University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Employee churn in afterschool care: an evaluation study of manager influences on employee retention and turnover

(USC Thesis Other)

Employee churn in afterschool care: an evaluation study of manager influences on employee retention and turnover

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: EMPLOYEE CHURN 1 Employee Churn in Afterschool Care: An Evaluation Study of Manager Influences on Employee Retention and Turnover Michele Wilkens A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF EDUCATION December 2017 Copyright 2017 Michele Wilkens EMPLOYEE CHURN 2 DEDICATION To both my parents, for believing in me every day of my entire life. To my mom, for gifting me with her insatiable desire to learn, sheer grit to rise above anything, humor to get through it all, and an unwavering focus on what matters most. To my dad, who passed away during this degree pursuit, for cheerleading my presumption of zero boundaries and setting an example of remarkable endurance and accompanying goofiness that continue to keep all things achievable and joyful. To my teenage daughters, Tess and Ellie, who happily shared in this journey as we supported each other in our parallel academic endeavors, flopping on beds at the end of long days talking together about the week’s papers, tests, and grades – you two are everything. EMPLOYEE CHURN 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Dedication 2 List of Tables 6 List of Figures 7 Abstract 10 Chapter One: Overview of the Study 11 Introduction to the Problem of Practice 11 Organizational Context and Mission 11 Organizational Goal 15 Related Literature 15 Importance of Evaluation 17 Description of Stakeholder Groups 18 Stakeholder Group for the Study 19 Purpose of the Project and Questions 20 General Conceptual and Methodological Framework 20 Key Definitions 21 Organization of the Paper 22 Chapter Two: Review of the Literature 23 Employee Turnover 23 Afterschool Industry 25 Employee Turnover Causes and Correlations 27 Implications of Employee Turnover 36 Area Manager Influences on Employee Turnover 43 EMPLOYEE CHURN 4 Conceptual Framework for the Study Integrating Knowledge, Motivation, 65 and Organizational Influences Conclusion 67 Chapter Three: Methods 69 Participating Stakeholders 69 Data Collection and Instrumentation 75 Data Analysis 82 Credibility and Trustworthiness 86 Validity and Reliability 87 Ethics 89 Chapter Four: Results and Findings 92 Results and Findings for Research Question 1: KCI’s Current Status with 93 Regard to Employee Retention Survey, Interview, and Observation Participants 103 Results and Findings for Research Question 2: Area Manager Retention 106 Influences Summary and Implications 161 Chapter Five: Solutions and Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plans 165 Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences 165 Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan 185 Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach 201 Limitations and Delimitations 202 Future Study 204 Conclusion 204 EMPLOYEE CHURN 5 References 206 Appendices Appendix A: Survey Protocol 221 Appendix B: Survey Results 228 Appendix C: Interview Protocol 254 Appendix D: Observation Protocol 258 Appendix E: Sample Post-Training Survey Items 262 Appendix F: Sample Blended Evaluation Items 264 EMPLOYEE CHURN 6 LIST OF TABLES Table Title Page 1 Kids' Club Incorporated (KCI) Employee Demographic Data, July 2017 13 2 Summary of Assumed Needs for Knowledge, Skills, Motivation, 61 and Organizational Issues 3 General Literature Summary of Assumed Influences on Employee Turnover 63 4 Higher Turnover Months, Year-to-Year Comparison 99 5 Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations 167 6 Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations 173 7 Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations 177 8 Level 4 - Results and Leading Indicators: Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods 188 for External and Internal Outcomes 9 Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Area Managers 190 10 Required Drivers to Support Area Managers’ Critical Behaviors 191 11 Components of Learning for the Program 195 12 Components to Measure Reactions to the Program 197 13 Key Performance Indicators for Internal Reporting and Accountability 199 EMPLOYEE CHURN 7 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Title Page 1 Conceptual Framework for the Study Integrating Knowledge, Motivation, 66 and Organizational Influences 2 Turnover Totals: Field Employees Combined and by Role, August 15, 2016 95 to May 30, 2017 3 Year-to-Year Turnover Change: Field Employees Combined 96 4 Turnover Performance Compared to Organizational Goal 97 5 Turnover by Month: All Field Employees Combined, August 2016 to May 98 2017 6 Highest Turnover Months Historically, 2013-14, 2015-16, 2016-17 99 (2014-15 n.d.) 7 Voluntary versus Involuntary Field Employee Turnover, August 2016 to 100 May 2017 8 Full- versus Part-Time Field Employee Turnover, August 2016 to May 2017 100 9 Stable versus Unstable Field Employee Population, 2016-17 School Year 102 10 Survey Participant Demographics: Area Manager Position Tenure 103 11 Survey Participant Demographics: Area Manager Program Tenure 104 12 Interview Participant Demographics: Representative Sample of Area 105 Managers by Position Tenure and Program Tenure 13 Frequency of Reported Turnover Causes for All Industries versus Area 110 Managers’ Own Team (Survey Responses, Participants Ranked Top Five Among Choices Provided) EMPLOYEE CHURN 8 14 Typicality of Reported Turnover Causes for All Industries Versus Area 111 Managers’ Own Team (Interview Results, Responses Not Prompted) 15 Frequency of Area Manager Selection of Management Issues as a Top Cause 112 for Employee Turnover: All Industries versus Area Managers’ Own Teams (Interview and Survey Results Combined) 16 Area Manager Perception of Turnover Consequences for Key Stakeholder 114 Groups (Survey Results) 17 Typicality of Reported Turnover Consequences for Key Stakeholders 114 (Interview Results) 18 Perceived Turnover Consequences for Program Children 116 19 Perceived Turnover Consequences for Program Families 118 20 Perceived Turnover Consequences for the Organization 120 21 Perceived Turnover Consequences for Society 122 22 Typicality of Reported Turnover Consequences for Additional Groups 124 (Interview and Observation Results, Non-Prompted) 23 Typicality of Turnover Consequences: (Survey and Interview Results, 125 Prompted and Non-Prompted Responses Combined) 24 Metacognitive Knowledge: Discrepant Responses Regarding Reflection on 129 Turnover (Survey and Interview Results) 25 Procedural Knowledge: Application of Retention Strategies (Survey Results) 131 26 Procedural Knowledge Volume and Sources: How Many Retention 132 Strategies AMs Know and Where They Learned Them (Interview Results) 27 Expectancy Value: Perceived Cost of Investing in Retention Activities 135 (Survey Results) EMPLOYEE CHURN 9 28 Attribution: Typicality of Internal versus External Locus of Control for 138 Turnover (Observation Results) 29 Attribution: Typicality of Internal versus External Locus of Control for 139 Turnover (Interview Results) 30 Attribution: Typicality of Internal versus External Locus of Control for 139 Turnover: New and Returning Area Managers (Interview Results) 31 Attribution: Perceived Locus of Control of Area Manager Influence on 141 Retention (Survey Results) 32 Organizational Communication of Managers’ Importance in Retention 144 (Survey and Observation Results) 33 Accountability for Turnover (Survey and Interview Results) 145 34 Peer Accountability for Turnover (Survey Results) 146 35 New Retention Strategy Encouragement Survey and Interview Results) 148 36 Awareness of Organizational Retention Goals (Survey and Interview Results) 150 37 Area Manager Proclamation of Own Retention Goals (Survey and Interview 151 Results) 38 Organizational Incentives to Focus on Retention (Survey Results) 153 39 Formative Feedback Provided by the Organization AND Resources for 156 Measuring Retention Strategy Efficacy (Survey and Interview Results; Identical Survey Results for Two Items) 40 Training Resources (Survey and Interview Results) 160 41 Compensation Resources (Survey and Interview Results 160 EMPLOYEE CHURN 10 ABSTRACT This study examined the status of field employee turnover at a national afterschool program provider in relation to its turnover improvement goal and assessed the knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational influences of those with the greatest impact on retention and turnover - frontline Area Managers (AMs) who directly supervise afterschool staff. Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis served as the general conceptual and methodological framework for the study. A mixed methods convergent parallel study was conducted using document analysis, surveys, interviews, and observations. Document analysis revealed high employee turnover in the school year of study (62%), far surpassing industry norms and prior year performance. However, analysis also found high employee retention (74%), which can coexist with high turnover when most staff are retained, but a smaller segment repeatedly churns over the same period. Specifically, recurring turnover among 37% of the organization’s field employee roles was found to be the source of its high turnover rate, while 63% of roles remained filled and therefore stable across the school year. Gap analysis of quantitative and qualitative survey results triangulated with interview and observation data illuminated barriers to AM success with retention and turnover. Barriers included limited knowledge of factors related to turnover, perception of minimal organizational focus on and resources for retention, significant external locus of control over turnover, and lack of ownership and accountability for turnover. The implications of these findings signal the risk of continued high turnover, where AMs could remain disempowered due to lack of critical knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational resources for retention. The study concludes with recommendations for context-specific solutions grounded in literature and in the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016), as well as an integrated implementation and evaluation plan, strengths and weaknesses of the study, limitations and delimitations, and recommendations for future study. EMPLOYEE CHURN 11 CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY Introduction to the Problem of Practice For the better part of the past century, the childcare industry has recorded high employee turnover rates, marking a significant and long-standing pain point for the profession (Whitebook, Phillips, & Howes, 2014; Whitebook & Sakai, 2003). The U.S. Department of Labor (n.d.) defines employee turnover as separation from a workplace, whether voluntary or involuntary. Documented since the 1930s, research spanning public, private, and military childcare settings has placed annual employee turnover rates between 25% and 300%, with current global averages between 30% and 40% (Campbell, Appelbaum, Martinson, & Martin, 2000; Choy & Haukka, 2010; First Research Industry Profile, 2015; Michel, 2011; Nitardy, 2008; U.S. Department of Labor, n.d.). While across industries, employee turnover is cited by Human Resource professionals as their most important organizational challenge (Society for Human Resource Management, 2015), childcare turnover rates run 13% to 23% higher than those for all industries combined (Compensation Force, 2015). Regardless of historical reform initiatives, childcare turnover has been consistently attributed to low wages, limited hours and benefits, and work- related stress (Choy & Haukka, 2010; Cole, 2011; First Research Industry Profile, 2015; Floyd & Phillips, 2013; Michel, 2011; Nitardy, 2008; Whitebook et al., 2014). Organizational Context and Mission Kids' Club Incorporated (KCI) is an international student enrichment and childcare provider with employee retention challenges that mirror historical industry-wide trends of high turnover. According to KCI's website 1 , KCI's mission is to foster a love of learning, support __________________________ 1 To maintain anonymity for the organization of study, the website is not cited. EMPLOYEE CHURN 12 schools, and give parents peace of mind. As a for-profit corporation that partners with school districts across the United States and Canada to serve working families, KCI provides on-site before- and afterschool childcare programs, enrichment classes, recess programs, preschool education, and summer camps for students from preschool through eighth grade. Established in 2011 in a large Midwestern city, KCI is funded by investors and tuition-paying parents. A portion of program revenue is typically shared with partnering school districts per contract to offset facilities usage or for the school to use for student scholarships, creating a no cost afterschool solution for districts. Upon launch in 2011, KCI served about 200 students in a single urban area. KCI has since evolved beyond the start-up phase of business to growth phase. For 2015 and 2016, KCI was named among the fastest growing companies in the U.S. As of fall 2017, KCI will serve over 30,000 students in over 200 programs across ten states and Canada. KCI's growth focus is grounded in the pursuit of mission fulfillment via profitability for long- term fiscal viability, with employee salaries its greatest annual expenditure. As of the end of the 2016-17 school year, Kids’ Club Incorporated employees numbered 405 and spanned eight departmental teams: Executive, Operations, Human Resources, Customer Service, Sales, Education and Training, Marketing, and Finance. Data from the organization's July 2017 Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) report, as seen in Table 1, show Executives made up 1% of the company, with 40% female, 60% male, and 100% Caucasian. Executive ages ranged from mid-30s to mid-50s. Managers made up 7% of the company, with 93% female, 7% male. KCI employees in this EEO category refer to Directors/department heads, central office staff, and Area Managers who serve in field leadership. Of these managers, 60% were Caucasian, 20% were Black or African American, 7% were Hispanic or Latino, 10% were two or more races, 3% were Asian, and 0% were American Indian or Alaskan Native. These employees ranged in age from 20s to 50s, with Area Managers being primarily older Millennial Generation EMPLOYEE CHURN 13 (early 30s) and younger Generation X (mid- to late-30s) employees. Field Professionals, KCI’s Program Managers, Educators, and Coaches who work at school-based programs with children, made up 90% of the company, with 78% female and 22% male. Among Field Professionals, 30% were Caucasian, 40% were Black or African American, 19% were Hispanic or Latino, 5% were Asian, 5% were two or more races, and 1% were American Indian or Alaskan Native. Field Professionals are primarily made up of Millennial Generation employees under age 35. An additional 4 employees, or 1% of total employees, made up the sales team, who were 75% female and 25% male, and 75% Caucasian and 25% African American. Two female Administrative employees, 50% Black or African American, 50% Latina, made up the final 1% of total employees. Table 1 Kids' Club Incorporated (KCI) Employee Demographic Data, July 2017 Job category Hispanic or Latino White Black or African American Asian American Indian or Alaskan Native Two or more races Total Executives 0 M, 0 F 3 M, 2 F 0 M, 0 F 0 M, 0 F 0 M, 0 F 0 M, 0 F 5 Managers 0 M, 2 F 1 M, 17 F 0 M, 6 F 1 M, 0 F 0 M, 0 F 0 M, 3 F 30 Field Professionals 8 M, 60 F 33 M, 75 F 25 M, 122 F 9 M, 9 F 0 M, 3 F 4 M, 16 F 364 Sales 0 M, 0 F 1 M, 2 F 0 M, 1 F 0 M, 0 F 0 M, 0 F 0 M, 0 F 4 Admini- strative 0 M, 1 F 0 M, 0 F 0 M, 1 F 0 M, 0 F 0 M, 0 F 0 M, 0 F 2 TOTAL 8 M, 63 F 38 M, 96 F 25 M, 130 F 10 M, 9 F 0 M, 3 F 4 M, 19 F 405 Note: M = male. F = female. EMPLOYEE CHURN 14 With regard to employee turnover, KCI's historical records focus on the aforementioned Field Professionals, the 90% of the company comprised of Program Managers, Educators, and Coaches, who directly carry out children's programming daily. For school year 2014-2015, KCI recorded a field employee turnover rate of 43%. For school year 2015-2016, KCI recorded a field employee turnover rate of 37%. The former exceeds global averages previously stated, while the latter falls within and on the higher end of said averages. In addition to prior description of this group as predominantly female Millennial generation employees, they are largely part-time workers scheduled under 30 hours per week, and thus not benefits eligible. While different geographic market compensation rates reflect cost of living accordingly, Program Managers (33% of this group) earn an average of $20.00 per hour and work closer to if not full-time hours, and Educators and Coaches (67% of this group) make an average of $14.50 per hour and are typically part-time. The spectrum of employees spans those who are 18 with no professional experience to those who are older Millennials earning graduate degrees. However, workers are most typically young adults with second jobs or college students working towards degrees related to childcare (education, recreation). According to historical KCI turnover reports, the top termination reason recorded by KCI Area Managers for their separated employees is voluntary resignation, which does not yield insight into specific employee reasons. Other top reasons coded by managers include moving out of the area, personal reasons, and securing other/full-time employment. The last reason reflects that, while the organization works to expand offerings within each school district, which then provide employees more hours and income, the majority of employees remain part-time due to the limited out-of-school-time hours of student enrichment programming. EMPLOYEE CHURN 15 Organizational Goal Now in its sixth year and rapidly growing internationally with expansion into 10 states and Canada, Kids’ Club Incorporated seeks market durability, whereupon combined earnings will exceed combined expenses, yielding profitability in pursuit of long-term mission fulfillment. Because field staff-related expenses, such as recruitment, onboarding, training, and salaries, are KCI's greatest expenditures, improving field employee turnover is integral to organizational endurance. Failure to improve turnover will reduce KCI's return on investment (ROI) in employees due to ongoing costs of hiring and training replacements. Thus, KCI's organizational turnover goal going into the 2016-17 school year of this study was to, by Spring 2017, improve field employee turnover from an overall 37% turnover rate for all field employees to a 30% turnover rate for Program Managers and a 35% turnover rate for Educators and Coaches. The Director of Human Resources collaborated with the Chief Services Officer to develop this goal in alignment with executive expressed targets to achieve a gross profit margin of 31.4% with corporate expenses less than 35% of revenue by the end of the 2016-17 school year. Gross profit margin is a percentage representing what revenue is left over after a company pays for the cost of goods sold or services provided (InvestorWords, n.d.). Related Literature As previously stated, employee turnover has been a long-standing, well-documented struggle for the childcare industry over the past century. Regardless of childcare setting, persistent employee realities of low pay, limited hours and benefits, and high job-related stress have created significant and unrelenting turnover rates currently averaging 30% to 40% globally (Campbell et al., 2000; Choy & Haukka, 2010; Cole; 2011; First Research Industry Profile, 2015; Floyd & Phillips, 2013; Michel, 2011; Nitardy, 2008; U.S. Department of Labor, n.d.; Whitebook et al., 2014). Turnover data specific to the out-of-school time portion of the industry EMPLOYEE CHURN 16 served by KCI, often referred to as the afterschool industry, is limited. However sparse, such data is important to review, in that afterschool work differs from most childcare work in its primarily part-time hours and workforce. One large-scale study of the afterschool profession segment provides insight into turnover challenges that parallel the childcare industry as a whole. Conducted between 2005 and 2006, the National AfterSchool Association (NAA) and research partners generated a workforce report that, in part, addressed employee turnover. While the study had a disproportionate number of full-time, salaried workers among its over 4,300 respondents (two-thirds), as compared to the far more common part-time, hourly workers who make up 67% - 80% of the workforce, according to studies in California and Massachusetts (Dennehy & Noam, 2005; NAA, 2006), relevant information regarding turnover can be extracted. The NAA study (2006) found an environment of substantial turnover intent, where 60% of all part-time workers planned to leave the field within three years, and 75% of workers under 25 years old intended to be in the field less than three years’ total. Preceding NAA's findings, the 2005 Massachusetts After-School Research Study (MARS) produced similar results, where part-time afterschool staff demonstrated average industry tenure of 2.8 years (Dennehy & Noam, 2005). The NAA report (2006) also gathered employee-stated reasons for limited industry tenure and high turnover intent, with two primary reasons for planned departure emerging. Twenty- three percent of respondents cited personal life changes, such as marriage and relocation, as the driving force behind turnover intent, while the same percentage indicated desire for higher pay outside the industry (NAA, 2006). While organizations lack control over personal life changes, compensation is within their purview. Compensation for part-time afterschool workers was found to mirror the historically low-paying childcare industry, averaging $9.25 per hour, with only 11.2% holding medical benefits (NAA, 2006). MARS also found widespread low and five- EMPLOYEE CHURN 17 year stagnant wages, with about three-quarters of employees lacking benefits (Dennehy & Noam, 2005). A 2016 NAA workforce survey (NAA, 2017) of 2,266 afterschool employees countered both the 2006 NAA and MARS reports, claiming to dispel short-term, part-time, low-paid afterschool employees in lieu of longer-term, full-time, salaried workers. However, the 2016 study, like the 2006 study, experienced overrepresentation of full-time, salaried staff, where 78% of respondents were full-time, and 70% were salaried, while only 32% were program directors, and 10% were frontline staff. Individual organization turnover rates were not gathered as part of the NAA or any other known national study, and thus, industry-wide turnover rates have yet to be defined. However, MARS captured specific organizational turnover rates that averaged 35% across the state (Dennehy & Noam, 2005). Thus, afterschool turnover data yields specific insights with regard to industry tenure and otherwise falls into alignment with long-standing rates and causes across childcare. Importance of Evaluation The problem of employee turnover is important to solve due to its multi-layered impact on childcare organizations, the families and children they serve, the workforce, and society as a whole. For organizations, long-term viability depends upon healthy return on investment (ROI), which is jeopardized by turnover due to the costs of recruiting, hiring, and training replacements, as well as temporarily diminished quality, productivity, and client relationships (Abbasi & Hollman, 2000; Alkahtani, 2015; Glebbeek & Bax, 2004; Gong, 2012; Hale-Jinks, Knopf, & Kemple, 2006; Lee & Mitchell, 2013; Nitardy, 2008). For families, fiscal efficiency by childcare organizations is of particular importance, as poor ROI drives parent-paid tuition upward, directly impacting family participation (Afterschool Alliance [AA], 2015; Child Care Aware, 2014). This is especially problematic when 75% of childcare costs already fall on families regardless of EMPLOYEE CHURN 18 income, and because government assistance falls short for many who qualify by federal guidelines (AA, 2014; Earle, 2009). For children, employee turnover has been found to result in poor quality care and negative impact on cognitive development, emotional attachment, security, and long-term mental wellbeing (Campbell et al., 2000; Hale et al., 2006; Michel, 2011; Nitardy, 2008; Whitebook et al., 2014; Zigler, Marsland, & Lord, 2009). For the workforce and society, afterschool program participation has been linked to parent productivity and job stability (AA, 2014; The Journal of Employee Assistance, 2007; Weitzman, Mijanovich, Silver, & Brazill, 2008). Conversely, lack of afterschool program enrollment interferes with parent job performance, costing organizations an estimated $50 to $300 billion annually in lost productivity (The Journal of Employee Assistance, 2007). In other words, afterschool care contributes to essential stability for working families in ways that extend to broader society (Earle, 2009). For Kids' Club Incorporated, failure to accomplish the turnover improvement goal would mean continued significant expense to recruit, hire, and train replacements. This would diminish ROI in employees, adversely affecting the organization's ability to achieve its gross profit margin target of 31.4%, and ultimately threatening KCI's pursuit of market durability and lasting mission fulfillment. Thus, based upon the direct risks turnover poses, improving employee turnover at KCI is critical to the organization, children, families, and society. Description of Stakeholder Groups Kids’ Club Inc. (KCI) stakeholder groups at the time of this study were: central office staff, field leadership, and field employees. Central office staff was comprised of executives (Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating Officer, and Chief Services Officer), department directors (Operations, Marketing, Education and Training, Sales, Human Resources, Finance, Customer Service), and department support personnel. KCI departments coordinate efforts to EMPLOYEE CHURN 19 achieve organizational goals. For instance, the acquisition of one new client contract involves all departments at different stages over many months, from initial winter sales pitch to fall program launch. KCI field leadership included Regional Directors, who oversee large geographic territories, such as an urban area with a dense market, or many smaller markets spread over multiple states, and the Area Managers they supervise, who oversee several programs in one large school district or geographically adjacent districts. Regional Directors and Area Managers manage their territories with special focus on client relationships, fiscal efficiencies, growth, and for Area Managers, direct field employee supervision. Field employees at the time of study were Program Managers, who oversee one program location, as well as their program employees, who include Educators and Coaches. Field employees carry out the day-to-day operations of enrichment programs with students, families, and school partners at school locations across North America. Stakeholder Group for the Study While multiple KCI stakeholder groups had potential to contribute to achieving the goal of improving field employee turnover, field leaders were selected as the focus for this study because they act as the bridge between KCI's central office, where policies, procedures, and resources are established, and the field, where the challenge of employee turnover exists. Area Managers, in particular, have the closest, most frequent contact with field employees and thereby possessed significant potential for impacting goal achievement. Therefore, it was important to evaluate Area Managers' knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational influences with field employee turnover, which is why the stakeholders of focus for this study were KCI Area Managers (AMs). EMPLOYEE CHURN 20 Purpose of the Project and Questions The purpose of this project was to evaluate Kids' Club Incorporated (KCI) Area Managers' knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational influences related to achieving the organizational goal of improving upon a 37% employee turnover rate. The questions that guided this study were the following: 1. In school year 2016-17, what is the gap between KCI's field employee turnover and the organizational goal of improving upon a 37% overall turnover rate to a 30% turnover rate for Program Managers and a 35% turnover rate for Educators and Coaches by Spring 2017? 