As an employer, learn to respect a departing employee's privacy and intelligence. Don't put him through a wringer just because "that's what we do."

Please tell us what you think of this article.