2. What are KCI Area Managers' knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational influences related to achieving the turnover improvement goal? 3. What are the recommended solutions to close the knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational gaps with regard to employee turnover at KCI? General Conceptual and Methodological Framework Clark and Estes' (2008) gap analysis was utilized as the general conceptual framework for this study to explore possible causes of and solutions for employee turnover at Kids' Club Incorporated (KCI). This framework serves to identify performance gaps that inhibit organizational goal attainment. By clearly assessing the nature of the gap between actual and desired performance, Clark and Estes (2008) believe specific causes and appropriate solutions may be identified, thus lending to organizational goal achievement. The authors identify three factors for examination in gap analysis: employee knowledge and skills, employee motivation, and organizational factors. Employee knowledge and skills refers to whether workers know how to reach performance targets. Employee motivation means the extent to which workers choose to work towards performance targets, persist through difficulties throughout, and exert mental EMPLOYEE CHURN 21 effort to achieve goals. Organizational barriers pertain to strategy, processes, or resources that help or impede workers' progress and thus goal attainment (Clark & Estes, 2008). The methodological framework for the study was a convergent parallel mixed methods case study. Area Managers' knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational barriers that impact KCI's turnover improvement goal achievement were drawn from quantitative surveys, qualitative observation and interviews, and historical document analysis. Comprehensive research-based solutions and evaluation strategies are recommended in the final chapter of this dissertation. Key Definitions Retention: The number of employees in position over an entire specified time period from beginning to end. (Society for Human Resource Management, n.d.) Retention rate calculation: The number of individual employees who remained employed for the entire measurement period divided by the number of employees at the start of the measurement period multiplied by 100. When determining how many employees remained employed for the entire measurement period, only those employees who were employed on both the first and last day of the period are included. (Society for Human Resource Management, n.d.) Retention calculation example: At a company with 10 positions, 4 employees remained in position from June 1 to June 30. This resulted in a 40% employee retention rate. Turnover: Separation of an employee from an establishment (voluntary, involuntary, or other). (Bureau of Labor Statistics, n.d.). Turnover rate calculation: The number of separations during a time period divided by the average number of employees for the same time period multiplied by 100. (Society for Human Resource Management, n.d.) Turnover rate calculation example: At a company with an average number of employees of 10, 6 employees left during the month of June. This resulted in a 60% turnover rate. EMPLOYEE CHURN 22 Example of when retention and turnover are inverse of one another: At a company with an average of 10 employees, 6 remained in position from June 1 to June 30, while 6 left and were replaced. This resulted in a 40% retention rate (10/4x100) and a 60% turnover rate (10/6x100). Example of when retention and turnover are not inverse of one another: At a company with an average of 10 employees, 4 remained in position from June 1 to June 30, while 3 left and were replaced within the month of June. Another 3 left and were replaced by workers who then also left within the month and were replaced for a total of 9 employee departures in June. This resulted in a 40% retention rate (10/4x100) and a 90% turnover rate (10/9x100). Example of when turnover can exceed 100%: At a company with an average of 10 employees, 7 left and were replaced, while another 3 left and were replaced by workers who then also left and were replaced within the month of June for a total of 13 departures in June. This resulted in a 130% turnover rate (10/13x100). Organization of the Paper This study is organized into five chapters. Chapter One introduced the problem of practice and its importance, provided organizational context, goals, and stakeholders for the study, and detailed the study’s research questions, general conceptual and methodological framework, and definitions. Chapter Two provides literature on employee turnover focusing on historical challenges in the childcare industry and its afterschool sub-industry and concludes with the conceptual framework for the study integrating knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences. Chapter Three presents the research design and methods for data collection and analysis. Chapter Four details results and findings and closes with a summary and implications. Chapter Five reviews the organization and stakeholder group for the study, as well as the study’s purpose and research questions, followed by issuing recommendations for solutions, and providing integrated implementation and evaluation plans. EMPLOYEE CHURN 23 CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Chapter Two outlines the literature on employee turnover with a focus on long-standing challenges in the childcare industry and its afterschool sub-industry. The first section provides a definitions of employee turnover and retention. The second section overviews the afterschool industry, including the emergence and professionalization of this sub-industry of childcare, present day demand and challenges, and turnover history and prevalence. The next section explores employee turnover causes and correlations, citing both cross-industry and childcare- specific literature regarding market realities, management, compensation, employee satisfaction, training, and employee self-efficacy. The section that follows presents literature documenting significant implications of employee turnover for children, families, organizations, and society. The final section provides a gap analysis perspective (Clark & Estes, 2008), examining Area Managers' knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational influences about employee turnover. Chapter Two concludes with the conceptual framework for this study. Employee Turnover Across industries, human resource professionals cite employee turnover as their most important challenges (Society for Human Resource Management, 2015). The U.S. Department of Labor defines turnover as employee separation from a workplace, whether voluntary or involuntary (Bureau of Labor Statistics, n.d.). Turnover is converted into monthly and annual percentages using a formula that divides the number of separated employees by the average number of employees during the period being measured multiplied by 100 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, n.d.; Glebbeek & Bax, 2004; Society for Human Resource Management, n.d.). For instance, in an organization that has an average of 10 employees, 3 separated employees between May 1 and May 30 would yield a 30% monthly turnover rate (3/10 x 100). In this scenario, the EMPLOYEE CHURN 24 remaining staff were retained, because retention refers to the number of employees in position over an entire specified period from beginning to end (Society for Human Resource Management, n.d.). Retention is calculated by taking the number of individuals who remained employed for the entire measurement period divided by the number of employees at the start of the measurement period multiplied by 100 (Society for Human Resource Management, n.d.). Thus, in this same example company with 10 employees, 7 remained in position from May 1 to May 30, resulting in a 70% employee retention rate (7/10 x 100). However, it is important to note a common misassumption that turnover is an automatic inverse of retention that adds up to 100%. In fact, if a single position sees multiple employees turn over in the same time, the combined turnover and retention rates will exceed 100%. Using the same example, if, among the three employees who left in May, two of them were replaced a second time within the month, the total number to employees who turned over would equal five. Thus, the calculation would be 5/10 x 100, or a turnover rate of 50% with a retention rate of 70% reflecting the 7 who remained in position all through May. Another common misunderstanding is that turnover cannot exceed 100%. At the same company with an average of 10 employees, if 7 workers left and were replaced, and 5 of those were replaced again within the same month, the total number of departures would be 12. This calculation would be 10/12 x 100 or a 120% turnover rate and, because 3 workers stayed in position all month, a 30% retention rate (3/10 x 100). Additional examples can be found in Chapter 1, Key Definitions. Scholars in organizational behavior identify three major components to employee turnover. The first two areas focus on employees in terms of who leaves and how they leave (Lee & Mitchell, 2003). The third area deals with how organizations view each turnover, such as seeing it as avoidable or unavoidable, functional or dysfunctional (Lee & Mitchell, 2003). The third area of consideration demonstrates an understanding held across industries that not all EMPLOYEE CHURN 25 employee turnover is negative, where some departures are costly in various ways, but others are ultimately positive for the organization, such as poor performers departing. That being said, organizational turnover costs for one employee often surpass 100% of the employee's annual salary (Cascio, 2006). Thus, most literature on the topic treats turnover as the dependent variable, focusing on illuminating antecedents that may help organizations prevent turnover (Glebbeek & Bax, 2015). In order to provide a comprehensive view of turnover, this review will include studies where turnover is the dependent variable to document antecedents, as well as studies that examine turnover as the independent variable, revealing significant costs and negative implications for organizations and their stakeholders. The following synopsis of the history and evolution of the afterschool profession prepares the reader for understanding the substantial challenges turnover poses the industry. Afterschool Industry Emergence and Professionalization Afterschool programs in the United States first emerged in the late nineteenth century as clubs for boys who were displaced by child labor laws and now participated in required education during traditional school hours (Halpern, 2002). While boys and girls continued to help in industrial (boys) and domestic (girls) duties for decades, afterschool hours provided, as they still do today, greater unregulated time for youth. This free time created concern among parents and police due to growing dangerous street traffic and increased youth delinquency, while simultaneous real estate development took over safe neighborhood play spaces (Halpern, 2002). The emergence of afterschool programs came about as a response to "physical and moral hazards" in order to provide sanctuary from the streets in primarily urban immigrant areas (Halpern, 2002, p. 5). Gradually, neighborhood churches and ethnic groups offered privately funded afterschool EMPLOYEE CHURN 26 programs, which focused on play as well as gender-tracked vocational and domestic experiences (Halpern, 2002). Over the twentieth century, a distinct afterschool industry evolved, professionalizing methods, activities, and staff qualifications. During World War II, absent fathers and working mothers, combined with minimal federal funding for schools to occupy children afterhours, caused a latchkey phenomenon of unsupervised children on a national scale (Halpern, 2002). The need for afterschool care over the past century has continued to grow significantly. However, program availability has not kept pace, with data showing many industry providers are losing the battle against an expanding gap in child and family access. Present Day Demand and Related Challenges Throughout the remainder of the twentieth century and to date, afterschool providers have struggled with how to serve enough working families and children in light of growing demand but significant funding limitations. Today, one in four American families has a child enrolled in school- or community-based afterschool programs (AA, 2014). This participation represents a 64% increase in afterschool program participation since 2004 (AA, 2014). The sharp rise in enrollment has been accompanied by parent need for afterschool care, with demand climbing 37% in the same timespan (AA, 2014). The rise in enrollment and demand, however, has not been met by program availability, leaving millions of children without safe, enriching afterschool options (AA, 2015; Earle, 2009; Hall, Williams, & Daniel, 2010). For the 10.2 million children enrolled, parents would enroll another 19.4 million if they had access, and over 11 million are left unsupervised entirely after school (AA, 2014). Publicly funded programs have had to assertively and creatively vie for limited monies to sustain programs in both number and quality, struggling chronically with financial insecurity while having to evolve to rationalize programs per contemporary priorities (AA, 2012; AA 2014; Earle, 2009; Halpern, 2002; Weitzman, Mijanovich, Silver, & Brazill, 2008). Working parent demand has led to a robust but EMPLOYEE CHURN 27 strained first century for the afterschool industry. Over the same time span, consistent instability in the childcare workforce has led to employee turnover as a significant and ongoing industry pain point. Turnover History and Prevalence The childcare industry, which is most closely aligned to Kids' Club Incorporated's (KCI) work in before- and afterschool programs, enrichment classes, recess programs, and summer camps, bears specific mention as a norm reference for Area Manager conception of turnover. Childcare turnover data reaches back nearly a century to the 1930s, when childcare programs began suffering high turnover as teachers opted for better paying jobs, at the time in defense manufacturing (Michel, 2011). Since then, research spanning public, private, and military childcare settings has placed annual employee turnover rates between 25% and 300%, with current averages between 30% and 40% (Campbell et al., 2000; First Research Industry Profiles, 2015; Nitardy, 2008; U.S. Department of Labor, n.d.; Zigler et al., 2009). These figures are 13% to 23% higher than national turnover rates for all industries combined (Compensation Force, 2015; First Research Industry Profiles, 2015) and about four times higher than rates for elementary education counterparts (Hale-Jinks et al., 2006). This high turnover is mirrored in the afterschool sub-industry's rate of 35% (Dennehy & Noam, 2005). Regardless of setting across time or the globe, turnover continues to plague the childcare industry. Along with century-long stable turnover rates, causes for employee turnover in childcare have remained largely static while also mirroring cross-industry antecedents. Employee Turnover Causes and Correlations Market Realities Across industries, well-documented turnover causes and correlations illustrate a weave of influences that are important for organizational leaders to recognize in order to determine areas EMPLOYEE CHURN 28 within and not within organizational control. Such bi-directional influence, the foundation of social-cognitive theory (Bandura, 2005; Denler, Wolters, & Benzon, 2006), exists in the job market. On a large scale, U.S. economic downturn in recent decades and subsequent widespread industry downsizing resulted in a highly mobile workforce, among whom the historically negative view of job movement as disloyalty lifted (Abbasi & Hollman, 2000). Workers have since become motivated by individual economic convenience, while technology has facilitated ease in job hunting and remote work across the world (Abbasi & Hollman, 2000). This triadic reciprocity of workers, the job market, and job movement behaviors demonstrates social- cognitive theory (Bandura, 2005; Denler et al., 2006), a complex dynamic that has caused turnover to become the top organizational challenge as reported by Human Resource professionals (Society for Human Resource Management, 2015). National and global workforce shifts such as these are not controllable by individual organizations or stakeholders. However, a closer look at organizational level turnover causes yields areas of measurement and potential influence. Management Deficiencies and Supports For better and for worse, management impacts employee retention and turnover. Managerial influence spans interpersonal skills, communication, judgment, and application of policy and organizational resources. These influences can be characterized as deficiencies or supports when it comes to employee retention and turnover. Manager deficiencies. A specific cause of turnover points to those who supervise employees. Buckingham and Coffman (1999) explain that workers do not leave companies; they leave managers. Thus, if a turnover problem exists in an organization, it is suggested the organization examine its management (Buckingham & Coffman, 1999). Weak manager judgment, communication, foresight, and perspective have been shown to directly contribute to EMPLOYEE CHURN 29 high turnover (Abbasi & Hollman, 2000). Additionally, failure to adapt traditional management methods to an increasingly diverse workforce and inattention to personnel and employee recognition in lieu of production have been linked to turnover (Abbasi & Hollman, 2000). Seminal works in organizational design cite voluntary termination as one employee method of escaping frustration over managers treating them like children instead of adults (Argyris, McGregor as cited in Bolman & Deal, 2013). Managers further impact employee retention in how they influence employee job expectations, which when unmet, escalate turnover (Maden, Ozcelik, & Karacay, 2016). Even the degree to which managers convey organization interest or disinterest with regard to employee opportunities is correlated with turnover (Mignonac & Richebé, 2013). Poor managers further drive turnover via non-competitive compensation schemes, requirements for excessive work at the expense of personal life, and their employees' perception of discrepant performance ratings (Abbasi & Hollman, 2000; Kwak & Choi, 2015). These findings are supported by Alkahtani's (2015) literature review, which identified seven common turnover factors tied to management, including perceived supervisor support, employee benefits, organizational climate, and organizational justice. This again demonstrates social-cognitive theory of bi-directional influence (Bandura, 2005; Denler et al., 2006), where, in organizations, managerial environment bi-directionally influences workers' beliefs and behaviors. Furthermore, it may be postulated that self-efficacy, or beliefs people hold about their own capabilities, which then determine their actions (Bandura, 2005), is lowered in employees who feel helpless against poor management and who thus subsequently opt for departure. Consequently, leader skill sets and interpersonal communication have direct impact on employee turnover. This is true both to the detriment of employee tenure via manager deficiencies, as well as to its benefit via manager supports. EMPLOYEE CHURN 30 Manager supports. Supervisor supports that combat turnover present in many interconnected forms that reciprocally influence employees, their environment, and their behaviors. This social-cognitive weave (Denler et al., 2006) of supports include providing clear direction, listening to employee grievances, recognizing staff, fostering employee interpersonal ties, managing job expectations, training staff to cope with competing personal demands, and counseling those who are disappointed at work or who have a peer depart (Abbasi & Hollman, 2009; Alkahtani, 2015; Gong, 2012; Lee & Mitchell, 2003; Maden et al., 2016; Nitardy, 2008; Society for Human Resource Management, 2015). In childcare specifically, support can mean providing peer mentorship programs, paid planning time, continuing education on best practices, employee appreciation activities, and areas for relaxation (Hale-Jinks et al., 2006; Whitebook et al., 2014). Cross-industry and childcare-specific literature jointly cite organizational justice as a means of combatting turnover, including accountability systems, performance rating fairness, and manager integrity (Abbasi & Hollman, 2009; Alkahtani, 2015; Campbell et al., 2000; Floyd & Phillips, 2013; Kwak & Choi, 2015). Therefore, managers understanding how their behaviors and policies do or do not demonstrate character, fairness, and support may yield turnover insights and areas of potential influence. Employee Satisfaction Narrowing in past market realities and managerial interactions, employees' feelings of satisfaction also play a significant role in turnover. Job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and turnover intentions are highly correlated with one another. When an employee's job satisfaction is lower, commitment to one's organization is lower, resulting in increased resignation thoughts, job search behaviors, and actual turnover (Lee & Mitchell, 2003). Conversely, higher job satisfaction and organizational commitment indicate lower likelihood of departure (Alkahtani, 2015). These findings are consistent with those of Gong (2012), who found EMPLOYEE CHURN 31 the degree to which employees are embedded in their jobs is correlated with turnover intent. In other words, employees who are less satisfied, committed, and entrenched organizationally are more likely to think about leaving and actually depart. A frequently cited cause of dissatisfaction, and the primary cause in the childcare industry, lies in the area of compensation (First Research Industry Profiles, 2015; Michel, 2011). Employee Compensation Compensation has been found to be tied to employee retention and turnover. Findings across industries, as well as in childcare and specifically its afterschool sub-industry, support the influence of compensation on retention in terms of both worker pay and benefits. General compensation strategy. As a strategic approach to remain on par with competitors, or as a means of fostering internal equity, compensation affords managers an important behavioral pathway to rewarding worker loyalty (Abbasi & Hollman, 2009; Daly, 2009). Alkahtani's (2015) literature review found high salaries were not imperative, but fair ones were, meaning financial rewards were less important to retention than was competitive pay. Rewards based upon length of tenure as well as tuition reimbursement have been suggested to improve retention (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009; Lee & Mitchell, 2003). However, Benson, Finegold, and Mohrman (as cited in Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009) noted that while tuition reimbursement retained employees during the period of support, turnover increased if employees who finished degrees were not promoted. Increased childcare demand but stagnant pay. With regard to childcare employee pay, the U.S. has generally been at a standstill for decades. Labor statistics reveal that childcare compensation has remained largely stagnant since 1997, while parent tuition costs have nearly doubled in the same time frame (Laughlin, 2013; U.S. Department of Labor as cited in Whitebook et al., 2014). Despite the size of the industry at over 75,000 facilities generating $32 EMPLOYEE CHURN 32 billion annually, childcare employees remain among the lowest paid workers in public, private, and military settings, earning just less than parking lot attendants and a bit more than dishwashers (Campbell et al., 2000; First Research Industry Profiles, 2015; Floyd & Phillips, 2013; U.S. Department of Labor, n.d.; Whitebook et al., 2014). The U.S. Department of Labor (n.d.) documented childcare workers' median pay in 2014 at $9.48 per hour or $19,730 per year. This pay rate was 45% lower than the median wage for all occupations combined (U.S. Department of Labor, n.d.), an ongoing pay gap deemed by the Center for the Study of Child Care Employment as "unlivable" (Whitebook et al., 2014, p. 10). The National AfterSchool Association (NAA) report (2006) cites similar compensation for part-time afterschool workers, documenting $9.25 per hour in 2006 with only 11.2% holding medical benefits. The 2005 Massachusetts After-School Research Study (MARS) also found low staff wages averaging $8.66 per hour with three-quarters lacking benefits, as well as five-year stagnation in rates of pay (Dennehy & Noam, 2005). In the national study, 23% of respondents cited desire for higher pay outside the industry as the primary source of high turnover intent and short industry tenure, where 60% of part-time workers and 75% of all workers under age 25 intend to leave the industry in less than three years (NAA, 2006). In contrast, a much smaller study of four high functioning afterschool programs by the National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing found staff interviewees were incentivized by altruistic motivators and not by pay, whether pay was viewed as good or inadequate (Huang, Cho, Nam, Torre, Oh, Harven, Huber, Rudo, & Caverly, 2010). Nevertheless, NAA's findings (2006) led the association to champion higher compensation and benefits, as well as a career path with advancement opportunities for those more highly educated, as the pathway to afterschool workforce stability (NAA, 2006). EMPLOYEE CHURN 33 In addition, despite significant increases in performance requirements related to quality regulations, mirror compensation increases remain to be seen. More than ever is expected of childcare workers and collected in parent tuition, yet worker pay remains essentially unchanged, making it challenging to attract and retain quality staff, especially in light of part-time hours (Choy & Haukka, 2010; Cole, 2011; First Research Industry Profiles, 2015). Upon closer examination, low pay has been linked to organizational attempts to offset the high cost of sustaining low, state-required teacher to child ratios (First Research Industry Profiles, 2015). Thus, in the process of meeting standards and attempting to preserve fiscal viability, childcare organizations only generate greater pay frustrations and their own subsequent costly turnover. Calls for improved childcare compensation. With compensation the longest documented cause of childcare turnover, literature abounds with calls for increased wages and benefits as a remedy. Industry researchers urge improved compensation in the form of higher pay, health insurance, paid leave, retirement plans, and equity guidelines (Dennehy & Noam, 2005; Hale-Jinks et al., 2006; Whitebook et al., 2014). National studies in childcare and the afterschool industry call on government to better fund childcare in the form of higher program reimbursement rates that impact worker compensation, support for employee preparation and development, and student loan forgiveness (AA, 2012; Cole, 2011; Earle, 2009; NAA, 2006; Whitebook et al., 2014). Proof of the impact of competitive pay on turnover was demonstrated by U.S. Department of Defense's (DOD) massive childcare turnaround in the 1990s. As part of improvements required by the Military Childcare Act of 1989, the DOD tied compensation to training milestones and advancement, helping to bring its 300% turnover rate down to within and even slightly below global averages (Campbell et al., 2000; Floyd & Phillips, 2013). While organizations often have little ability to add to budgets for compensation, knowledge of its influence on turnover may drive efficiencies in other areas of business, as well as prompt leaders EMPLOYEE CHURN 34 to join national conversation and advocacy around childcare compensation. While compensation holds the promise of significantly impacting employee satisfaction, so does the manner in which employees are prepared for their jobs, particularly in demanding lines of work such as childcare. Employee Training A number of turnover causes and correlations overlap, as is the case with training and employee satisfaction. Additionally, there are childcare industry-specific realities that connect employee training with satisfaction and therefore influence retention. Training correlation with employee satisfaction and turnover. Cross-industry literature previously cited correlates turnover intent with employee satisfaction (Alkahtani, 2015; Lee & Mitchell, 2003). Employee satisfaction is directly impacted by training (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009) and is thus proposed to reduce turnover (Alkahtani, 2015). Dardar, Jusoh, and Rasli (as cited in Ellis & Kuznia, 2014) found the more highly trained employees are, the greater their satisfaction, and the longer their term with their organization. Varied training delivery methods yield varied impact depending upon retention priorities. For instance, online and blended learning approaches elevate satisfaction (Ellis & Kuznia, 2014; McGuire & Gubbins, 2010), while approaches that blend online cognitive learning and live interpersonal training with psychomotor practice improve effectiveness (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009). Aguinis and Kraiger (2009) encourage the integration of training with other Human Resource management practices to maximize positive impact, such as candidate selection and performance management, while Gong (2012) suggests training content as a means of directly addressing employee stressors that exacerbate turnover risk, including time management. Childcare industry training nuances. In childcare, training is seen as a means of preparing staff for demanding jobs, thereby reducing job stress and dissatisfaction that contribute EMPLOYEE CHURN 35 to turnover (Hale-Hinks at al., 2006) and elevating employee satisfaction and retention (First Research Industry Profiles, 2015). Training systems also serve to professionalize childcare employment by creating equitable wage guidelines, financial incentives, advancement opportunities, career paths, and deeper attachments to the profession, all of which aid retention (Gong, 2012; Hale-Jinks et al., 2006; NAA, 2006; Nitardy, 2008; Whitebook et al., 2014). As seen in the U.S. Department of Defense's dramatic turnaround, increasing training requirements and linking completion to pay increases and promotions were highly effective means of improving a 300% turnover rate to 25% (Campbell et al., 2000; Floyd & Phillips, 2013). Thus, the connection among training, employee satisfaction, and turnover reveals multi-directional opportunities for influence on employee retention. Furthermore, as training impacts actual employee workplace capabilities, it subsequently affects employees' beliefs about their own capabilities, or self-efficacy, which in turn influences employee actions to stay or leave. Employee Self-Efficacy As a final area of discussion regarding turnover causes and correlations, employee self- efficacy, such as managers' beliefs about their ability to influence turnover, overlaps with the aforementioned topics of employee training and satisfaction. Self-efficacy has been found to have both positive and negative correlations with employee retention and turnover. Self-efficacy correlation with employee training, development, and turnover. Self- efficacy, as defined by Bandura in his 1976 seminal social-cognitive theory text (as cited in Bandura, 2005), refers to beliefs people hold about their own capabilities, which then determine their actions. For instance, Parker (1993) found that people who feel they can be effective at work and believe they have development opportunities tend to stay in position. Clark and Estes (2008) cited Parker's findings, deducing that training and individual development plans would thus contribute to employee retention, and conversely, that those who felt they were no longer EMPLOYEE CHURN 36 able to be effective or to be developed were more likely to turn over. In other words, training and development contribute to feelings of capability and satisfaction that directly impact turnover intent and employment longevity. Inverse relationship of self-efficacy to turnover. Not all findings, however, support the assertion that higher job efficacy positively impacts turnover. Maden, Ozcelik, and Karacay (2016) found employees with higher efficacy were more likely to turnover if their expectations about their job were unmet. Specifically, higher job efficacy was correlated with feelings of self- confidence and entitlement, leading employees to more readily seek better employment elsewhere (Maden et al., 2016). Tangentially, Clark and Estes (2008) point to employee overconfidence as a hindrance to motivation as exemplified by low mental effort and external blame. Therefore, while most research indicates a positive correlation between effective training and employee retention, conflicting literature suggests there may be a point at which this relationship inverts. As previously stated, the causes of or antecedents to employee turnover comprise the majority of literature, where turnover is treated as the dependent variable. However, it is important to consider turnover as the independent variable in order to grasp its negative impact on stakeholders, including children, families, organizations, and society. Implications of Employee Turnover Turnover Impact on Children The negative impact of employee caregiver turnover on children is both significant and well documented. Turnover not only affects child developmental outcomes, as well as program quality and safety, but it also potentially increases an already wide access gap for millions of children, thus denying them the established benefits of safe, quality afterschool care and elevating their risk during out of school time hours. EMPLOYEE CHURN 37 Program quality and child outcomes. Employee turnover in childcare has been found to result in poor quality care and negative consequences for children (Campbell et al., 2000; Michel, 2011; Nitardy, 2008; Whitebook et al., 2014). Nearly three decades ago, a national study of hundreds of childcare centers in five major U.S. cities revealed a clear connection between employee turnover and program quality for children. The National Child Care Staffing Study of 1989 found employee turnover was among key predictors of program quality (Whitebook, Phillips, & Howes, 1990). Children who attended centers with higher turnover were less developed in language and social skills, while those in programs with lower turnover spent more time engaging with staff and peers in positive interactions and activities (Whitebook et al., 1990). A follow-up study in 2014 reiterated adverse child impact due to an unstable childcare workforce and further noted the domino effect of individual employee departures fueling teammates' departures (Whitebook et al., 2014). Additional studies echo concerns that turnover diminishes program quality by disrupting continuity of care, yielding sobering detrimental impact on children's development and adjustment (Hale et al., 2006; Zigler et al., 2009). Negative impact is especially noted in cases of repeated turnover, where caregiver changes pose specific risks to children's cognitive development, healthy attachment, essential security, and long-term mental wellbeing (Hale et al., 2006). Excessive turnover versus stable staffing. In the most extreme case documented in the U.S., excessive turnover in the nation's largest employer-sponsored childcare system was paralleled by serious impact to program quality and child safety. As previously stated, prior to the Military Child Care Act of 1989, the Department of Defense's (DOD) childcare system suffered excessive turnover rates (Campbell et al., 2000). A perfect storm of low wages, inadequate training, unregulated care, and highly mobile military families led to colossal turnover rates as high as 300% (Campbell et al., 2000). Inadequate employees were retained, and EMPLOYEE CHURN 38 the impact on children included poor quality care, hazardous facilities, and allegations of child abuse (Campbell et al., 2000; Floyd & Phillips, 2013). The Military Child Care Act has since forged a substantial turnaround, bringing the military's turnover rate in line with and even slightly under global averages, while significantly elevating quality through training, compensation, curriculum development, licensing, and accreditation (Campbell et al., 2000; Floyd & Phillips, 2013). The DOD's record is mirrored in afterschool industry findings that quality is directly undermined by high employee turnover, which impedes programs' ability to foster educational, safe environments, including in the afterschool setting (Dennehy & Noam, 2005). Conversely, stable staffing aids consistent staff-youth relationships and positive developmental outcomes (Dennehy & Noam, 2005). In this way, the DOD's dramatic turnaround story is both a cautionary and inspirational tale of staff turnover as it relates to child wellbeing. Child access gap and associated risks. While turnover exacerbates poor programs yielding serious potential consequences for children, it also widens the access gap for children and families. Forty-eight of higher income families and 56% of lower income families indicate cost is already a barrier to participation (AA, 2014). Turnover only fuels higher tuition, thus creating access issues and potentially contributing to the 19.4 million children without afterschool program access at all (AA, 2015). Children without access miss out numerous documented benefits of afterschool program attendance, including improved school behavior, attendance, and academic performance, as well as lowered risk of drug use, pregnancy, dropping out of school, juvenile violence, and crime (AA, 2015; Hall et al., 2010). Additional documented benefits fostered in afterschool programs include peer belongingness and opportunities to experiment with different roles, initiative, relationships, and emotional self-regulation (Fusco, 2008). Overwhelmingly, parents believe in such benefits of afterschool programs. Specifically, 83% of afterschool parents reported believing that afterschool programs reduce the chances of EMPLOYEE CHURN 39 their children falling into risky behaviors, including crime, drugs, and teen pregnancy (AA, 2014). The protections of such programs cannot, however, be enjoyed by those not able to gain access. For socially disadvantaged children, risks of non-enrollment in childcare programs are even greater. Formal childcare is correlated with achievement gap improvement for children with mothers of low education levels (Geoffroy, Côté, Giguère, Dionne, Zelazo, Tremblay, & Séguin, 2010), access to essential snacks and meals that help combat childhood hunger and obesity (Hatcher, Fitzsimons, & Turley, 2014), and out of school time youth behavior and safety (Roche, Astone, & Bishai, 2007; Soule, Gottfredson, & Bauer, 2008). For boys, African-American in particular, the afterschool environment has been shown to heighten perception of developmental opportunities and personal success as compared to the school day, which is theorized to be related to afterschool physical activities (Fusco, 2008). According to Halpern (2003) (as cited in Fusco, 2008), "Afterschool programs have been noted to be one of the few places that low- income children and youth can go without being pathologized" (p. 2). By missing out on the advantages of such programs and elevating potential risks, the disparity between low income, urban youth and their counterparts is potentially widened. Thus, whether employee turnover diminishes program quality or access altogether, the risks for children are significant. Parents, too, have challenges related to the turnover of childcare employees. Turnover Impact on Families Employee turnover affects families most in the trickle-down costs of replacing employees. Families incur impact related to tuition, program access, and work stability. Such impact is only exacerbated by limited government funding for families most in need of afterschool care. EMPLOYEE CHURN 40 Turnover's impact on family tuition and access. As previously stated, the cost of replacing one employee often surpasses 100% of the annual salary of the departed employee (Cascio, 2006), which harms organizational return on investment (ROI). Poor ROI drives parent- paid tuition costs upward, which directly impacts family participation (AA, 2015; Child Care Aware, 2014). This is especially problematic when childcare costs have already been shown to fall heavily on families regardless of income level, where parent tuition and fees cover over 75% of a $3100 annual per child burden (AA, 2014; Earle, 2009). Further exacerbating family costs are limitations in government assistance. Twenty percent of families reported receiving government assistance with the cost of afterschool care, though nearly 30% qualified by federal standards (AA, 2014; Earle, 2009). Because families utilizing afterschool programs are predominantly economically disadvantaged households already (AA, 2012), the impact of afterschool program funding cuts is significant and sometimes insurmountable: In Contra Costa County, California, some formerly free programs are now charging fees to cover recent losses in city funding. About 600 children, ages 6 to 11, were attending the program at Panorama Elementary School every day. Principal Robin Pang-Maganaris said about 50% of the children come from very low-income families, and many of the parents work multiple jobs. They cannot afford the new fees (Earle, 2009, p. 1). Thus, any tuition increases related to organizational inefficiencies, such as employee turnover, pose risks to family access and parent reassurance of their children's safety after school hours. Parental "peace of mind." Afterschool care for the children of working parents has also been directly tied to parental reassurance during work hours and overall job stability. In families with younger children, afterschool programs were found to be an essential and primary source of childcare for working parents (Weitzman et al., 2008). Parents without such program access have been shown to worry about what their children are doing after school, resulting in lower EMPLOYEE CHURN 41 workplace engagement and productivity (Employee Assistance Professionals Association [EAPA], 2007). For parents of children enrolled in afterschool programs, they consider such programs safe, adult-supervised places that reduce the likelihood of their children participating in risky behaviors (AA, 2014). Thus, three-fourths of parents agree that afterschool programs provide "peace of mind" (AA, 2014, n.p.) while they remain at work and ultimately help them keep their jobs. Access to stable, affordable afterschool programs, then, is essential to whole family security. When employee turnover thwarts organizational fiscal efficiencies, families and organizations themselves are at significant risk. Turnover Impact on Organizations Organizationally, the implications of employee turnover are multi-layered, costly, and can have long-lasting effects on business. The consequences for companies across industries and within childcare are potentially significant, even to the extent of threatening long-term viability. Visible and invisible organizational costs of turnover. Turnover costs can be divided between those that are visible and those that are invisible, though both diminish organizational efficiency and performance (Abbasi & Hollman, 2000; Alkahtani, 2015). Visible turnover costs, both general and those specific to childcare, include securing temporary staff, advertising for and recruiting replacements, and hiring, onboarding, and training new staff (Alkahtani, 2015; Hale- Jinks et al., 2006; Lee & Mitchell, 2013; Nitardy, 2008). Invisible turnover costs include risks to organizational productivity, loss of organization-specific knowledge held by departing staff, poor ROI for training, elevated administrative costs related to staffing, disrupted operations and client relationships, and diminished innovation and quality (Abbasi & Hollman, 2000; Alkahtani, 2015; Glebbeek & Bax, 2004; Hale-Jinks et al., 2006; Lee & Mitchell, 2003; Nitardy, 2008). Already strained childcare organizations. Turnover adds especially unwelcome cost headaches in the childcare industry, where rates are already 13% to 23% higher than all EMPLOYEE CHURN 42 industries combined (Compensation Force, 2015; First Research Industry Profiles, 2015). Afterschool programs hardly need further financial strain on top of federal funding limits that have caused significant budget strain in recent years, leading to heavy competition for funding, severe limitations on offerings despite demand, and program closures (Earle, 2009). Because long-term organizational viability depends upon healthy ROI, turnover jeopardizes organizational survival. Turnover Impact on Society In addition to the potentially negative consequences of employee departures for children, families, and organizations presented, turnover also poses risks to society. While literature on the topic of societal impact is lesser in volume compared to that for the groups already discussed, it is nevertheless significant and part of a holistic understanding of the impact of employee turnover. Turnover impact on workforce productivity. When employee turnover jeopardizes organizational efficiency and family affordability, the potential impact of limited or no access reaches far and wide. As previously stated, for parents who cannot access programs, parental concern has been shown to interfere with job performance. A 2007 study surveying employees at three Fortune 100 companies found that parents who worried about what their children were doing after school lost significant productivity, potentially costing employers $50 to $300 billion annually (EAPA, 2007). Working parents determined to be most susceptible to worry and decreased productivity were single parents, those who worked long hours, and parents of older children (EAPA, 2007). Turnover impact on military readiness. In the U.S. military, a shifting demographic of more working parents in need of childcare contributed to tardiness, absenteeism, and retention problems (Campbell et al., 2000). Childcare access was seen directly connected to enlisted job EMPLOYEE CHURN 43 performance and military workforce retention and stability (Campbell et al., 2000). The associated risk of diminished military readiness helped spur the sweeping and successful childcare changes in the Department of Defense previously cited (Campbell et al., 2000). Simply stated, "Afterschool programs are a stabilizing force in many communities and families" (Earle, 2009, p. 16) that extends to society as a whole. This concludes the general literature portion of this review. Table 3 at the end of this chapter summarizes assumed influences on employee turnover found in the literature just cited. The next part of this review will examine literature about employee turnover influences through the lens of the gap analysis framework. Area Manager Influences on Employee Turnover As the conceptual framework for the study, Clark and Estes' (2008) gap analysis will serve to identify performance gaps and their root causes that inhibit organizational goal attainment. The three areas for analysis are employee knowledge and skills, employee motivation, and organizational barriers. Knowledge and skills refer to employees knowing how to achieve performance goals. Motivation pertains to the degree to which employees decide to work towards goals, to exert mental effort, and to persist through difficulties on the path to goal achievement. Organizational barriers have to do with strategy, processes, or resources that are missing, misaligned, outdated, or in any way impede employees' ability to progress towards and achieve performance goals (Clark & Estes, 2008). Each area of the gap analysis framework will be discussed in terms of general theory, assumed influences on KCI Area Managers, and assessment methods for the study. Area Manager Knowledge and Skills Influences on Turnover In order for KCI to achieve organizational goals, an understanding of Area Managers' (AMs') knowledge and skills is required. Whether and to what extent workers know how, when, EMPLOYEE CHURN 44 why, where, with what, and with who to accomplish their work directly impacts their ability to contribute to organizational goal attainment (Clark & Estes, 2008). KCI turnover improvement goals state that by Spring 2017, KCI will improve field employee turnover from an overall 37% turnover rate to a 30% turnover rate for Program Managers and a 35% turnover rate for Educators and Coaches. In order to frame AMs' knowledge and skills as they relate to KCI's turnover improvement goals, a literature review of relevant knowledge-related influences follows. Literature will be analyzed according to varied types of knowledge in an effort to identify the knowledge and skills AMs need in order to meet turnover improvement goals. General theory. Several types of knowledge influences pertain to turnover improvement goals for Area Managers. Knowledge types include declarative, procedural, and metacognitive. Declarative knowledge refers to what is known, such as definitive facts and events (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009; Berge & Hezewijk, 1999). Declarative knowledge can be further differentiated by whether it is factual, such as vocabulary or element details, or conceptual, which refers to relationships among elements and is commonly represented as categories or classifications (Krathwohl, 2002). In contrast, procedural knowledge involves knowledge of how to do something, such as performing specific skills or action steps (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009; Krathwohl, 2002). Lastly, metacognitive knowledge is defined by knowledge, control, and insight into one's own cognition, such as planning strategies for a given context, self-evaluating, or adjusting methods to achieve task completion (Baker, 2006; Krathwohl, 2002). The literature review to follow will examine content according to declarative knowledge (concept of employee turnover), metacognitive knowledge (employee turnover awareness), and procedural knowledge (how to apply employee support strategies). Area Managers' declarative knowledge influences: Turnover conceptualization. The first knowledge influence has to do with understanding turnover conceptually. Area Managers EMPLOYEE CHURN 45 need to know how employee turnover is conceptualized, specifically in terms of its definition and common causes. Understanding the definition of turnover, including how it is calculated as described earlier in this chapter, would allow Area Managers to accurately assess current performance and compare it to turnover improvement goals and industry norms. While turnover rates constitute a quantitative view of employee turnover, scholars in organizational behavior have identified three additional layers to the concept of turnover that reveal insights beyond statistics that could deepen AMs' assessment. The first two areas pertain to employees directly, in terms of who leaves employment and how they do so (Lee & Mitchell, 2003). The third area deals with how organizations characterize each departure as avoidable or unavoidable, as well as functional or dysfunctional (Lee & Mitchell, 2003). The last component illustrates cross-industry understanding that not all employee turnover is negative, where some departures are costly to the organization on a number of fronts, but others are ultimately positive for the organization, such as when underperforming workers depart (Lee & Mitchell, 2003). Alignment among AMs on the definition and characterization of turnover would directly impact the accuracy of performance gap analysis as well as the appropriateness of selected interventions to improve retention. Conceptual knowledge is also useful to Area Managers in its generalizability. For instance, reflecting knowledge of principles and generalizations from the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy (Krathwohl, 2002), AMs could apply a broad conceptualization of turnover to specific causes, or generalize their current conceptualization of turnover to new scenarios. Bloom's conceptual knowledge framework can also illuminate causal interrelationships (Krathwohl, 2002), which would allow AMs to more efficiently apply turnover solutions that impact multiple “pain points." Conceptual knowledge additionally supports the development of new procedural knowledge (Schneider, Rittle-Johnson, & Star, 2011), which in this case would allow AMs to operationalize turnover measurement, as well as retention strategies discussed later EMPLOYEE CHURN 46 in this chapter under procedural knowledge influence. Furthermore, as conceptual and procedural knowledge interplay, procedural flexibility, or the knowledge of multiple solutions and the ability to invent novel procedures for unfamiliar problems, is enhanced (Schneider et al., 2011; Star & Seifert, 2006). This would equip AMs with the adeptness necessary to respond to unique turnover challenges with novel solutions. Also, in newly contracted school districts common for a growing organization like KCI, AMs could then more accurately process turnover information and manage retention efforts with unfamiliar employee populations. For AMs, then, conceptual understanding of turnover serves as the basis for immediate and long-term problem solving. Area Manager metacognitive knowledge influences: Turnover awareness. The next knowledge influence directly connects Area Managers with turnover through metacognitive reflection. AMs need to self-assess the interrelationship among their respective work activities and field employee turnover. In addition to findings on general benefits of metacognitive leadership practices, specific leadership activities directly tied to employee turnover will constitute this section's review. Metacognition is characterized by knowledge, control, and insight into one's own thinking, including self-evaluation, strategic knowledge, and contextual application of knowledge, all of which allow learners to adapt thinking and behaviors for greater success (Baker, 2006; Krathwohl, 2002). In the workplace, metacognition has been shown to benefit performance analysis, entrepreneurial efforts, and organizational performance. Specifically, metacognition has to do with how organizations learn to learn, meaning reflective processes which help companies critically assess knowledge gaps, biases, and flawed reasoning to motivate new learning and strategy (Cleverley, 2016). Haynie, Shepherd, Mosakowski, and Earley (2010) applied social and cognitive psychology to an entrepreneurial mindset to illuminate a synthesized EMPLOYEE CHURN 47 concept of entrepreneurial metacognition. In fast-paced, dynamic business environments, where innovative and adaptive thinking is required, metacognition plays a significant role in essential cognitive flexibility (Haynie et al., 2010). As such, leaders with metacognitive abilities are theorized to be better prepared to carry out entrepreneurial duties than less reflective peers (Cho & Jung, 2014). Furthermore, metacognition has been shown to serve as a strong influence on leaders' overall entrepreneurial orientation, as well as in generating positive outcomes from entrepreneurial efforts (Cho & Jung, 2014). Even for novice leaders, metacognitive practices are beneficial, acting as a mediating influence against lack of prior experience (Haynie, Shepherd, & Patzelt, 2012). Hence, in terms of gap identification, adaptive leadership, and performance outcomes, metacognitive reflection is justified as a potentially effective means for KCI Area Managers to deeply understand turnover-related information. In addition to appreciating the positive potential for metacognitive practices, it is important KCI Area Managers also recognize direct connections between leadership behaviors and employee turnover. Leaders and managers serve as an essential bridge between organizations and their employees. Specifically, leaders and managers bear the responsibility of connecting strategy and culture to the hiring and retention of employees whose skills and efforts carry out the organization's vision with leaders' support (Abbasi & Hollman, 2000). How leaders carry out company-wide policies and the resulting employee perception of organizational justice have been shown to correlate with employee turnover. For instance, in the U.S. Department of Defense's history, lack of accountability structures in childcare facilities helped fuel astronomical turnover rates, while later licensing, accreditation, and enforced sanctions were associated with a dramatic turnaround in retention (Floyd & Phillips, 2013). These findings align with those of Kwak and Choi (2015) and Alkahtani (2015), where turnover intent was shown to correspond with perceptions of managerial discrepancies in performance ratings and organizational justice. EMPLOYEE CHURN 48 Managerial fairness with policies and procedures, then, proves to be an important correlate with employee turnover. Metacognitive awareness of such a link to turnover would allow AMs to self-evaluate for fairness throughout the application of policies and procedures, making appropriate adjustments as needed to positively influence retention. Area Managers' procedural knowledge influences: Employee support strategies. The final knowledge influence empowers Area Managers with practical procedural knowledge for combatting turnover. AMs need to know how to support employees through their respective job functions both practically and emotionally. Documented effective managerial supports previously cited include fostering collegial ties, managing job expectations, training staff to cope with personal demands, providing clear direction, listening to grievances, and counseling those who are disappointed at work or who have a peer depart (Abbasi & Hollman, 2009; Alkahtani, 2015; Gong, 2012; Lee & Mitchell, 2003; Maden et al., 2016; Nitardy, 2008; Society for Human Resource Management, 2015). AMs also need to know how to apply supports proven to be effective in childcare, such as providing peer mentorship programs, paid planning time, continuing education on best practices, employee appreciation activities, and areas for relaxation (Hale-Jinks et al., 2006; Whitebook et al., 2014). Furthermore, AMs need to know how to use retention strategies shown to be effective in childcare and across industries, including manager integrity and fairness in performance ratings and accountability systems (Abbasi & Hollman, 2009; Alkahtani, 2015; Campbell et al., 2000; Floyd & Phillips, 2013; Kwak & Choi, 2015). In summary, AMs knowing how to apply effective retention strategies would empower them to impact their respective team's turnover and thereby turnover improvement goal achievement. Area Managers' Motivation Influences on Turnover In addition to understanding Area Manager knowledge and skills as they relate to organizational goals, it is equally important to understand AMs' motivation influences in the EMPLOYEE CHURN 49 context of the turnover improvement goal. Whether and to what extent employees are motivated to choose to pursue company goals, persist through difficulties, and expend mental effort ultimately impacts organizational goal attainment (Clark & Estes, 2008). In order to frame AMs' motivation as it relates to KCI turnover improvement goals, a literature review of relevant motivation-related influences follows. Literature will be analyzed according to two types of motivation influences, Expectancy Value Theory and Attribution Theory, in an effort to understand what influences are required for AMs to achieve the turnover improvement goal. General theory. Motivation is an internal capacity that starts, directs, and sustains goal- oriented behavior (Mayer, 2011). Mayer (2011) notes four components of motivation: it is a personal state, residing inside a person; it is activating, causing one to initiate; it is energizing, driving one to maintain activity; and it is goal-directed. Motivation can be based upon one's interests, beliefs, attributions of success or failure, goal focus, or partnership with others (Mayer, 2011). Three primary processes of motivation are: active choice, which means taking action steps toward goal attainment; persistence, which means continuing work towards goals even when distractions are presented; and mental effort, which means investing cognitively towards goal achievement (Clark & Estes, 2008). Rueda (2011) points to the context-specific nature of motivation in terms of how beliefs, perceptions, and processes impact goal pursuit or avoidance. Literature that describes motivation is often coupled with organizational barriers to motivation, such as inconsistent goals, critical or biased feedback, managerial unfairness or hypocrisy, irrelevant policies and procedures, and peer competition (Clark & Estes, 2008). The following literature review will explore motivation in terms of Expectancy Value Theory and Attribution Theory. Expectancy value theory. Expectancy Value Theory (EVT) refers to an individual's expectation for succeeding at a task, along with the value the individual places on the task EMPLOYEE CHURN 50 (Eccles, Wigfield, & Schiefele as cited in Eccles, 2006). EVT poses two motivational questions: can one do the task, and does one want to do the task (Eccles, 2006)? To the latter question, four value constructs influence motivation, which are intrinsic value, attainment value, utility value, and perceived cost (Eccles, 2006). For this study, perceived cost will be the focus, examining Area Managers’ beliefs about the cost of participating in retention activities. Area Managers' perceived cost. Area Managers need to see the value of investing time and effort in retention strategies. Even if fully knowledgeable about broad turnover implications as described in prior literature, AMs' perceived cost of retention efforts might influence their motivation. For instance, the cost of effort-filled activities could include anticipatory anxiety or perceived loss of time and energy for competing work or personal demands (Eccles, 2006). While cost is involved in all efforts, if accepting inconvenient, pointless rules is required, employees may be demotivated (Clark & Estes, 2008). For example, if AMs were required to adhere to extensive employee retention tracking, motivation may be hindered. Furthermore, some workers may fear failure in acting towards goals, and thus, to preserve self-worth, may avoid engaging at all (Eccles, 2006). Even success has its costs, especially among teams, where overt internal competition or the risk of peer rejection for success may be demotivating (Clark & Estes, 2008; Eccles, 2006). Thus, perceived cost spans practical expenditures, intrapersonal needs, and interpersonal dynamics. Ultimately, followers, in this case employees, will be motivated to initiate and exert effort and to persist towards goals if they see the payoff for action as worth their efforts (Northouse, 2016). Therefore, Area Managers would need to view the benefits of working on retention as matching or outweighing their efforts. To accurately compute perceived cost, leaders could apply a path-goal theoretical approach by educating employees about costs as well as presenting desirable rewards (Northouse, 2016). Appropriately motivating rewards to offset perceived costs EMPLOYEE CHURN 51 may depend upon the organizational framework. For instance, Bolman and Deal (2013) state that organizations framed by structure would motivate through financial incentives, those with human resource frames would motivate with growth opportunities, politically framed organizations would largely coerce employee motivation, and symbolic organizations would celebrate to reward employees. Therefore, communication of meaningfully aligned rewards may assist AMs in accurately perceiving the cost of goal-directed efforts. Specific to retention strategies, perceived cost can act as a barrier to engaging in strategies otherwise documented as effective. For example, research has postulated the cost of training as potentially contributing to turnover by increasing marketability of employees, thereby making them more appealing to rivals (Alkahtani, 2015). Additionally, poor return on investment in training due to turnover (Gong, 2012; Nitardy, 2008) may further discourage investment in training as an otherwise effective retention approach. Clark and Estes (2008) refute claims that training leads to turnover, but stakeholder motivation may still be impacted if not presented with counterevidence. Therefore, AMs need to be presented with clear information about the benefits of retention efforts as well as encouragement to engage with known effective strategies in order to offset perceived cost. Attribution theory. The second motivational influence, attributions, refer to how one explains the causes of events (Anderman & Anderman, 2006). Bernard Weiner's (1985) attribution theory model explores causation in terms of locus (a cause that is viewed as internal or external to the individual), stability (a cause that is viewed as stable or unstable over time and contexts), and controllability (a cause that is viewed as controllable or not controllable by the individual) (Anderman & Anderman, 2006; Weiner, 1985). For this study, locus of control will be addressed, exploring Area Manager beliefs about their ability to influence employee retention versus attributing such ability to external factors. EMPLOYEE CHURN 52 Area Managers' locus of control. The ability for Area Managers to see turnover as something they can control is important to opening actionable pathways towards retention of their employees. AMs need to believe field employee retention is strongly influenced by their direct efforts rather than by external factors. To what people attribute events results in feelings that generate a cycle of action or inaction. For instance, attributing accomplishments intrinsically generates positive emotions, such as pride and self-esteem, which fuel future efforts (Anderman & Anderman, 2006). The same internal attribution for failures may yield negative emotions, such as guilt and anger, but the internal presumption of controllability ultimately drives corrective efforts (Anderman & Anderman, 2006; Rueda, 2011; Weiner, 1985). Conversely, extrinsic locus of control for events is associated with presumptions of permanent, unchangeable conditions that may evoke pity and hopelessness (Weiner, 1985). There also exists the risk for hedonic bias, which is the tendency to attribute success internally and failure externally (Weiner, 1985). Hence, an understanding of Area Manager attributions about turnover will offer insights into motivation around retention efforts. Cultural considerations also play a part in locus of control, especially in how they coexist in diverse workplaces. For example, people raised in cultures emphasizing individual control over their own lives not only attribute control internally but also act on largely individual bases towards goal achievement (Clark & Estes, 2008). In contrast, cultures emphasizing collective effort tend to ascribe control externally and act in collaboration towards goals (Clark & Estes, 2008). Studies examining racial and gender differences in attribution are limited and at times conflicting (Anderman & Anderman, 2010), yet they point to the importance of avoiding assumptions and of incorporating diverse motivational indices (Clark & Estes, 2008). In childcare, there may be grounds to hypothesize an external locus of control among field leaders related to turnover. Given historically high turnover rates and decades-old industry EMPLOYEE CHURN 53 abandonment for better paying work (Michel, 2011), learned helplessness, or apathy resulting from repeated exposure to an unsolved problem (Overmier, 2013), may exist, where retention efforts may be considered useless. Given the fact that external barriers to retention may be more evident to Area Managers than intrinsically sourced opportunities, assessing beliefs about retention efforts would be an important step in determining motivational influences and interventions. Area Managers' Organizational Influences on Employee Turnover The third and final area of influence on organizational goal attainment pertains to organizational barriers. The ability of employees to achieve company goals is directly impacted by aspects of the organization that affect employee performance, such as work processes, material resources, and workplace culture (Clark & Estes, 2008). In order to frame organizational influences as they relate to KCI turnover improvement goals, a literature review of relevant organizational influences follows. Literature will be analyzed according to cultural models and cultural settings in an effort to understand what influences are required for Area Managers to contribute to KCI's achievement of turnover improvement goals. General theory. Approaches to policy and leadership fall into a broader, organization- wide phenomenon referred to as culture. Work culture is defined as the foundational values, goals, beliefs, and processes within an organization that evolve over time and which drive how employees get work accomplished (Clark & Estes, 2008). Culture reflects shared assumptions about the workplace that determine how employees interpret and make meaning of workplace events (Schein, 2010). Culture also acts as "the superglue that bonds an organization, unites people, and helps an enterprise to accomplish desired ends" (Bolman & Deal, 2013, p. 248). As such, culture can be seen as both a product, which reflects accrued wisdom, as well as a process, which continually renews through personnel changes (Bolman & Deal, 2013). EMPLOYEE CHURN 54 Culture has visible elements, known as cultural climate or settings, and invisible elements, known as cultural models (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001; Schneider, Brief, & Guzzo, 1996), both versions bearing significant impact on each other and on organizations. For example, beliefs about what an organization values (cultural models) exist largely in employees' subconscious psyches and are thus not outwardly visible, yet beliefs are impacted by concrete workplace activities, policies, and procedures (cultural climate or settings) (Schneider et al., 1996). Thus, organizational influence depends upon shifts in invisible beliefs that cannot occur without first adjusting visible policies and procedures (Schneider et al., 1996). Specific to this study, culture is noted as the greatest factor attracting and retaining employees (Schneider et al., 1996). Therefore, to achieve organizational goals, including employee retention, cultural models and settings must be aligned with each other and with the organization. Furthermore, performance gap solutions should be congruent with each unique workplace culture (Clark & Estes, 2008). Therefore, Area Managers’ assessment of organizational culture is warranted as part of an organizational examination of employee turnover and for appropriate retention solutions at KCI. Area Managers' cultural model influences: Accountability. The first cultural model influence pertains to accountability. The organization needs to hold Area Managers accountable for employee turnover. Accountability is defined as one's answerability for performance to a supervisor, consumers, or some other constituency, typically in the form of rationalizing methods and reporting outcomes (Firestone & Riehl, 2005). Accountability serves as a contract between leaders, who determine performance objectives, and supervisees, who are responsible for carrying them out (Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004). Accountability systems may include performance reporting as well as consequences, which thereby influence employee focus with regard to objectives (Firestone & Riehl, 2005). For instance, Guilding, Lamminimaki, and EMPLOYEE CHURN 55 McManus (2013) found in the high turnover industry of hospitality that more robust accountability systems that specifically addressed employee retention resulted in greater managerial effort to reduce staff turnover. In organizations that foster a culture of accountability, expectations are clear to employees and are seen as valid and fair, where positive consequences are expected to follow positive behavior, and negative consequences are expected to follow negative behavior (Grimshaw, Baron, Mike, & Edwards, 2006). Furthermore, high performing teams automatically hold themselves accountable as individuals and as teams (Bolman & Deal, 2010). Conversely, when accountability is avoided, the consequences for organizations are low performance standards and inattention to results (Lencioni, 2002). An accountability framework (cultural setting), however, is not enough to improve employee turnover; the organization must foster a culture of accountability (cultural model). Clark and Estes (2008) state that cultural patterns can only be changed by altering workers' beliefs. Similarly, Schein (2010) explains that shared assumptions dictate uniform action as a part of the social reality that causes group beliefs to become group reality (Schein, 2010). Therefore, Area Managers need to believe they are accountable for employee retention in order to take collective action to improve turnover. Area Manager cultural model influences: Encouragement of new retention strategies. The second cultural model influence is about encouraging new ideas and efforts. The organization needs to convey a supportive attitude towards Area Managers with regard to trying new retention strategies. Trying new retention strategies involves change on the part of AMs. Change potentially creates a multitude of fears, including "learning anxiety" (Schein, 2010, p. 303), where workers feel temporarily incompetent having let go of old methods before being skilled in new ones, and thus fear failure and loss of power and identity in the interim. Yet Dyer, Gregerson, and Christensen (2011) reference multiple highly successful organizations, such as EMPLOYEE CHURN 56 Apple, IDEO, and Virgin, where frequent failure is viewed as necessary for innovation if not a pathway that actually expedites success. Additionally, openness and risk-taking are frequently cited among traits of successful leaders (Northouse, 2016). With regard to childcare turnover, the remarkable story of the U.S. military's reduction of caregiver turnover from 300% to less than 30% hinged on significant, intentional changes in retention strategy and methods (Floyd & Phillips, 2013). Therefore, KCI needs to encourage and support AMs in trying new retention strategies in order to positively impact employee turnover. Area Managers' cultural setting influences: Goal setting and communication. The first cultural setting influence is goal setting. The organization needs to set and communicate employee retention goals to guide Area Manager performance expectations around retention and turnover. Regardless of organizational framework, goal setting is among the "structural imperatives" (Bolman & Deal, 2013, p. 61) that support communal progress in any workplace while providing a sense of organizational validity (Lewis, 2011). Organizational goals provide the basis from which employee performance goals are crafted (Clark & Estes, 2008) and serve as the benchmark against which goal and organizational progress and success are measured (Lewis, 2011). Shared goals also embody organizational consensus, demonstrating the integration and adaptation of multi-dimensional socio-cultural phenomena (Schein, 2010), while absence of goals lends to employee self-focus (Clark & Estes, 2008). In a practical sense, goals serve to map employee action, providing clarity about the starting point, destination in terms of specific results desired, and path in between (Lewis, 2011). For employees to support goals, Lewis (2011) notes the importance of employees understanding goals as well as rationale, such that meaning making is managed to create a sense of validity for the goal and related processes. Clark and Estes (2008) echo the need for goal rationale but specify employees need not be part of goal setting to yield commitment, so long as EMPLOYEE CHURN 57 those assigning the goals are viewed as having positive attributes, such as trustworthiness and credibility, and so long as goal setters provide employees an inspired vision, feedback, and recognition. Therefore, KCI will need to communicate desired outcomes and rationale clearly and strategically in order to garner individual AM investment in the collective turnover improvement goal. Area Managers' cultural setting influences: Incentives. The second cultural setting influence involves Area Manager incentives. The organization needs to provide AMs with incentives to drive them to invest in retention strategies. Incentives operate on the same behavioral learning theory educational psychologist E. L. Thorndike published in 1911. In his Law of Effect, positive responses to behavior increase the likelihood of the behavior being repeated, while inversely, negative responses decrease the likelihood that a behavior will be repeated (Mayer, 2011). With an organizational parallel, Schein (2010) reports that changes in reward and punishment are among the fastest, easiest ways to affect employee behavior. When organizations communicate rewards that are meaningful to employees, it allows employees to weigh their goal-related efforts against the incentive (Bolman & Deal, 2010). Thus, a well- designed incentive for AMs should yield proportional retention-focused effort. There are nuances with incentives to consider in terms of what, how, when, and why to administer them to maximize positive impact. First, the type of incentive offered can mirror an organization's particular framework. For example, growth opportunities reflect an organization with a human resource framework, while celebrations are akin to symbolic organizations, and financial rewards are aligned with organizations framed by structure (Bolman & Deal, 2010). Secondly, how behaviors are rewarded and punished, along with the rewards and punishment themselves, communicate certain values and priorities and should therefore be aligned with organizational values and assumptions (Schein, 2010). Also, the incentive's potential impact on EMPLOYEE CHURN 58 motivation should be weighed for positives and negatives. For instance, Clark and Estes (2008) discuss tangible incentives (financial rewards or gifts) in terms of their utility value as a source of worker motivation, but they also indicate intrinsic motivation is lessened by such rewards. Hansen, Smith, and Hansen (2002) echo Clark and Estes, equating rewards with extrinsic employee motivation but recognition with intrinsic motivation. Lastly, incentive timing and rationale should be approached with caution, as poorly timed, poorly reasoned incentives can actually cause performance decline (Clark & Estes, 2008). As such, it is important for KCI to provide AMs meaningful incentives that are organizationally aligned and thoughtfully delivered in order to drive their efforts to improve employee retention. Area Managers' cultural setting influences: Feedback. The next cultural setting influence involves feedback. KCI needs to provide Area Managers formative feedback on employee turnover and retention strategy efficacy. Feedback that is informational provides workers direction on how to carry out leaders' objectives (Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004). Feedback that is both informational as well as correctional in nature further helps employees make adjustments to their goal approach as needed (Clark & Estes, 2008). When attempting new strategies, feedback about how one is doing, as well as opportunities to make mistakes that do not disrupt the organization, are essential to learning (Schein, 2010). Moreover, feedback has been identified as critical to individual job redesign, through top-down feedback from supervisor to supervisee (Hackman, Oldham, Janson, & Purdy in Boone & Bowen, 1987), as well as to organizational improvement, through 360-degree managerial assessment by superiors, peers, and subordinates (Schein, 2010). Use of feedback has even been correlated with expert performance when used by individuals of high metacognitive knowledge (Haynie et al., 2012). Therefore, KCI needs to provide AMs formative feedback on where turnover for their respective teams EMPLOYEE CHURN 59 stands and on how new strategies are working so they can adjust retention methods and contribute to organizational goal attainment. Much like incentives, feedback has conditions of design and delivery that make it more or less helpful in the workplace. For example, feedback is typically only helpful if the person receiving it has asked for it and if there is consensus within the organizational culture about what is measured and how (Schein, 2010). Thus, AMs need to seek and accept feedback, while also participating in a broader KCI conversation about performance measurement content and methods. Once feedback is provided, employees need time to reflect, evaluate, and incorporate the information (Schein, 2010). Such time and resources would be present in an organization with an active learning culture, where value is placed on learning and reflection, as well as on testing new methods (Schein, 2010). Lastly, feedback, if negatively focused on the individual, biased or prejudicial, or based in the past, may diminish worker motivation (Clark & Estes, 2008). Therefore, feedback provided by KCI should be informational and corrective without diminishing AM self-image or motivation towards turnover improvement goal attainment. Area Managers' cultural setting influences: Resources for effective application of employee training and compensation strategies. The final cultural setting influence deals with employee training and compensation. Area Managers need to have the resources to effectively deliver employee training and competitive compensation strategies, both of which are correlated with employee retention. Area Managers' effective application of employee training. Literature often cites training as a primary means of positively impacting employee retention. Cross-industry research previously cited correlates turnover intent with employee satisfaction (Alkahtani, 2015; Lee & Mitchell, 2003). Employee satisfaction is directly impacted by training (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009) and is thus proposed to reduce turnover (Alkahtani, 2015). Literature on the childcare EMPLOYEE CHURN 60 industry echoes the impact of training on turnover in its ability to effectively prepare workers, reduce stress, contribute to equitable compensation and career paths, and foster professional attachments and satisfaction that aid retention (Campbell et al., 2000; First Research Industry Profiles, 2015; Floyd & Phillips, 2013; Gong, 2012; Hale-Jinks et al., 2006; NAA, 2006; Nitardy, 2008; Whitebook et al., 2014). The aforementioned training literature suggests multiple theoretical views of employee learning that provide various pathways for how to deliver training. For instance, organizations may see employee training through a behavioral learning lens, where employees are products of the training environment, and trainers can predictably condition workers by knowing how to use feedback, rewards, reinforcement, and punishment (Daly, 2006). Organizations may also see employee training through a cognitive lens, where trainers tap into information processing theory (Kirshner, Kirshner, & Paas, 2006; Schraw & McCrudden, 2006), such as knowing how to connect training content to prior knowledge and interests to increase encoding and retrieval, how to break learning into smaller chunks to manage cognitive load, and how to provide practice to increase automaticity and transfer. A social-cognitive view on training may also be assumed, where trainers know how to employ role models for observational learning, teach trainees to set goals, self-observe, and self-evaluate, or know how to use Prochaska's model of change (Dembo & Eaton, 2000) to nudge employees past pre-contemplation in order to buy into new knowledge and skills needed for success. Clearly numerous options exist for how KCI views and supports Area Managers in the implementation of training, any of which could impact turnover and are therefore worth consideration when pursuing turnover improvement goals. Area Managers' effective application of compensation strategy. How employees are compensated is another widely cited, cross-industry area of organizational influence that is important for Area Manager empowerment over turnover. As previously stated, compensation EMPLOYEE CHURN 61 can serve as reward for employee loyalty, as a strategy to remain competitive for workers, or to ensure equitable pay internally (Abbasi & Hollman, 2009; Bolman & Deal, 2013; Daly, 2009). Because Alkahtani's (2015) literature review found fair salaries, not necessarily high ones, were relevant to retention, and because rewards based upon tenure and tuition reimbursement may also improve retention (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009; Lee & Mitchell, 2003), KCI needs to equip AMs with funds for competitive salaries and benefits to help retain their employees. This concludes the examination of literature about employee turnover influences through the lens of the gap analysis framework. Table 2 summarizes assumed needs for knowledge, motivation, and organizational issues. Table 3 summarizes assumed influences for knowledge, motivation, and organizational issues by literature reviewed in this chapter. Table 2 Summary of Assumed Needs for Knowledge, Skills, Motivation, and Organizational Issues Assumed Needs Sources Knowledge & Skills Area Managers Motivation Area Managers Organization KCI Learning and Motivation Theory • Need to know how field employee turnover is conceptualized by definition, common causes, and stakeholder implications. • Need to self-assess the interrelationship among their respective work activities and • Need to see the value of investing time and effort in retention strategies. • Need to believe field employee retention is strongly influenced by their direct efforts rather than by external factors, such as low • Needs to hold AMs accountable for employee turnover. • Needs to convey a supportive attitude towards AMs trying new retention strategies. • Needs to set and communicate employee retention EMPLOYEE CHURN 62 field employee turnover. • Need to know how to support employees through their respective job functions both practically and emotionally. compensation and limited hours. goals to guide AM performance expectations. • Needs to provide incentives to drive AM investment in retention strategies. • Needs to provide AMs formative feedback on employee turnover and retention strategy efficacy. Related Literature • Need understanding of afterschool industry history and employee turnover prevalence. • Need to know how management style and organizational processes impact employee turnover. • Need to understand implications of employee turnover for children, families, organizations, and society. • Need to believe strategic turnaround of high employee turnover is possible. • Need to see the value in addressing training, compensation, and advancement as means of improving employee satisfaction and turnover. • Needs to provide resources which address management deficiencies and develop management supports that impact employee retention. • Needs to provide resources for employee training, compensation, and professional development. EMPLOYEE CHURN 63 Table 3 General Literature Summary of Assumed Influences on Employee Turnover Assumed Area Manager Knowledge Influences on Employee Turnover General Literature Area Managers (AMs) need to know how field employee turnover is conceptualized. (Declarative - conceptual) (Bandura, 2005; Denler et al., 2006; Krathwohl, 2002; Lee & Mitchell, 2003; Society for Human Resource Management, 2015; Schneider et al., 2011; Star & Seifert, 2006; U.S. Department of Labor, n.d.) AMs need to self-assess the interrelationship among their respective work activities and field employee turnover. (Metacognitive) (Abbasi & Hollman, 2000; Alkahtani, 2015; Baker, 2006; Cho & Jung, 2014; Cleverley, 2016; Floyd & Phillips, 2013; Haynie et al., 2010; Krathwohl, 2002; Kwak and Choi, 2015) AMs need to know how to support employees through their respective job functions both practically and emotionally. (Procedural) (Abbasi & Hollman, 2009; Alkahtani, 2015; Campbell et al., 2000; Floyd & Phillips, 2013; Gong, 2012; Hale-Jinks et al., 2006; Kwak & Choi, 2015; Lee & Mitchell, 2003; Maden et al., 2016; Nitardy, 2008; Society for Human Resource Management, 2015; Whitebook et al., 2014) Assumed Area Manager Motivation Influences on Employee Turnover General Literature AMs need to see the value of investing time and effort in retention strategies. (Expectancy Value Theory - Perceived Cost) (Alkahtani, 2015; Bolman & Deal, 2013; Clark & Estes, 2008; Eccles et al. in Eccles, 2006; Gong, 2012; Nitardy, 2008; Northouse, 2016) AMs need to believe field employee retention is strongly influenced by their direct efforts rather than by external factors. (Attribution Theory - Locus of Control) (Anderman & Anderman, 2006; Clark & Estes, 2008; Michel, 2011; Rueda, 2011; Weiner, 1985) Assumed Area Manager Organizational Influences on Employee Turnover General Literature Cultural Model Influence 1: The organization needs to hold AMs accountable for employee turnover. (Bolman & Deal, 2010; Clark & Estes, 2008; Firestone & Shipps, 2005; Grimshaw et al., 2006; Guilding et al., 2014; Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004; Lencioni, 2002; Schein, 2010) EMPLOYEE CHURN 64 Cultural Model Influence 2: The organization needs to convey a supportive attitude towards AMs trying new retention strategies. (Campbell et al., 2000; Dyer et al., 2011; Northouse, 2016; Schein, 2010) Cultural Setting Influence 1: The organization needs to set and communicate employee retention goals to guide AM performance expectations. (Bolman & Deal, 2013; Clark & Estes, 2008; Lewis, 2011; Schein, 2010) Cultural Setting Influence 2: The organization needs to provide AMs incentives to drive investment in retention strategies. (Bolman & Deal, 2013; Clark & Estes, 2008; Mayer, 2011; Schein, 2010) Cultural Setting Influence 3: The organization needs to provide AMs formative feedback on employee turnover and retention strategy efficacy. Cultural Setting Influence 4: The organization needs to provide AMs resources to effectively deliver employee training and competitive compensation strategies. (Bolman & Deal, 2013; Clark & Estes, 2008; Hackman et al., 1984; Schein, 2010) (Abbasi & Hollman, 2009; Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009; Alkahtani, 2015; Bolman & Deal, 2013; Campbell et al., 2000; Daly, 2006; Dembo & Eaton, 2000; First Research Industry Profiles, 2015; Floyd & Phillips, 2013; Gong, 2012; Hale-Jinks et al., 2006; Kirshner, Kirshner, & Paas, 2006; Lee & Mitchell, 2003; NAA, 2006; Nitardy, 2008; Schraw & McCrudden, 2006; Whitebook et al., 2014) EMPLOYEE CHURN 65 Conceptual Framework for the Study Integrating Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences The purpose of a conceptual framework is to convey and connect the primary concepts of a study through narrative and/or graphic representation (Maxwell, 2013). The framework dually serves as scaffolding for the study framed by the researcher's disciplinary orientation, as well as acting as a reflection of the interrelationships among key ideas, factors, and variables (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). As such, the framework impacts every aspect of the study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Though primary areas of the literature on employee turnover and key influences of the stakeholder group have been presented individually, the conceptual framework demonstrates their interrelationship and how this interaction impacts goal attainment and drives cyclical repercussions. An explanation of the graphic follows Figure 1. EMPLOYEE CHURN 66 Figure 1 Conceptual Framework for the Study Integrating Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences Figure 1 represents the conceptual framework for the study integrating knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences as reflected in the first two chapters. The graphic is framed by implications of field employee retention for key stakeholders (children, families, organization, and society). This framing reflects how implications for stakeholders act as both the foundation of the study's importance as well as the cyclical consequences of goal attainment. The organization for the study, KCI, is represented centrally by the hexagon. The stakeholder group for the study, KCI Area Managers, is represented by the triangle and is positioned within EMPLOYEE CHURN 67 the organization. The positioning of field leaders within the KCI depicts the organization's influence on Area Managers' ability to progress towards and achieve the turnover improvement goal based upon organizational supports, processes, resources, strategy, and/or barriers as consistent with the Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis framework discussed in Chapter One. These include invisible organizational beliefs in the form of cultural models (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001; Schneider, Brief, & Guzzo, 1996), such as accountability and attitudes towards new strategy use, as well as more concrete workplace activities, or cultural settings (Schneider et al., 1996), such as retention goals, incentives, formative feedback, and resources for training and compensation. Arrows inside the central graphic depict how organizational influences directly impact field leaders' knowledge and motivation. This chapter detailed specific field leader knowledge and skill influences represented in the graphic, including conceptual, metacognitive, and procedural. This chapter also described field leader motivational influences on employee retention, including Expectancy Value Theory in the form of perceived cost and locus of control. The overlay of the organizational hexagon with the downward field leader triangle represents how all influences interact through field leaders to impact turnover improvement goal attainment. Finally, the arrow from goal attainment leads to implications, which then travels upward back to the four key groups impacted by employee retention. This arrow represents the cycle of influence and consequences goal attainment, or lack thereof, has on children, families, organizations, and society. Conclusion The purpose of this project was to evaluate to what degree Kids' Club Incorporated (KCI) was on track to achieve its employee turnover improvement goal in spring 2017. As such, EMPLOYEE CHURN 68 Chapter Two presented literature on employee turnover, focusing on causes, correlations, and impact in childcare and afterschool settings, as well as across industries. The literature presented supports the critical importance of employee retention to consumer experiences and organizational success. Chapter Two also presented a gap analysis perspective, where employee turnover was considered in relation to stakeholder knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences. While literature presented addressed various aspects of these influences, there is no known direct application of the gap analysis framework to employee turnover in the afterschool industry or to the organization of study. Therefore, Chapter Three will begin with an explanation of the methods by which the gap analysis framework was applied to KCI Area Managers in order to determine turnover goal progress. EMPLOYEE CHURN 69 CHAPTER THREE: METHODS This chapter presents the study's research design and methods for data collection and analysis. As a reminder from Chapter One, the purpose of the study was to evaluate Kids' Club Incorporated (KCI) Area Managers' knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational influences related to achieving the organizational goal of improving upon a 37% employee turnover rate. The questions that guided this study were the following: 1. In school year 2016-17, what is the gap between KCI's field employee turnover and the organizational goal of improving upon a 37% overall turnover rate to a 30% turnover rate for Program Managers and a 35% turnover rate for Educators and Coaches by Spring 2017? 2. What are KCI Area Managers' knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational influences related to achieving the turnover improvement goal? 3. What are the recommended solutions to close the knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational gaps with regard to employee turnover at KCI? This chapter begins with a review of participating stakeholders presented in Chapter One. Thereafter, sampling criterion, recruitment strategy, and rationale for four data collection approaches are described. Next, methods for data collection, instrumentation use, and analysis are detailed. Next, a discussion of study credibility, trustworthiness, validity, and reliability is provided. Finally, Chapter Three closes with an exploration of ethical considerations, as well as anticipated limitations and delimitations of the study. Participating Stakeholders Multiple KCI stakeholder groups contribute to field employee retention. However, field leaders act as a unique bridge between KCI's central office, where policies and procedures are EMPLOYEE CHURN 70 established and resources allocated, and the field, where the problem of employee turnover exists. As direct supervisors to field employees, Area Managers have the closest, most frequent contact with the field employees who are at risk of turning over and thereby possess the most significant potential for impacting turnover improvement goal achievement as compared to other KCI stakeholders. Therefore, Area Managers (AMs) were the stakeholders of focus for this study. Survey Sampling Criterion and Rationale Criterion 1. Current KCI Area Managers comprised the survey sample. Collecting data on AMs' knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational influences related to field employee turnover is necessary to answer research question two and to begin to generate recommended solutions for research question three. Criterion 2. Current KCI AMs comprised the survey sample. As direct supervisors to the field employees at risk of or actually turning over, AMs have the most immediate experience with the problem of practice as compared to other stakeholders in the organization, who may also influence turnover but in ways that are less direct. Survey Sampling Strategy and Rationale For the survey, all KCI Area Managers were sought for participation. While other KCI stakeholders may impact employee turnover, collecting data from Area Managers had the greatest potential to yield the most valuable information on the topic, as AMs have the greatest frequency of direct contact with field employees, and therefore may have the greatest insight into and influence over the problem of turnover. Because there were only 18 members of this population at the time of the study, census sampling was used, which eliminated selection bias and random sampling error (Daniel, 2012), while also taking advantage of the availability of the entire group, the practicality of administering to 18 members, and the manageability of the EMPLOYEE CHURN 71 volume of resulting data. A high response rate of no less than 80% was sought to acquire limited but sufficient quantitative data to begin to answer the question of what is happening at KCI with regard to employee turnover. Participants were recruited by personal appearance in the regional team meetings prior to the study window, whereupon the study was explained, information sheets were provided, and the pending survey was discussed. Then, each potential participant received an email invitation to their work email address with a Qualtrics.com link to the survey provided in the body of the email. To incentivize participants, a numeric code was provided at the conclusion of the survey which participants were directed to email to the principal researcher after participation to earn eligibility for a monetary gift card drawing. This code was necessary since responses were anonymous, and thus there was no way to confirm specific participants for drawing eligibility other than to imbed such a code at the survey's conclusion. A convergent parallel mixed methods study (Creswell, 2014) was planned due to the limited time frame of the study. Thus, the survey was conducted within the same window as other methods. The survey sample was accessed electronically through email introduction to the survey followed by online data collection. Individual Interview Sampling Criterion and Rationale Criterion 1. Thirty percent or six of all KCI Area Managers participated in individual interviews. This smaller group from the total population created two-tier sampling against the survey that allowed for in-depth discussion within the limited time frame of the study. Criterion 2. New and returning AMs were included in the stratified sample. New AMs referred to those who began the AM role in the current school year of the study, while returning AMs were those who served in the role in prior school years, either for KCI or another organization. By stratifying the sample and interviewing a number of both new and returning EMPLOYEE CHURN 72 AMs proportional to the makeup of the whole group, analysis held the potential of revealing subgroup correlations that would help customize recommended solutions. Criterion 3. AMs who managed newly contracted school districts, returning school districts, or both were included in the stratified sample. Newly contracted school districts referred to those in their first year of contract with KCI to provide student enrichment programs, while returning school districts were in their second or subsequent contract year with KCI. By stratifying the sample and interviewing AMs from both newly contracted and returning districts in numbers proportional to the whole group, analysis held the potential to reveal subgroup correlations that would help customize recommended solutions for the third research question. Interview Sampling Strategy and Rationale For interviews, sampling was non-probability, non-random, purposeful, and stratified (Creswell, 2014; Fink, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The use of non-probability, non-random, purposeful selection of participants was designed to generate representativeness of the population (Maxwell, 2013), from which rich qualitative discovery could be conducted (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Thirty percent (n = 6) of all KCI Area Managers were interviewed, which created two-tier sampling and in-depth data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), while limiting the sample to a realistic size given the limited study window. The sample was also stratified, meaning participants will reflect an accurate proportion of certain traits compared to the whole group in order to generate interviewee responses that were more likely to be representative of the whole group than if collected from a non-stratified sample (Creswell, 2016). In this case, stratification meant including numbers of new and returning managers who served newly contracted and returning school districts in the interview sample that were proportional to the whole AM group. As with the survey, new AMs were those who began in the AM role in the school year of the study, while returning AMs were those who EMPLOYEE CHURN 73 served as an AM in prior school years, either for KCI or another organization. Also akin to the survey, newly contracted school districts were those just contracted for the school year of the study and running the first year of student enrichment programming with KCI. Returning school districts were those in their second or subsequent year of partnership with KCI. Typically, returning school districts have returning AMs, while newly contracted districts have new AMs. However, there are instances where returning AMs have a newly contracted district in their territory of primarily returning districts, or a seasoned Area Manager from another organization joins KCI taking on newly contracted districts. By probing into new versus returning Area Managers with their new and returning districts, the overall population's heterogeneity was represented. This was key to what Maxwell (2013) terms purposeful sampling. This representativeness allowed for internal generalizability (Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña, 2014) to the entire AM population. Additionally, subgroup analysis held the potential to reveal meaningful commonalities among manager types of retention knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational influences to more deeply answer research question two and better steer customized solutions in response to research question three. The six participants sought were Area Managers who, across their group, represented the various permutations of AM types previously described. Based upon KCI's managers and districts as new or returning at the time of the study, the sample sought included: two new AMs with newly contracted school districts; two returning AMs with returning contracted school districts, and; two AMs, one new and one returning, who have both new and returning contracted school districts. Participants were recruited by personal appearance in regional team meetings prior to the study window, whereupon the study was explained, information sheets were provided, and the pending interviews were discussed. Then, each of the six potential interviewees received an EMPLOYEE CHURN 74 email invitation to their work email address inviting them to confirm or deny participation by responding to the email. If any participants declined participation, alternative AMs were sought to fill the six spots with consideration of representativeness of the overall sample. This occurred in one instance, whereupon the declining AM was replaced by a representative peer. To incentivize participants, AMs were informed in their regional meeting and in their email invitation that interview participation invitation would provide them the option of participating in a monetary gift card drawing to be held at the conclusion of all interviews. Participants were accessed for interview based upon their geographic location relative to KCI's central office, where the principal researcher worked. For those in the central office, face-to-face interviews were held, while AMs in other areas of the country were accessed via the internet using gotomeeting.com with face-to-face computer cameras and cell phone audio. Interviews were held within the same window of time as other methods were carried out, and thus was part of a convergent parallel mixed methods approach (Creswell, 2014). Observation Sampling Criterion and Rationale Criterion 1. Area Managers who worked out of the KCI's central office were observed due to accessibility by the principal researcher. This included 10 new and returning AMs leading new and returning contracted school districts. Criterion 2. Area Managers who worked out of KCI's central office were observed during their weekly team meetings during the study window due to the likelihood of the topic of employee turnover coming up either by agenda item or in conversation. Observation Sampling (Access) Strategy and Rationale Observations took place at the KCI central office due to accessibility by the principal researcher, who works out of the same office. The sample of 10 AMs represented both new and returning leaders and contracted school districts. There was a high likelihood that the topic of EMPLOYEE CHURN 75 employee retention and turnover would come up in these meetings either by agenda item or unplanned conversation due to the frequency of this issue in the industry and at KCI. This allowed for observation of group dynamics around the topic, which held the potential to reveal additional insights into influences and provide complementarity and expansion on the topic (Maxwell, 2013). Observations were also used to triangulate data gathered by other methods for the purpose of yielding research themes (Creswell, 2014), reducing biases and incidental connections (Maxwell, 2013), and elevating internal validity and credibility (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Permission to observe participants was sought via personal appearance at the regional meeting prior to the study window, whereupon the study was explained, information sheets were provided, and the pending observations were discussed. Observations were conducted throughout the study window along with other methods as part of a convergent parallel mixed methods approach (Creswell, 2014). Observations involved observing one-hour gatherings held Tuesday mornings typically three to four times per month at the KCI central office. Attendees were present both in person and by speakerphone. Data Collection and Instrumentation There were four methods of data collection in this convergent parallel mixed methods case study. Each method addressed the research questions in some manner, and each required varied methods of collection and analysis. Methods in the study were surveys, interviews, observations, and document collection. The use of multiple methods, or triangulation, was used to confirm findings and boosts internal validity by gathering data that most authentically reflected participants' experiences (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). For each of the four methods, a rationale for inclusion and explanation of instrumentation, administration, and analysis follows. EMPLOYEE CHURN 76 Surveys A quantitative survey was included as an instrument in this study because, according to Fink (2013), surveys directly access participant knowledge, feelings, perspectives, and behaviors. Surveys provide data in a manner that is efficient in delivery and produces swift results (Creswell, 2014), which was important for this limited time study. Survey responses were designed to answer the second research question regarding Area Managers' (AMs) knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational employee turnover influences. Surveys also support program design guidance (Fink, 2013), and thus held the potential to assist in the generation of proposed solutions to answer research question three. The survey consisted of 24 close-ended multiple-choice questions. Multiple-choice surveys are more efficient in administration and reliable in results than surveys that use other types of questions (Fink, 2013). Survey questions addressed AMs' knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational influences with regard to employee turnover in order to answer the second research question. Survey questions also specifically reflected the conceptual framework by exploring the relationship between KCI influences and AMs' knowledge and skills as they converged to impact turnover. If a survey successfully measures what it is intended to measure, in this case AMs' turnover influences, the survey has what Creswell (2014) would term content validity, as well as alignment with the conceptual framework for the study. While this survey was original and thus lacked established validity, items were directly based upon theories of learning, motivation, and organizational culture and related research findings detailed throughout Chapter Two. In Chapter Two, Table 2 (General Literature Summary of Assumed Influences on Employee Turnover) lists each specific influence measured in the survey beside literary sources. So, while the survey for this study was not established as valid, the survey items were based EMPLOYEE CHURN 77 upon theory and findings from studies that utilized valid and reliable instrumentation, thus aiding this survey's content validity. Due to the limited time frame for the study, methods, including the survey, were conducted simultaneously as part of a convergent parallel mixed methods approach (Creswell, 2014). The survey was cross-sectional and conducted online. All AMs received an email invitation to participate on the same date, as well as follow-up invitations administered simultaneously in order to provide uniform opportunity to engage. This aided reliability in consistent survey administration. The body of the email included a direct link to the survey location at Qualtrics.com, and all responses were anonymous. Descriptive analysis (Creswell, 2014) of the quantitative surveys yielded statistical information, which was then fuse with data from other methods in order to establish themes, interpret meaning, and ultimately answer the research questions. The survey is located in Appendix A. Interviews Qualitative interviews were included in the study in order to capture information which could not be easily observed. Information that is difficult to observe but which interviews may capture include participants' perspectives, feelings, and intentions related to a topic (Patton, 2002; Weiss, 1994). Interviews also provide greater depth of information regarding participants' perspectives (Patton, 2002), capturing participants' own words in ways that illuminate how they interpret a topic for the researcher (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007). Interviewing a smaller, purposeful, stratified sample (Creswell, 2014) of the whole group kept the task manageable given the limited study window and was designed to provide two-tier sampling (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), as well as representative responses and group heterogeneity (Maxwell, 2013) essential to qualitative inquiry. Therefore, the sample included six Area Managers who, across their group, represented the various permutations of AM categories who were new or returning and who served new or EMPLOYEE CHURN 78 returning contracted school districts at the time of the study. As previously stated, based upon KCI's managers and districts at the time of the study, the stratified sample included: two new AMs with newly contracted school districts; two returning AMs with returning contracted school districts, and; two AMs, one new and one returning, both of whom new and returning contracted school districts. Individual interviews served the study better than a focus group. Focus groups are appropriate for non-sensitive topics (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), such as the topic of this study. However, the principal researcher ruled out the group interview approach due to concern that new AMs could be less likely to disclose gaps in knowledge, skills, or motivation on the topic in the presence of their veteran peers, who may possess and express more information and confidence on the same topic. The individual interview environment was more likely ensure comfort for all participants regardless of experience. Focus groups also present the likely challenge of scheduling a mutually convenient time for busy participants who office remotely from one another and across U.S. time zones, as well as the difficulty hosting an effective, balanced group conversation with some participants in person and others via phone or internet. Each of the six participants engaged in one interview. Standardized, open-ended interview questions and follow-up questions are available in Appendix B. Predetermined questions and order provided assurance that all interviewees were asked about the same topics in the same manner, which aided standardized administration (Patton, 2002). Standardization helps manage the focus of questions (Creswell, 2014) to ensure relevance to the study's research questions and conceptual framework. Standardization further reduces researcher effects (Patton, 1987), while delimiting content and aiding comparisons made during analysis (Patton, 2002). However, a semi-structured approach was also adopted for casual conversation to ease into the EMPLOYEE CHURN 79 interview with spontaneous follow-up probes to gain clarification and enrich detail (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007; Weiss, 1994). Open-ended interview questions were used, as they promote participant sharing of perspectives and opinions (Creswell, 2014) by subjects presumed to be experts on the topic (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007). Questions were designed to be neutral, brief, easily stated, and clearly focused on a single concept of inquiry in each question, all of which are keys to effective qualitative inquiry (Krueger & Casey, 2009; Patton, 2002). Questions were strategically ordered and worded, opening with topics that required minimal effort of participants, moving from general to more specific topics, and framed by a clear opening and transitions to get and keep the conversation going (Krueger & Casey, 2009; Patton, 2002). Questions explored AMs' knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational influences with employee turnover as general concepts and direct experiences. In this way, the interviews served to inform the second research question while building understanding of the interaction between AMs and the organization on the topic of employee turnover as represented in the conceptual framework. The location and method of interviews was contingent upon the geographic location of each AM within the sample. All interviews were one-on-one and audio recorded on the personal cell phone or computer of the principal investigator. Recording ensures preservation of each interviewee's full experience as stated (Patton, 2002). For AMs in KCI's central office, interviews took place in the principal researcher’s office. For AMs who worked in other geographic areas, interviews took place over gotomeeting.com, which provided both video and audio connection. During both types of interviews, the principal researcher took hand-written notes. Notes document emerging follow-up questions (Patton, 1987), capture observations of nonverbal behavior in relation to verbal statements, archive key moments in the interview to revisit in analysis, and act as a backup in the event of recording failure (Patton, 2002). EMPLOYEE CHURN 80 Interviews occurred simultaneously with other methods in a convergent parallel mixed methods approach (Creswell, 2014). Once each interview was transcribed using the website rev.com, the researcher deleted all recordings. Interview analysis began immediately following each interview. Debrief notes (Patton, 2002) were made to record observations not already noted nor captured on recordings, as well as to self-reflect on the conducting of the interview itself and the quality of information gathered. Audio transcription of interviews was used during analysis in order to extract and interpret meaning, to compare answers across AM subgroups, and to identify themes to compare against data collected by other methods in order to answer the third research question about organizational recommendations. Observation The next method of data collection for this study was observation. Observation provides the researcher firsthand experience with the topic in real time and in the setting in which it occurs (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This allows the researcher to record data as it is happening with an understanding of context, to note things participants do not report due to routine or discomfort, and to draw upon one's own knowledge to personally interpret meaning and draw inferences possible thanks to presence (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Patton, 1987). In addition, while interviews focus on stakeholder self-report of their own perspectives, observation focuses on researcher description of the setting and behaviors related to the topic, thereby complementing and expanding understanding of the topic (Maxwell, 2013). Area Managers were observed in their weekly team meetings in which employee turnover was predicted to be a discussion topic, either as an agenda item or spontaneously due to its prevalence in the industry and as an organizational challenge. These meetings involved AMs and a Regional Director, who served as their direct supervisor. For purposes of access, observations took place in KCI's central office hosted by one Regional Director with 10 AMs attending in EMPLOYEE CHURN 81 person and by speakerphone. These meetings were typically one hour on Tuesday mornings. The number of observations was planned to be four but ended up being three due to a meeting cancellation during the study window. Observations occurred within the same window as other methods in a convergent parallel mixed methods approach (Creswell, 2014). During observations, the principal researcher was an "observer as participant" (Creswell, 2014, p. 191; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 144), meaning participants knew the observation's purpose, and the researcher concentrated on observing versus participating with those present. Observations focused on individual comments, group discussion, and nonverbal behaviors related to any mention or implication of employee turnover. Specifically, the principal researcher looked and listened for evidence that would help answer research question two regarding AM knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational influences regarding turnover, and for information provided by or represented through the Regional Director with regard to organizational influencers represented in the conceptual framework. Observers are sometimes intrusive (Creswell, 2014), and distraction was already a moderate potential due to the full room in which the Area Manager meetings occur and the physical presence of the principal researcher seated on the side. Therefore, the principal researcher quietly took hand written field notes during observations without interacting to be as inconspicuous as possible. Field notes serve as written record of what the researcher sees, hears, thinks about, and experiences during observations (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007). The template used for field notes is included in Appendix C. Following each observation, the principal researcher made summative and reflective notes on the observation itself as part of initial analysis. Full analysis included categorizing and connecting themes across observations and in comparison to data collected via other methods. EMPLOYEE CHURN 82 Historical Documents The final data collection method for the study was review of historical organizational documentation. Reviewing documents affords the opportunity to gather information not collected by other methods, thereby providing a more complete understanding of the topic (McEwan & McEwan, 2003). Document review also potentially confirms or disconfirms data collected from other methods, yielding new insights or questions (McEwan & McEwan, 2003). KCI employee turnover reports were collected to answer the first research question about the status of employee turnover. Reviewing such reports dating back as far as they are available held the potential to further illustrate KCI's long-term retention trends, providing a historical perspective that could illuminate organizational development on the topic (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) and correlations with the influences represented in the conceptual framework. Additionally, reviewing current KCI organizational goals verified the existence of turnover goals and provided organizational language around goals. Reviewing goals also reveals their position in relation to other priorities (Creswell, 2014), such as other KCI organizational goals outside and potentially competing with turnover improvement. Data Analysis Analysis of the data collected occurred in phases, moving from raw data, through analysis to initial results, and finally to synthesis of key findings. The first phase focused on quantitative data collected through KCI turnover reports to answer the first research question about how KCI is doing in relation to its employee turnover improvement goal. Historical turnover percentages documented in KCI turnover reports for the present school year of study as well as three years prior were reviewed to gain an understanding of multi-year trends. Across these years of reports, where monthly data was available, monthly turnover data was inspected to ascertain patterns of higher and lower seasonal turnover. Because of year-to-year differences in EMPLOYEE CHURN 83 the number of months KCI reported turnover data, as well as uncertainty about calculation methods for data collected three and four years ago, data was cleaned (Alkin, 2011) to largely disregard earlier reports and to focus on the current and prior year only, when timeframe and calculation methods were known to be consistent. KCI turnover reports included all employees. Therefore, to isolate field employee data for this study, monthly turnover was manually calculated and recorded in a spreadsheet. Each month’s average number of active field employees combined (Program Managers, Educators, and Coaches) and related turnovers were recorded in the spreadsheet. An online percentage calculator (https://percentagecalculator.net) was then used to determine the turnover percentage for each month. For August, 2016, through May, 2017, total turnover was calculated by comparing the average number of active field employees, or the mean (Alkin, 2011), to the total number of turnovers to determine a school year turnover percentage. The percentage for school year 2017-18 was then compared to prior year performance to determine any movement towards or away from the turnover improvement goal. Separate turnover percentages for Program Managers and Educators/Coaches were similarly calculated to determine performance compared to the turnover improvement goal for each sub-group. This analysis was then related back to the conceptual framework, as detailed in Chapter 4, by providing concrete evidence of the gap between retention performance and goal attainment. The second and third phases of analysis involved processing both quantitative and qualitative data to answer the second research question about Area Managers’ turnover influences. A data analysis plan (Pazzaglia, Stafford, & Rodriguez, 2016) was developed to map conceptual framework topics to survey and interview items and to outline planned analysis and presentation methods. For the AM survey about turnover influences, quantitative reports were developed via the survey administration tool, Qualtrics Insight Platform EMPLOYEE CHURN 84 (https://www.qualtrics.com). This report provided response frequencies in number and percentages. There were no non-respondents (Pazzaglia et al., 2016) due to 100% participation, nor were there any missing or incomplete data due to survey design that forced responses for all items. Working with the data in a spreadsheet, descriptive statistics were manually applied to the data. These statistics included: measures of central tendency (specifically answer mode, or the value occurring most frequently) to determine the most frequent answer for each item; weighted mean (values multiplied by frequency) to ensure fair representation of Likert scale responses where raw data coded word answers numerically (Salkind, 2016); and response rankings for ratings scales (Pazzaglia et. al, 2016). Standard deviation (variability among scores) was calculated for Likert type items with caution because standard deviation is most applicable to interval data (Alkin, 2011), while Likert type items, in this case of Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree, do not ensure interval level of measurement with equal distances between items (Salkind, 2016). Sub-reports were generated to divide veteran and new AM responses, whereupon further analysis discerned some instances of significant differences in responses between these sub-groups. This analysis supported the areas of the conceptual framework, including knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences, as well as implications for key stakeholders. The third phase of analysis addressed qualitative data, utilizing three coding steps for interview transcripts and observation field notes. Coding moves raw data to a conceptual level (Corbin & Strauss, 2008), where it is summarized and sub-grouped in various ways depending upon the phase of coding (Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña, 2014). The three coding steps used were open, axial, and selective (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). First, interview transcripts were reformatted to provide a wide margin for hand-written analysis. Open coding, or labeling EMPLOYEE CHURN 85 potentially relevant units of data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) was then used on transcripts and observation field notes, which were then transferred to a spreadsheet codebook. The codebook provided the ability to conduct constant comparisons (Corbin & Strauss, 2008) that revealed initial data groupings. Second, the codebook and data groupings were organized via axial coding (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) tied to the conceptual framework, where open codes were categorized by patterns and themes that connected to Area Manager retention knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences. An additional category for emergent themes was developed for codes that did not fall within the conceptual framework but were potentially meaningful. Counting codes and recording these numbers in the codebook provided typicality across multiple data sets and methods, thereby providing insight into commonalities among respondents as well as points of negative or conflicting evidence (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). Finally, selective coding (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) recorded initial hypotheses and assertions within the body of the codebook. The final phase of analysis fused results from surveys, interviews, and observations to generate findings that answer the second research question about Area Manager retention influences. The write-up was organized into sections and sub-sections that tied to the conceptual framework by presenting assertions supported by the most compelling data. Each larger influence (knowledge, motivation, organizational) concluded with a synthesis of all findings under the heading. This synthesis drew upon the survey results and codebook, as well as a running data memo (Harding, 2013) kept throughout analysis to record conceptual reflections on overarching themes and emerging assertions. Finally, all syntheses were integrated into the Chapter Four conclusion that embodies the entire conceptual framework. This ensures the reader fully understands the status of KCI employee retention and Area Managers’ retention influences, thus preparing the reader for Chapter Five implications and recommendations back to the organization. EMPLOYEE CHURN 86 Credibility and Trustworthiness In qualitative data collection, the presence of and reliance upon humans as data collection instruments poses potential threats to credibility and trustworthiness of findings. For the study at hand, identifying such risks allowed for proactive mitigation. Initially, the principal researcher, as a member of the organization of study, may have assumed to know what the stakeholder groups knew on the study topic and what resources were available. This assumption was allayed by heeding Miles, Huberman, and Saldaña's (2014) guidance for qualitative studies, including not theorizing in the first place so as to allow understandings to emerge. The principal researcher also followed the suggestion of Miles et al. (2014) to pay attention to outliers among respondents, follow up on surprises, and look for conflicting or negative evidence. For interviews and observations, the risks associated with researcher effects (Miles et al., 2014) are significant. The two primary effects are researcher subjectivity or bias and researcher reactivity. Subjectivity, or bias, refers to how the researcher's identity and prior experience may be brought in to a study (Maxwell, 2013). Maxwell (2013) points out conflicting views about researcher bias that have some research authors arguing for separation of all things personal about the researcher, while others maintain such separation works against essential qualitative insight. Therefore, the goal for this study was to minimize bias without eliminating valuable within-organization and industry perspectives that enriched interpretation of Area Manager responses and behaviors. This was aided by the principal researcher intentionally reflecting upon possible bias, focusing on research questions during interviews and observations, conducting repeat observations, taking notes on concrete facts, using triangulated methods that revealed discrepant evidence, and conducting observations unobtrusively and via immersion (Creswell, 2014; Maxwell, 2013; Miles et al., 2013). EMPLOYEE CHURN 87 Researcher reactivity pertains to the impact the researcher has on the study setting and participants (Maxwell, 2013). While ultimately impossible to fully eliminate, it is possible to understand the potential dynamics and work with them (Maxwell, 2013). For instance, even after explaining the use of data collected, participants may alter persona or responses in an effort to present in ways they believe are desirable to the researcher or to preserve their own agenda (Miles et al., 2014). The principal researcher sought to lessen the influence of presenting well by avoiding leading questions and conducting respondent validation of what was learned by the researcher (Creswell, 2014; Maxwell, 2013; Miles et. al, 2013). The researcher also assuaged reactivity by transcribing full interviews, triangulating data with that gathered via other methods, comparing observations conducted at different times, and keeping running notes on quality data collection to inform analysis (Creswell, 2014; Maxwell, 2013; Miles et al., 2013). As a qualitative study, sampling strategy impacts internal generalizability. By using a representative sample, findings may be applicable within the setting, even to those who did not participate and to the future (Maxwell, 2013; Miles et al., 2013). In this study, internal generalizability was supported by the survey sample being fully inclusive as a census and by representativeness in the stratified interview sample. External generalizability is less concrete with qualitative studies, where the focus is more on extending a theory of processes to other settings versus specific outcomes (Maxwell, 2013). To this end, the study's findings afford KCI insights that are potentially useful to future Area Managers working on employee retention while possibly providing the broader afterschool and childcare industries valuable approaches to studying employee turnover. Validity and Reliability The value of any study lies in readers' ability to trust results presented as being reliable and valid (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Reliability is the degree to which measurement is EMPLOYEE CHURN 88 trustworthy and accurate, which is driven by consistency within a measurement tool and the stability of the tool over different administrations (Kurpius & Stafford, 2006). Reliability may be impacted by sampling, method administration, response rate, and non-responses. For the survey, the strategy for sample confidence was census sampling. This allowed for internal generalizability since all participants were included (McEwan & McEwan, 2003). Confidence in survey administration was aided by uniform online administration presenting standardized questions, order, and format. Additionally, items were multiple-choice, which are more efficient in administration and produce more reliable results than other types of questions (Fink, 2013). Because the Area Manager population was relatively small at 18 members at the time of the study, a high survey response rate was necessary to have confidence in results. The Research Advisors (2006) indicate nearly 100% participation for a sample this small will yield a 90% to 95% confidence rate. Because there was some risk of not achieving such a high response rate, survey data was triangulated with interviews, observations, and documents collected. Validity is the extent to which a tool measures what is intended to measure and ties to the accuracy of interpretation of results from the tool's administration (Kurpius & Stafford, 2006). Validity is divided between internal and external types. Internal validity refers to the alignment of research findings with reality (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Should a study produce results that are incongruent with reality, the study lacks internal validity (McEwan & McEwan, 2003). Internal validity threats identified as potentially impact this study included history and testing. The potential impact of history, an event that occurs during the study window that influences outcomes (Creswell, 2014), was lessened by everyone in the participant group being exposed to the same occurrences. All Area Managers were part of the survey sample, and all were impacted by the same organizational influences. Testing had the potential to impact outcomes across the study window as participants became familiar with what was being studied, thereby affecting EMPLOYEE CHURN 89 responses to later measures (Creswell, 2014). This was mitigated by spreading methods out over the study window and asking about similar topics but in different ways on surveys versus interviews. External validity threats may be addressed primarily through future research, such as replicating the study with additional groups, settings, and organizations over time (Creswell, 2014). Ethics Reliable, valid findings are the result of research conducted ethically. Ethical procedures with human subjects are grounded in four primary considerations: doing no harm, avoiding deception of or pressure on participants, obtaining informed consent of participants, and honoring promises, such as ensuring participants' privacy and confidentiality (Rubin & Rubin, 2012; Tracy, 2013). With regard to this study, nothing potentially harmful was required of participants, as the subject matter for the survey and interview was not sensitive in nature, the observation was not particularly intrusive, and methods posed no obvious physical or emotional risk. Participants were not deceived about the purpose and topic of the study, as this was articulated both verbally by the principal researcher and in the information sheet provided in writing to all participants. The information sheet clearly stated key components of informed consent, which according to Glesne (2011) include: voluntary participation, the right to decline or withdraw participation, and knowledge of potential risks and/or benefits to participation. Additionally, the principal researcher acquired written approval of the organizational authorities, or "gatekeepers" (Creswell, 2014, p. 96), in order to formally establish permission to access participants. In this case, this was a letter granting permission and access signed by KCI's Chief Executive and Chief Services Officers. In terms of confidentiality and privacy, research participants have right to expect both to be protected (Glesne, 2011). For surveys, no identifiable information was obtained. Participant EMPLOYEE CHURN 90 names, addresses, or other identifiable information was not collected, nor were participants asked to identify themselves; therefore, responses were anonymous to the principal investigator. Survey data was collected through Qualtrics Insight Platform (https://www.qualtrics.com) using an account only accessible to the principal investigator. Though Qualtrics collects user IP addresses, the principal investigator had no access to the computers of participants to connect IP addresses with participants. Once data was retrieved and stored on the principal investigator's personal computer, the online survey and responses stored online were deleted permanently. For interviews and observations, confidentiality by the principal researcher was assured in the information sheet. Shared findings did not link participants to report content. Interview audio recordings were obtained using the cell phone and laptop computer of the principal investigator. The cell phone and computer were both password protected with the password known only to the principal investigator. Information about audio recording was provided in the information sheet given to all participants. Once the recording was fully transcribed with the transcription stored in the principal investigator's computer for analysis, recordings of all interviews from the cell phone and computer were deleted permanently. The personal computer on which the anonymous survey results and interview transcription were stored was password protected with the password known only to the principal investigator. During interview transcription, any personally identifying information regarding participants was replaced with pseudonyms to protect the identity of participants. The transcription was kept for use throughout the course of analysis, stored on the password-protected computer of the principal investigator. As the principal researcher is a member of the organization of study at the executive level, participants included subordinates. No participants reported to the researcher, though the collegial relationship between the researcher and participants and their supervisors had the EMPLOYEE CHURN 91 potential to create an assumption of expected participation or a participant wish to support the researcher's endeavor. Any perceived pressure to participate was mitigated by voluntary participation, which was explained in writing in the information sheet provided to all participants, verbally by the principal investigator in regional meetings when the research was introduced, and again verbally at the time of each interview. The researcher's position within the organization presented a site with vested interests (Creswell, 2014) in terms of the researcher's interest in the topic as central to the dissertation. However, the researcher had no specific material stake in survey, interview, observation, or historical document data, nor were there any consequences, positive or negative, to the researcher anticipated or realized as a result of findings. Throughout data analysis, there were opportunities to choose the importance of data collected, to interpret meaning, and to decide what to include or to exclude in the final report (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Such opportunities may have been influenced by prior knowledge about the topic or participants within the organizational context. For instance, the principal researcher entered the study aware of the performance levels of various Area Managers, including those with existing employee turnover rates higher than their peers' rates. This knowledge had the potential to influence researcher openness to participant report in interviews. Thus, a post-positivist paradigm was accepted, where inherent biases were understood to exist in methods and mitigated to whatever extent possible (Tracey, 2013). Triangulating data collection through four methods (surveys, interviews, observations, and historical documents) helped limit the impact of researcher bias and protect internal validity (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Tracey, 2013). EMPLOYEE CHURN 92 CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS This chapter presents the study's results and key findings within the framework of the study’s purpose and research questions. As a reminder from Chapter One, the purpose of the study was to evaluate Kids' Club Incorporated (KCI) Area Managers' knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational influences related to achieving the organizational goal of improving upon a 37% employee turnover rate. The questions that guided this study were the following: 1. In school year 2016-17, what is the gap between KCI's field employee turnover and the organizational goal of improving upon a 37% overall turnover rate to a 30% turnover rate for Program Managers and a 35% turnover rate for Educators and Coaches by Spring 2017? 2. What are KCI Area Managers' knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational influences related to achieving the turnover improvement goal? 3. What are the recommended solutions to close the knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational gaps with regard to employee turnover at KCI? To answer the research questions, qualitative and quantitative data were collected through surveys, interviews, observations, and organizational documents. This chapter begins with information from KCI documents that were reviewed to answer the first research question about KCI’s current status with regard to employee turnover. Next, a description of participants in observations, surveys, and interviews is provided. Finally, study results and a synthesis of findings are presented to answer the second research question about Area Managers’ (AM) influences related to employee retention. The chapter will close with summary and implications. Chapter Five, then, will address the final research question with recommendations for closing EMPLOYEE CHURN 93 gaps in AM knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational influences identified and discussed in this chapter. Results and Findings for Research Question 1: KCI’s Current Status with Regard to Employee Retention This section will present information from organizational documents collected to answer the first research question about KCI’s current status with regard to employee retention compared to the organizational goal. In the conceptual framework shown and described in Chapter 2, this information corresponds to retention goal attainment, providing the data against which to measure how the various knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences are coming together to impact desired outcomes. Documents collected included monthly and annual turnover and termination reports run by KCI’s Human Resources Department using an online employee record keeping platform. By reviewing such documents, it was possible to ascertain the gap between current organizational performance in employee retention for school year 2016- 17 compared to the goal of improving upon a 37% turnover rate to a 30% turnover rate for Program Managers and a 35% turnover rate for Educators and Coaches by spring 2017. Employee Turnover: Results Reports collected provided field employee turnover data for three years prior to the fiscal year of study. KCI’s fiscal year mirrors the typical fiscal year of school districts with which KCI contracts, from July 1 to June 30. For three fiscal years prior to the year of this study, 2016-17, data was collected for varied numbers of months. For instance, 2013-14 data was collected for eleven months (August 2013 through June 2014), yielding a 35% turnover rate. For 2014-15, data appears to have been collected for all twelve months of the fiscal year (July 1, 2014 to June 30, 2015), resulting in a 43% turnover rate. Data for 2015-16 reflected ten months (August 2015 to May 2016), which organizational executives intentionally chose so as not to skew turnover EMPLOYEE CHURN 94 data with large summer departures related to seasonal program closures in June. Data for 2016-17, the year of this study, also included ten months (August 2016 to May 2017). In addition to varied numbers of months for annual turnover figures, methods of calculating turnover for 2013-14 and 2014-15 were unclear and consistency unknown, compared to 2015-16 to present, when this researcher was employed by the organization of study and knowledgeable about consistent calculation methods. Since fiscal year 2015-16, KCI’s Human Resources Department has calculated monthly employee turnover by weighing the number of separated employees for a month against the average number of active employees for the same period. This is then converted to a turnover percentage. For instance, if 20 field employees were separated during a month when the average number of active employees was 200, the turnover rate would be 10%. This method is consistent with that practiced by the U.S. Department of labor about how to calculate employee turnover, as described in Chapter Two (Bureau of Labor Statistics, n.d.; Glebbeek & Bax, 2004). Thus, KCI’s annual turnover for 2015-16 and 2016-17 was calculated by weighing the total number of separated employees for the months of the school year when staff in all markets are hired and working, which is September 15 through May 30, against the average number of active employees for the period. For 2015-16, KCI’s field employee turnover rate was 54% for all field staff combined (Program Managers, Educators, and Coaches). Data on turnover by role was not available. Within the organization, KCI executives chose to extract employees who worked less than ten hours from their turnover consideration in order to remove those who did not complete training. This created a 37% overall turnover rate for 2015-16, from which the organization improvement goal was set to reduce turnover to 30% for Program Managers and 35% for Educators and Coaches. For school year 2016-17 (again, August 15 through May 30), KCI document analysis revealed overall field employee turnover increased. The combined field employee turnover rate EMPLOYEE CHURN 95 was 62%, as shown in Figure 2. For Program Managers, the 2016-17 turnover rate was 39%, and the rate for Educators and Coaches was 58%. Figure 2 Turnover Totals: Field Employees Combined and by Role, August 15, 2016 to May 30, 2017 Avg. # field employees = 392 Total # Turnovers = 244 Avg. # Program Managers = 126 Program Manager Turnovers = 49 Avg. # Educators/ Coaches = 263 Educator/Coach Turnovers = 153 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 Avg. # Employees Turnover Totals Combined and By Role, 2016-17 62%Total Field Employee Turnover 39% Program Manager Turnover 58% Educator/ Coach Turnover EMPLOYEE CHURN 96 To conduct year-to-year comparison, KCI’s original 2015-16 turnover rate of 54%, which included all field employees, was considered against their 2016-17 rate of 62% with the same population. As Figure 3 shows, this represents an 8% increase in turnover from year to year. When compared to childcare industry norms of 30-40% turnover (Campbell et al., 2000; Choy & Haukka, 2010; Cole; 2011; First Research Industry Profile, 2015; Floyd & Phillips, 2013; Michel, 2011; Nitardy, 2008; U.S. Department of Labor, n.d.; Whitebook et al., 2014), KCI’s 62% turnover rate is 22% to 32% higher than the industry average. However, the afterschool sub-industry, and companies like KCI, employ primarily part-time workers, as compared to the overall childcare industry, where full-time workers, particularly in early childhood centers, are far more common. This may account for at least some of difference between turnover rates. Figure 3 Year-to-Year Turnover Change: Field Employees Combined Note: The afterschool sub-industry, and companies like KCI, employ primarily part-time workers, as compared to the overall childcare industry, where full-time workers, particularly in early childhood centers, are far more common. 54% 62% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 15-16 Annual Turnover 16-17 Annual Turnover Year-to-Year Turnover Change, Field Employees Combined 30-40% Childcare Industry Norm* EMPLOYEE CHURN 97 By looking at field employee roles in Figure 4, KCI’s performance compared to the turnover improvement goal is illustrated. KCI did not meet its goal of improving Program Manager turnover to 30%, nor did it meet its goal of improving Educator and Coach turnover to 35%. Because prior year data on turnover by roles was not available, any increase or decrease in turnover by role could not be established. Figure 4 Turnover Performance Compared to Organizational Goal In the fiscal year of this study, the months with highest turnover were August, September, and December respectively, as shown in Figure 5. In such months, turnover was higher among Educators and Coaches as compared to Program Managers: August, Educators and Coaches = 36%, Program Managers = 20%; September, Educators and Coaches = 25%, Program Managers = 13%; December, Educators and Coaches 12%, Program Managers 8%). This is consistent with Figure 3, which shows Educators and Coaches have a higher overall turnover rate. From year to 30% 35% 39% 58% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Program Managers Educators/Coaches Turnover Performance Compared to Goal Goal 16-17 Actual EMPLOYEE CHURN 98 year, as Table 4 shows, there is not necessarily consistency for highest turnover months; however, fall months tend to dominate, as Figure 6 represents. Figure 5 Turnover by Month: All Field Employees Combined, August 2016 to May 2017 31% 21% 9% 5% 11% 8% 4% 7% 5% 5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Average # Field Employees Turnover by Month, 2016-17 Average # of Active Field Employees Combined (Program Managers, Educators, Coaches) # Monthly Turnovers of Field Employees Combined Turnover % EMPLOYEE CHURN 99 Table 4 Higher Turnover Months, Year-to-Year Comparison Year Highest Turnover Month Second Highest Third Highest 2013-2014 Oct Sep Aug 2014-2015 No data No data No data 2015-2016 Oct Mar Nov 2016-2017 Aug Sept Dec Figure 6 Highest Turnover Months Historically, 2013-14, 2015-16, 2016-17 (2014-15 n.d.) Weighted 𝑋: Oct = 6; Aug and Sep = 4; Mar = 2; Dec and Nov = 1. KCI reports also provided data on voluntary versus involuntary turnover, meaning separations identified as of the employee’s choosing or forced by management. Figure 7 shows Oct Aug Sep Mar Dec Nov Relative Frequency of Top Turnover Months Highest Turnover Months Historically 2013-14, 2015-16, 2016-17 (2014-15 n.d.) EMPLOYEE CHURN 100 87% of separations were voluntary, 12% were involuntary, and 1% were not identified either way. Figure 8 represents separations by employment status, with 97% part-time employees and 3% full-time employees. Figure 7 Voluntary versus Involuntary Field Employee Turnover, August 2016 to May 2017 Figure 8 Full- versus Part-Time Field Employee Turnover, August 2016 to May 2017 87% 12% 1% Voluntary versus Involuntary Turnover Voluntary Involuntary Unknown 3% 97% Full- versus Part-Time Employee Turnover Full-Time Part-Time EMPLOYEE CHURN 101 Data from KCI turnover reports for the year of the study also captured reasons for employee departures as coded by the Area Manager logging the departure in the company’s employee portal system. However, the data was inconsistent in its degree of specificity, with most information too vague to provide meaningful insight. For instance, the August 2016 report provided greater specificity in departure reasons than any other month, such as, “Moved out of area” or “Secured other/full time job.” November 2016 included most departures coded as “Personal reasons,” while all other months were dominated heavily by “Voluntary resignation.” Because the latter two reasons do not provide further information, it is not possible to deduce patterns among reasons, nor is what is available reliable due to inconsistencies from month to month and based upon varied manager interpretation of category meanings. Employee Retention: Results Data from KCI retention reports for the year of study were also examined after the initial study window when made available to the researcher. Reports from the same window as turnover reports, from September 15, 2016, to May 30, 2017, showed a field employee retention rate of 74%, with 80% of Program Managers and 72% of Educators and Coaches retained across the school year. As with turnover reports, the organization’s purpose for beginning the report in mid- September was to view data once all geographic markets were open and running programming fully staffed to capture full school year retention for all markets combined. High Turnover and High Retention As explained in Chapter One definitions, turnover and retention are complementary but not necessarily inverse figures. Therefore, it is possible for both to be high, such as with KCI’s 62% turnover and 74% retention rates. To determine the portions of KCI’s population that were stable versus unstable, both figures needed to be weighed against the average number of employees for school year 2016-17 (356). Figure 9 shows that 63% or 226 field roles remained EMPLOYEE CHURN 102 stable throughout the school year, which afforded the 74% retention rate. In contrast, 37% or 166 roles repeatedly turned over, creating the 62% turnover rate. Figure 9 illuminates that about two-thirds of KCI’s field roles were stable across the school year, while about one-third were unstable and repeatedly churning. Figure 9 Stable versus Unstable Field Employee Population, 2016-17 School Year Note: The average number of employees deducts for programs that opened or closed mid-school year and therefore could not have full year retained employees. Summary of Findings on Employee Turnover: Answer to Research Question #1 In answer to the first research question about the gap between KCI’s turnover and its improvement goal by spring 2017, analysis of turnover reports indicates KCI did not meet its goal, and turnover rose compared to the prior year. For school year 2016-17, the overall turnover rate for field employees was 62%, an 8% increase from 2015-16. Program Manager turnover was 39% compared to the goal of 30%, while Educators and Coaches had 58% turnover compared to the 35% goal. Reasons for turnover could not be analyzed due to the inconsistent information on turnover reports as input by individual Area Managers. This may indicate a lack of uniform 63% 37% Stable versus Unstable Population Stable population retained over school year (226 of 356 avg. employees*) Churning population responsible for 62% turnover (166 of 356 avg. employees*) EMPLOYEE CHURN 103 understanding of termination codes among Area Managers as well as limited choices from which to select accurate reasons. Therefore, while reasons for departure are unclear, what is clear is that KCI did not meet its turnover improvement goal of 30% for Program Managers and 35% for Educators and Coaches by Spring 2017 and in fact made strides in the opposite direction, raising turnover somewhat from the prior year. However, additional reports indicating retention of 74% of field employees over the same school year of the study reveals the co-occurrence of high retention and high turnover. In summary, KCI has stability among about two-thirds of its field population, while the remaining one-third is repeatedly and rapidly churning. Survey, Interview, and Observation Participants Participants from the organization of study were engaged for the study through surveys, interviews, and observations. All eighteen KCI Area Managers (AMs) invited to participate in the survey portion of the study did so. This represented 100% of KCI’s AM population at the time of the study. As shown in Figure 10, 45% of participants were in their first year as an AM, while 55% were in their second or more year as an AM for KCI or another like organization. Figure 10 Survey Participant Demographics: Area Manager Position Tenure 45% 55% 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 This is my FIRST SCHOOL YEAR as an Area Manager for KCI or any after school / student enrichment organization. This is my SECOND or MORE SCHOOL YEAR as an Area Manager for KCI or any after school / student enrichment organization. # Area Managers Survey Participants by Position Tenure EMPLOYEE CHURN 104 As Figure 11 shows, of the eighteen survey participants, 33% managed all new programs, 28% managed all returning programs, and 39% managed both new and returning programs. Figure 11 Survey Participant Demographics: Area Manager Program Tenure For interviews, six AMs (33% of the total population at the time of the study) were invited and participated in a single individual interview. These six, shown in Figure 12, were a representative sample of the eighteen AMs, where two were new AMs with new programs, two were returning AMs with returning programs, one was a new AM with both new and returning programs, and one was a returning AM with both new and returning programs. Survey Participants by Program Tenure 6 / 33% AM manages all NEW programs. 5 / 28% AM manages all RETURNING programs. 7 / 39% AM manages BOTH NEW and RETURNING programs. EMPLOYEE CHURN 105 Figure 12 Interview Participant Demographics: Representative Sample of Area Managers by Position Tenure and Program Tenure For observations, one regional group of Area Managers agreed to be observed in their weekly team meetings led by their Regional Director. For the first observation, this group included ten AMs of varying position and program tenures and their Regional Director. For the second two observations, this group expanded to involve eleven AMs of varying position and program tenures across two regional areas and their two Regional Directors (a new Regional Director was being trained, and AMs were in the process of being reassigned to new supervisors). A fourth planned observation did not occur due to the Regional Director cancelling the team meeting due to so many AMs and the Regional Director having to cover staff vacancies in programs. Further identifying information about participants, such as gender, age, or geographic market, is not disclosed here to protect the identities of this small population. 2/ 33% 2/ 33% 1/ 17% 1/ 17% Interview Participants: Representative Sample New AM manages new programs Returning AM manages returning programs New AM manages both new and returning programs Returning AM manages both new and returning programs EMPLOYEE CHURN 106 Results and Findings for Research Question 2: Area Manager Retention Influences In this section, analysis of qualitative data is presented to answer the second research question: What are KCI Area Managers' knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational influences related to achieving the retention goal? Results and key findings from surveys, interviews, and observations, as well as assumed influences on employee turnover from literature discussed and presented in Chapter Two (see Table 2) were used to determine Area Manager knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational barriers to field employee retention. Survey, interview, and observation protocols are available in Appendices A, C, and D respectively, with survey results presented in full in Appendix B. Knowledge Results and Key Findings As a reminder from Chapter Two, this study addressed three types of knowledge and skills: declarative (conceptual), metacognitive, and procedural. In the conceptual framework, knowledge and motivation influences are represented alongside each other and in connection to Area Managers. Organizational influences surround all, indicating the influence of organizational resources and/or barriers on knowledge and motivation as well as AMs. All knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences then combine to determine retention outcomes. Results and key findings will be presented for each of the three knowledge areas, followed by a synthesis of results and findings for knowledge influences. Declarative – conceptual knowledge: Area Managers’ knowledge depends upon what is being asked and how. The extent and accuracy of Area Managers’ knowledge of various dimensions of employee turnover was found to be contingent upon what aspect of turnover was in question and whether AMs had to choose an answer from among provided options or generate their own responses. In this study, declarative knowledge, or what is known, EMPLOYEE CHURN 107 such as facts and events (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009; Berge & Hezewijk, 1999), referred to Area Managers’ conceptual understanding of employee turnover. Survey and interview items addressed three areas of declarative knowledge: the definition of employee turnover, common causes for turnover, and turnover consequences for key stakeholders (children, families, the organization, and society). Turnover definition: Most Area Managers know what turnover is. Most Area Managers exhibited a solid sense of what employee turnover is. When presented with four definition options on the survey, 100% of AMs identified the correct definition of turnover as, “Employee separation from a workplace, whether voluntary or involuntary.” This definition, provided in Chapters One and Two, was drawn from the U.S. Department of Labor (Bureau of Labor Statistics, n.d.) and served as the working definition for this study. During interviews, when all six AMs had to generate their own definition, responses varied in wording, but four AMs (67%) generated a definition in alignment with the correct definition. Two AMs (33%), one new and one veteran, articulated alternative definitions. One referred to turnover in wholly negative terms: “…when you constantly have a revolving door of staff…turnover means a disproportionate amount of staff coming in and out.” Another defined turnover as, “...they are not properly trained.” Thus, when provided options, all AMs identified the correct definition. When required to generate the definition, AMs were less accurate, where two-thirds provided a correct definition, and one-third offered alternative descriptions that neither aligned with literature nor with peers’ understanding. The ability of all AMs to identify an accurate definition but not all to generate one demonstrated some AMs have a limited working understanding of the concept. Turnover causes: Area Managers see numerous turnover causes, but not themselves among them. Depending upon what population of employees Area Managers were asked about, EMPLOYEE CHURN 108 their view of the source of turnover causes shifted significantly. Area Managers were asked in two ways about common causes for employee turnover on both the survey and, for six AMs, in interviews. First, AMs were asked to think about workers in all types of industries and why they leave their jobs and secondly to consider turnover on their own teams. On the survey, as seen in Appendix A, 17 choices and an optional “other” category were provided, from which AMs were directed to choose the five most common causes for voluntary turnover. For interviews, AMs were free to generate their own responses. For the first question about workers in all types of industries, AMs on the survey rated the top five turnover reasons as dissatisfaction with pay and benefits (83%), the job not being what the employee expected (50%), career change (44%), helplessness against poor management and life change (tied at 39%), and stressful work (33%). Three additional reasons tied for the sixth rank (28%) and included organizational unfairness, lack of employee recognition, and dislike of the work itself (see Appendix B for full results). In interviews, the top five turnover reasons most frequently mentioned were poor management (67%), followed by inadequate compensation and not feeling connected to the work (tied at 50%), and untapped potential and other opportunities (tied at 33%). When comparing survey responses of new versus returning AMs, the most significant differences were around conflicts with coworkers and worker relocation (veterans ranked these 30% more often), as well as dislike of schedule (new AMs ranked this 50% more often. Several top turnover reasons AMs chose and spoke about align with literature across industries. As presented in Chapter Two, fair salaries were found to be key to retention across industries (Alkahtani, 2015). Weak management as a turnover cause is also supported by cross- industry literature (Abbasi & Hollman, 2000; Argyris, McGregor as cited in Bolman & Deal, 2013; Buckingham & Coffman, 1999), as are organizational justice issues (Alkahtani, 2015) and EMPLOYEE CHURN 109 managing realistic job expectations (Maden et al., 2016). Employee recognition is cited as a means of motivating employees (Clark & Estes, 2008), though lack of recognition is not specifically stated as a turnover cause. While AMs identified many causes from literature, they nearly missed ranking one of the most common turnover reasons altogether, which is the volatile job market and subsequent highly mobile workforce (6%, lowest ranking) (Abbasi & Hollman, 2000; Denler et al., 2006; Society for Human Resource Management, 2015). AMs also indicated career change (44%) as the third most common turnover cause on surveys and not being connected to the work (50%) as the second most common cause in interviews. However, neither of these reasons are not supported by literature. When asked to consider turnover causes a second time, now focusing on one’s own team of employees, some answers shifted significantly in both surveys and interviews, as shown in Figures 13 and 14. On surveys, dislike of the schedule (78%) and resumption of education (72%) both moved up six rankings to the first and second spots. Dissatisfaction with pay and benefits dropped from its top spot to tie for third (68%) with career change, which held the same ranking but increased in percentage significantly. The job not being what the employee expected (44%) remained in the middle of rankings at fourth tied with life change, while geographic relocation (39%) moved up three rankings, and stressful work (33%) retained the same percentage. In interviews, 100% of AMs stated hours as a primary turnover cause, followed by low pay and benefits (83%). When comparing survey responses of new versus returning AMs, the most significant differences were around stressful work (veterans ranked this 37% more often) and dislike of schedule (new AMs ranked this 40% more often). In comparison to childcare and afterschool industry literature, some of the reasons AMs chose for their respective team’s turnover contrast, where neither dislike of the schedule, resumption of education, career change, nor unmet employee expectations are documented as EMPLOYEE CHURN 110 frequent turnover causes. AMs did cite dissatisfaction with compensation (68% on the survey, 83% in interviews), which is the longest documented and most significant cause of childcare turnover. In childcare, literature supports low wages, limited hours and benefits, and work-related stress as long-standing turnover causes (Choy & Haukka, 2010; Cole, 2011; First Research Industry Profile, 2015; Floyd & Phillips, 2013; Michel, 2011; Nitardy, 2008; Whitebook et al., 2014), while life changes and desire for more pay outside the industry are causes supported in afterschool industry literature (NAA, 2006). Figure 13 Frequency of Reported Turnover Causes for All Industries versus Area Managers’ Own Team (Survey Responses, Participants Ranked Top Five Among Choices Provided) 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Dissatisfaction with compensation Dislike schedule Job not what employee expected To resume education Career change Career change Poor management Dissatisfaction with compensation Life change Job not what employee expected Stressful work Worker relocation Organizational unfairness Stressful work Lack of employee recognition Dislike for work itself Dislike for work itself Frequency of Reported Turnover Causes for All Industries versus AMs' Own Team EMPLOYEE CHURN 111 Figure 14 Typicality of Reported Turnover Causes for All Industries Versus Area Managers’ Own Team (Interview Results, Responses Not Prompted) As previously stated, turnover causes related to management issues were treated with a stark difference when AMs were asked about all industries versus their own teams. As shown in Figure 15, between surveys and interviews, management issues were stated 29 times when AMs considered turnover for all industries but only once when thinking about their own employees’ turnover. Management causes that made the top six turnover reasons on the survey and the number one interview-generated reason when AMs were asked about all industries sharply dropped to the bottom of survey and interview rankings when AMs reflected upon their own teams. For instance, poor management as a reason for turnover dropped 33% and five rankings 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Poor management Dislike hours Dissatisfaction with compensation Dissatisfaction with compensation Not connected to the work Not connected to the work Untapped potential Employee didn't like feedback Other opportunities Luck Typicality of Reported Turnover Causes: All Industries versus AMs' Own Team EMPLOYEE CHURN 112 among survey respondents and 67% among interviewees, who did not mention management issues once. Organizational unfairness and lack of employee recognition both dropped 28% and four spots on surveys and were also not mentioned in interviews. Lack of accountability and organizational unfairness remained at the bottom of rankings on both survey items. In fact, five of the six turnover causes having to do with management received zero responses when AMs reflected on their own teams, while the top ranked answers largely reflected things outside the purview of AMs (schedule, limited hours, resuming education, career change, pay, and benefits). This was consistent with observations of AM team meetings, where the only employee turnover causes mentioned were external to the AM, such as relocation, long-term illness, taking a full- time job elsewhere, or the partner school hiring the employee. Figure 15 Frequency of Area Manager Selection of Management Issues as a Top Cause for Employee Turnover: All Industries versus Area Managers’ Own Teams (Interview and Survey Results Combined) 29 1 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 When AMs considered turnover in any industry When AMs considered turnover of their own employees # Management Mentions How Frequently Area Managers Chose Management Issues as a Top Cause for Employee Turnover: All Industries versus AMs' Own Teams EMPLOYEE CHURN 113 In summary, while AMs demonstrated knowledge of many causes supported by literature, their responses related to management causes were significantly different between the two prompts. This revealed stark differences in thinking depending upon which population of employees was being considered: employees in general or their own team. This difference will be discussed further in the motivation section concerning locus of control. Turnover consequences: Area Managers are aware of turnover consequences for key stakeholders. Area Managers demonstrated concrete understanding of the consequences of employee turnover for key stakeholders based on direct experience. In both surveys and interviews, Area Managers were asked about consequences of employee turnover for four key stakeholder groups determined through the literature: children, families, the organization, and society. All 18 AMs (100%) unanimously indicated turnover consequences for children and families, as shown in Figure 16. All but one AM stated consequences for the organization (94%), and 10 (56%) saw consequences for society. Interviewed AMs cited consequences for key stakeholder groups with similar frequency, as shown in Figure 17. This section will present results for each of the four key stakeholder groups as well as for additional groups indicated by interviewed AMs as also impacted by employee turnover. EMPLOYEE CHURN 114 Figure 16 Area Manager Perception of Turnover Consequences for Key Stakeholder Groups (Survey Results) n = 18 Figure 17 Typicality of Reported Turnover Consequences for Key Stakeholders (Interview Results) 100% 100% 94% 56% 0 5 10 15 20 For children For families For the organization For society # Area Managers Area Manager Perception of Turnover Consequences for Key Stakeholder Groups For children 20 / 32% For families 19 / 31% For the organization 19 / 31% For society 4 / 6% Typicality of Reported Turnover Consequences for Key Stakeholders EMPLOYEE CHURN 115 Turnover consequences for children. Area Managers had no doubt children are impacted by turnover, and they easily described what the impact looks like in detail. As shown in Figure 18, AMs agreed entirely that there are turnover consequences for children. Interviewed AMs reported similar child impact from one interviewee to the next, citing broken bonds with staff, questions about where staff went, diminished morale, difficulty adjusting following staff changes, and temporary behavioral issues. As one AM described: We work so hard to develop this structure and consistency, especially with children who have behavior issues…so that can be really alarming for the children, like, Why is this person leaving? And if it happens multiple times to them, they’re like, Why do people keep leaving us? These consequences are consistent with literature discussed in Chapter Two that documents significant impact on program quality and child outcomes, including attachment, adjustment, cognitive and academic development, security, and long-term mental wellbeing (Campbell et al., 2000; Hale et al., 2006; Michel, 2011; Nitardy, 2008; Whitebook et al., 2009; Whitebook et al., 2014; Zigler et al., 2009). Two veteran AMs seemed to contradict themselves in interviews by talking about children being adaptable to staff changes, but then also stating several negative impacts. One, upon reflection of being remembered at a program visit despite a long absence, admitted, “I forget sometimes how much of an impact we have as their mentors and guides.” Though some AMs referred to child adaptability, overall, AMs agreed with one another and with the literature about the existence and nature of turnover impact on children. EMPLOYEE CHURN 116 Figure 18 Perceived Turnover Consequences for Program Children n = 18 Weighted 𝑋 = 3.7 SD.P = 0.47 σ 2 = .22 Turnover consequences for families. Area Managers expressed understanding of how the impact of turnover extends to the parents of children in programs in emotional ways that are often directed at AMs. As with children, AMs agreed unanimously to family impact, as seen in Figure 19. However, the strength of agreement varied when comparing new versus veteran AMs, where new AMs more strongly agreed with family consequences (33% more). In interviews, AMs discussed fielding parent questions about the departed employee, complaints, expressed fear of new employees, and diminished trust in the organization as primary responses. “Big consequences…families complain… parents are more comfortable when they see the same face every day;” “Lack of trust, and that’s a big issue of course when we’re dealing with kids.” …it’s like that fear…we don’t know anything about this new person coming in. How’s it going to work? Why are people leaving? They’re just concerned about how it’s going to change their child’s experience and their experience, especially when they’ve developed those relationships… 33% 67% 0 5 10 15 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree # Area Managers When program employees turn over, there are consequences for program children. EMPLOYEE CHURN 117 Two AMs also noted that parents assume negative reasons for staff changes: “People always go to the negative side. It’s never, They must have had a great opportunity.” …they (parents) don’t get the inner workings…even if I had to let somebody go for them not doing their job or doing something inappropriate, they don’t see those things. They just see that, Oh, it’s a new person my child has to get used to. Several AMs stated that Program Manager departures impact parents more so than other staff due to the Program Manager being a primary point person for communication and the person most responsible for programming: I think the Program Managers, if they turnover, that’s going to have an almost 75% more impact than Educators. I think they (parents) almost see the educators as coming and going…but they need kind of a one-person focus, and if that one person is changed, then that kind of just rocks everything. However, one AM pointed out, “If I am able to bring in a Program Manager that’s miles above, parents and fine, and they’re happy.” Two AMs also mentioned turnover can cause lost parent business. One shared, “…before parents even…decided to register their children, they were calling me like, I hear you’ve had a lot of turnover at your site. My child needs consistency.” In contrast to family consequences stated by AMs, literature on family impact focuses on the cascading financial impact parents incur when staff replacement costs pile on top of already burdensome tuition and limited government assistance (AA, 2014; Earle, 2009). These financial strains if not barriers directly impact child participation when 19.4 million U.S. children already cannot access care (AA, 2015). When parents cannot afford to enroll their children, they are left with the dilemma of leaving their children unattended, thereby placing them at risk for the very things parents believe afterschool programs protect their children from (crime, substance abuse, pregnancy) or risking their job because they are unable to stay at work. EMPLOYEE CHURN 118 Interestingly, when AMs were asked about the impact of turnover on parents, a noticeable shift in attitude was observed, though in various forms from AM to AM. Some AMs became visibly tense, nodding with widened eyes, sitting up straighter, taking a deep breath. This response suggested they associate parent impact with stress. Others sighed, rolled their eyes, or expressed parents were wrongly assuming kids would not adapt, indicating possible exasperation with parent responses. While local program staff often field parent responses to staff turnover as well, it was clear AMs are on the front lines when parents hear what they consider concerning news about staff changes. Figure 19 Perceived Turnover Consequences for Program Families n = 18 Weighted 𝑋 = 3.4 SD.P = .50 σ 2 = .25 In summation, though AMs diverged from literature about the nature of parent impact, they were unanimous that parents, like children, are impacted by employee turnover. Some AMs were additionally experienced in the nuances of positive consequences. While AMs varied in 56% 44% 0 5 10 15 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree # Area Managers When program employees turn over, there are consequences for program families. EMPLOYEE CHURN 119 their attitudes towards parents, there was clear evidence of strong negative feelings among all interviewees in dealing with parent responses towards turnover. Turnover consequences for the organization. While clearly in touch with the human impact of turnover on children and parents, AMs also demonstrated awareness of organizational consequences that are both negative and positive. As shown in Figure 20, all but one AM indicated organizational consequences on the survey. Half of the AMs interviewed voiced awareness of hiring and retraining time and costs as significant consequences of employee turnover. Five of the six interviewees also expressed turnover creating a negative reputation for the program or company among current and potential employees, parents, and clients, thus diminishing the talent pool as well as enrollment and revenue potential. One AM summarized these organizational impacts this way: The talent coming in would be a consequence, being lessened, because of reviews on Glassdoor, for example, referrals from our own staff. If I didn’t feel confident in my own company, I wouldn’t refer people as much…because there’s something going wrong there. It’s not a calm environment, so it doesn’t keep the talent coming in…definitely profitability, because if parents are leaving programs just to get babysitters instead…because of their unhappiness with our program because of turnover, then that’ll affect our revenue. Then of course future accounts, because (if) principals don’t have confidence in us, then they won’t refer us to other schools.” Another AM said: …that reputation meets us at the door sometimes. I was teasing with one of my peers, and I said, I feel like one day I’m going to look up, and I’m going to know everybody in (geographic area), because they’ve worked for me at some point. Literature presented in Chapter Two supports these organizational impacts of turnover. EMPLOYEE CHURN 120 AM responses align with literature presented in Chapter Two. Organizations incur visible costs for turnover, such as all the costs and effort related to seeking, securing, and training replacement staff, as well as invisible costs, such as diminished quality, productivity, and return on training investment, and disrupted operations and external relationships (Abbasi & Hollman, 2000; Alkahtani, 2015; Glebbeek & Bax, 2004; Hale-Jinks et al., 2006; Lee & Mitchell, 2013; Nitardy, 2008). Four AMs also noted in interviews that turnover is not always negative. Each provided an example of a departure from their own team that ultimately improved program quality. This is supported in literature, where turnover is noted as a positive when underperformers leave (Lee & Mitchell, 2003). Thus, AMs demonstrated awareness of both visible and invisible costs of turnover, as well as negative and positive consequences for the organization. Figure 20 Perceived Turnover Consequences for the Organization n = 18 Weighted 𝑋 = 3.6 SD.P = .59 σ 2 = .35 5% 28% 67% 0 5 10 15 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree # Area Managers When program employees turn over, there are consequences for KCI (the organization). EMPLOYEE CHURN 121 Turnover consequences for society. Not all AMs reported seeing if or how turnover impacts society, and none identified societal consequences found in literature. In their greatest area of disagreement, AMs were split in survey responses on whether there are societal consequences of employee turnover, as Figure 21 demonstrates. In interviews, it was observed that AMs who answered that there were no consequences were not confident; it seemed more that they could not think of any. However, societal consequences documented in literature are significant and related to parent worry about adequate care. Parental worry is believed to diminish workplace productivity, costing employers between $50 and $300 annually (EAPA, 2007), while also impacting military readiness for enlisted parents (Campbell et al., 2000). Area Managers did not identify this type of impact. Instead, among the three AMs interviewed who mentioned at least one societal impact, answers were both positive and negative. Positive impact was expressed as people developing professionally and advancing towards better opportunities instead of becoming complacent. Negative consequences included cross-industry time lost replacing people and setting a negative example for youth about work pride and loyalty: I know we live in a society where the days are gone where you work for a company from college to retirement, but I do think we’re saying something to our youth by not investing our time into our role that we’re in. We kind of take it as, I can just go get another job. It’s no biggie…I think the value of having pride in your job and having pride in what you do is just really diminished…where it’s all about the dollar and what benefits…I’m not saying that that is not important, but I will say that we teach our children the same values inadvertently. Area Managers were largely unaware of the broader societal consequences of employee turnover. Consequences they voiced were unrelated to literature findings. However, most AMs EMPLOYEE CHURN 122 seemed open to the possibility that society is affected by employee turnover, including in positive ways. Figure 21 Perceived Turnover Consequences for Society n = 18 Weighted 𝑋 = 2.6 SD.P = .50 σ 2 = .25 Additional stakeholder groups impacted by turnover. Area Managers see the consequences of turnover reaching beyond the four key stakeholder groups established for this study through literature. In interviews and observations, Area Managers mentioned five additional groups affected by employee turnover, as seen in Figure 22. These groups were program colleagues, central office staff, school partners, potential parents, employees, and clients, and the AMs themselves. Some of these groups are found in literature to a minimal extent, while others are not found in the literature. 44% 56% 0 5 10 15 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree # Area Managers When program employees turn over, there are consequences for society. EMPLOYEE CHURN 123 When an employee departs, AMs report the colleagues left behind experience worry and doubt. As one AM described: …their peers start to ask questions. Sometimes it’s, Is my job safe, or, Is this a stable company? …they become worried when people leave. Even if you say they’re going to become vice president…it’s a better position that they’re going to, but you still feel like, Why are they leaving? Maybe I should start looking. Literature discussed in Chapter Two describes a similar domino effect of peer departures in the childcare industry (Whitebook et al., 2014). Other groups AMs stated as being impacted by turnover included KCI central office staff and school partners. Central office staff sometimes substitute in programs and thus experience disrupted work, which impacts other areas of business. For instance, in a team meeting observed, AMs discussed how Customer Service was interrupted when staff from that department had to go substitute in programs due to shortages in the region surrounding the central office. Regarding school partners, AMs indicated they notice and inquire about staff changes and sometimes field parent questions and complaints. AMs further theorized a program or organizational reputation for turnover may impact potential parents, employees, and clients, who may avoid doing business with KCI as a result. This theory is consistent with organizational consequences AMs expressed related to enrollment, revenue, talent pool, and client referrals. EMPLOYEE CHURN 124 Figure 22 Typicality of Reported Turnover Consequences for Additional Groups (Interview and Observation Results, Non-Prompted) Area Managers most frequently referred to the impact of turnover on themselves. Figure 21 depicts self-impact as the most often non-prompted category, while Figure 18 shows how AM non-prompted report of self-impact was nearly as high as three prompted categories of children, families, and the organization. Those interviewed reported experiencing time pressure to fill short notice vacancies, being in “crisis mode” due to an inability to cover staff-child ratio shortages, struggling with their own morale to continually go through the hiring process, and 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 # Mentions Typicality of Reported Turnover Consequences for Additional Groups EMPLOYEE CHURN 125 emotional responses to staff departures ranging from sadness and helplessness to frustration, anger, and numbness. Such impact was reported by both new and veteran AMs, who shared the following: “I cry a little bit…that’s what I do if I know in enough time…If I don’t know in enough time…it’s a lot of maneuvering and shifting…” “It’s just like a morale piece…it can be very draining to have to keep going through the recruitment cycle;” “If it’s a last minute…resignation, I get irritated, very very irritated, and I don’t think about it…I’m just doing what I have to do to put the pieces back together so that everybody’s not stressed out.” Figure 23 Typicality of Turnover Consequences: (Survey and Interview Results, Prompted and Non- Prompted Responses Combined) For children, 20 For families, 19 For the organization, 19 Area Manager, 16 Potential parents/employees/clients, 8 For society, 4 School partners, 3 Program colleagues, 2 Central office staff, 2 Typicality of Turnover Consequences: Prompted and Non-Prompted Responses EMPLOYEE CHURN 126 The intense impact on Area Managers was also directly observed in AM team meetings. Every meeting observed within a month included the entire regional team of AMs reporting first and foremost about staffing holes, needing help from peers with substitute staffing, having to substitute themselves, and conducting ongoing interviews, regardless of being a new or veteran AM. Individual AMs reported their plan for each week ahead in the go-around that kicked off weekly meetings. Weekly plans included the following: “Still subbing this week;” “I’m subbing all week…also hiring and onboarding…still searching for two PMs (Program Managers);” “Like everyone else, I’m hiring, hiring, hiring…I’ll be subbing the rest of the week;” “I’ll be subbing this week for two people…my priority is to try to fill my positions for my morning program” (so AM doesn’t have to substitute before school hours); “I subbed yesterday. Am subbing tomorrow;” “I’m every day at (program site) as PM;” “I’m staffing all week at (program site) and doing interviews.” Incidentally, the month of meeting observations, January, saw a 2% increase in turnover as compared to prior months, as shown in Figure 2. AMs were observed sometimes referring to other job duties juggled or left unattended due to personally substituting: “I’ll jump in and out as PM (Program Manager) and do admin stuff in between;” “I haven’t had the chance to (check in with new hires) since I’ve been subbing;” “Been hard the last three weeks…haven’t been able to visit programs” due to substituting; “I may be there (at labor meeting), but it depends if I have to sub.” Not surprisingly, then, celebrations expressed in team meetings typically had to do with helping each other with substitute needs or filling vacancies with hires, whereupon AMs expressed relief at getting out of ratio: “Good news on staffing on my end!” “I’m really happy about” (a spot filled); AM thanked peer who covered a work issue while she was substituting; “I’m really excited” (about someone in training and another hire’s background check clearing); (Regional Director to AM) “I love to hear about openings closing!” EMPLOYEE CHURN 127 Even the team’s weekly meeting attendance and engagement were impacted by staff vacancies. Some AMs were absent from the meeting or had to leave early due to personally substituting in their own programs, and some who were expected to attend in person had to attend by phone instead due to traveling to program sites to substitute at the meeting time. One week, the team meeting was cancelled altogether due to so many AMs and even the Regional Director having to substitute. Engagement in meetings also appeared to be impacted by AMs substituting. AMs who attended by meetings phone due to traveling to a program where they needed to substitute were significantly less verbally involved as compared to their in-person counterparts. In one meeting observed, AMs attending by phone were engaged about 50% of the time and almost solely just when called upon, while AMs who attended in person were engaged voluntarily throughout 100% of the meeting. Despite the significant impact of turnover on AMs, they were not observed directly asking for help from their peers with substitutes in team meetings, such as, “I need a substitute for Tuesday. Who has one?” Instead, they consistently posed their need more passively: “If anyone has someone who can sub…;” and “I’ll be subbing two days this week unless somebody has someone.” AMs were also observed incongruently laughing or speaking in a cheery tone about significant hiring needs and having to substitute in programs: (in a cheerful tone regarding substituting all week) “I’ll be there every day;” one AM laughed lightly while describing an employee who, at the last minute, decided not to come back, so now the AM had to substitute; another AM described four staff openings after already substituting for weeks and said with upbeat tone, “…so I have some more staffing to do!” At no time in team meetings were AMs observed openly and congruently discussing the pain points of turnover as they did in individual interviews. EMPLOYEE CHURN 128 While AMs voiced awareness of turnover impact for key stakeholder groups when prompted in surveys and interviews, their spontaneous responses in interviews and observed team meetings centered heavily around consequences they personally incur. The agenda and conversational content of team meetings, however, did not directly address AM difficulties related to staff vacancies and only occasionally made mention of retention strategy. Impact of turnover on AMs was also observed as having collective negative impact in the cancellation of the weekly team meeting. Metacognitive knowledge: Area Managers’ understanding of and practices in reflection are limited. Area Managers seemed to lack a clear understanding of what constitutes reflection, which resulted in discrepancies in report of participation in reflective activities around employee turnover. Metacognitive knowledge, in this case, AM insight into their own cognitions, was addressed in the survey and interviews through an item inquiring about post-turnover reflection. As Figure 24 shows, there was variance among AMs surveyed on this response, where a few AMs, both new and veteran, do not practice reflection at all. The rate of reflection dropped among interviewees, where half (primarily veterans) indicated they practice reflection, and half said they did not at all. These percentages contrast with survey responses, where far more AMs indicated they take time to reflect. One veteran who indicated practicing reflection qualified it saying it depends upon time available. Other interviewees mistook answering their Regional Director’s questions about a turnover as reflection. Among AM team meetings observed, none hosted reflective conversations nor were AMs directed to reflect outside of the meeting on turnover despite nearly all AMs struggling significantly with turnover during the month observed. For those who do not practice reflection, they may be missing out on benefits cited in Chapter Two. This literature details how metacognition provides broad insights into adaptive EMPLOYEE CHURN 129 performance skills and entrepreneurial leadership that spur strategic improvements (Cho & Jung, 2014; Cleverley, 2016; Haynie et al., 2010). Metacognition can also aid turnover-specific awareness, where managers develop an understanding of their critical role as the bridge between the organization’s culture and strategy and retention of employees (Abbasi & Hollman, 2000). Given the inconsistencies with survey and interview responses, and that some interviewees applied the term reflection to other conversational activities, AMs appeared to lack clarity and uniformity on what reflection means and looks like behaviorally. Time availability also seemed to impact reflective discussions. When AMs were dealing with crises and substituting, they did not have the opportunity to step back and reflect on turnover. Figure 24 Metacognitive Knowledge: Discrepant Responses Regarding Reflection on Turnover (Survey and Interview Results) n = 18 Weighted 𝑋 = 3.3 SD.P = .65 σ 2 = .42 11% 50% 39% 0 2 4 6 8 10 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree # Area Managers When one of my employees voluntarily leaves his/her job, I take time to reflect on the turnover to gain insight. ReflectionDiscrepancy: 89% survey-takerssaid they reflect, but only 50% of interviewees said they reflect. EMPLOYEE CHURN 130 Procedural knowledge: Experience and outside resources are primary sources of Area Managers’ retention strategies. Area Managers knowledge of how to apply retention strategies appeared to be linked to position tenure and personal resources from prior work or self-study. In this study, AM procedural knowledge refers to their knowing how to concretely support employee retention. Procedural knowledge was addressed in a survey and an interview item asking AMs about their knowledge of how to apply different types of retention strategies. Literature cited in Chapter Two describes numerous physical and emotional managerial supports as key to retention across industries in and childcare specifically. These include providing ongoing training tied to compensation, recognizing staff, counseling those who are disappointed at work or who have a peer depart, providing peer mentorship, conducting fair performance evaluations, and demonstrating manager integrity and organizational justice (Abbasi & Hollman, 2009; Alkahtani, 2015; Floyd & Phillips, 2013; Kwak & Choi, 2015; Lee & Mitchell, 2003; 2016; Nitardy, 2008; Society for Human Resource Management, 2015). However, few AMs strongly agreed to having retention strategy know-how, as seen in Figure 25, and three AMs (17%) indicated they lacked such procedural knowledge altogether. EMPLOYEE CHURN 131 Figure 25 Procedural Knowledge: Application of Retention Strategies (Survey Results) n = 18 Weighted 𝑋 = 3.0 SD.P = .58 σ 2 = .33 It is noteworthy that among interviewees, while all AMs reported knowing how to apply some retention strategies, this was most predominantly true for veteran AMs. As Figure 21 shows, of the 37 mentions of strategy know-how, 27 (73%) were from veteran AMs. Also significant is the fact that 23 of the 37 strategies (62%) were said to have been learned outside the organization through prior positions or self-directed professional development. In team meetings observed, retention strategies were only occasionally mentioned and when they were, this was primarily by the Regional Director. AMs repeatedly reported staffing holes without stating strategies for overcoming the cycle of vacancies. One team meeting later in the month featured an AM presenting on hiring strategies that would aid retention, but retention was not a stated focus. However, the topic generated discussion among AMs that included hiring strategies that could impact retention, such as discussing hours clearly with candidates, interviewing at 17% 66% 17% 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree # Area Managers I know how to apply different types of employee retention strategies. EMPLOYEE CHURN 132 program sites to see candidates interact with children, and hiring candidates with positive attitudes. For veteran AMs, experience seemed to afford a greater repertoire of retention strategies than their new AM counterparts possessed. However, most strategies were the result of experience gained earlier in their career and/or from voluntary professional development, not from strategies provided by KCI. When team meetings included open conversation, AMs were willing and able to share strategies among peers, though retention strategy was not an agenda topic in any meeting. Figure 26 Procedural Knowledge Volume and Sources: How Many Retention Strategies AMs Know and Where They Learned Them (Interview Results) Synthesis of Knowledge Results and Key Findings Area Managers’ knowledge depended upon which aspect of turnover was being addressed and in what setting. Results demonstrate that most Area Managers had a clear 73% 27% 62% 38% 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Veteran AMs New AMs Learned Prior/On Own Learned from Org Retention Strategy Know-How Learning Source EMPLOYEE CHURN 133 conceptual understanding of turnover. Their understanding of the definition of turnover was stronger and more collective than were their perceptions of causes and consequences of turnover, where AMs demonstrated some differences among new versus veteran managers and regarding the literature on parent and societal financial impact. As a group, AMs did not see themselves as a cause for their own team’s turnover. Regardless of tenure as an AM, turnover impacted every manager significantly. However, while staff vacancies dominated team conversations, stress and frustration associated with turnover was not openly shared, strategies were not intentionally discussed, and help was not directly sought. Instead, managers were incongruent in meetings about the impact they personally incur, though they were far more open behind closed doors. Lastly, time to reflect to generate insights and strategies to overcome the distressful turnover cycle was thwarted by the crisis of covering one’s own vacancies, causing AMs to draw far more often upon prior and outside experience for retention strategies. Motivation Results and Key Findings The second area of results and findings pertains to motivation. As detailed in Chapter Two, this study explored two types of motivation: perceived cost, which is part of Expectancy Value Theory, and locus of control, which is part of Attribution Theory. In the conceptual framework, motivation influences are depicted with knowledge influences as being connected to Area Managers and surrounded by organizational influences. As explained with knowledge, this depicts how manager motivation is influenced by organizational resources and/or barriers, all of which combine to determine goal attainment. Results and key findings will be presented for both motivation areas followed by a synthesis of results and findings for motivation influences. Expectancy value theory – perceived cost: Area Managers generally see benefits of retention efforts as outweighing costs. Overall, Area Managers expressed belief that the effort EMPLOYEE CHURN 134 they exert to retain employees is worth it. In this study, comparing effort to benefits was examined as perceived cost. As a reminder from Chapter Two, perceived cost is the part of Expectancy Value Theory that involves the value a person assigns to a task (Eccles et al. as cited in Eccles, 2006). Perceived cost, in this study, refers to Area Managers’ beliefs about the cost of carrying out retention activities. One item on the survey and in the interview asked AMs about their perception of costs and benefits if they do or do not put time and effort into retention. As Figure 27 depicts, all AMs agreed in the survey that investing in retention activities is important. New AMs agreed to a greater degree, with 60% choosing “strongly agree” compared to veterans’ 40%. In interviews, nearly all AMs indicated retention efforts involve significant output but are worthwhile. Several noted that upfront costs in time and effort yield greater long-term benefits, such as retaining good workers who want to grow with the company. As one AM explained: I think building relationships matters…that’s a huge part of your employee retention…sitting down for a half hour to talk to somebody…it’s worth the $7 it might cost you, because you might keep them for a long time. For one veteran AM interviewed, the benefit of retention effort was driven by a clear motivation to avoid the pain of turnover, such as dealing with staffing crises. Celebration over avoiding the negative impact of turnover was also observed in team meetings, where an AM shared a story of saving a near resignation by flexing the employee’s hours. The Regional Director (RD) reinforced this win to the team with, “Don’t be afraid to ask, ‘What can we do?’” In this case, the message to AMs was if they are willing to pay the price of adjusting prior arrangements, they may be able to keep employees in place. Three AMs interviewed reported attempting such save strategies using scheduling and pay as incentives for employees to reverse resignations. EMPLOYEE CHURN 135 Figure 27 Expectancy Value: Perceived Cost of Investing in Retention Activities (Survey Results) n = 18 Weighted 𝑋 = 3.6 SD.P = 0.50 σ 2 = .25 One veteran AM saw the same types of effort-filled activities involved in retention as peers but differed significantly from peers in perception of pay-off, which was viewed as considerably uncertain: I feel like the industry, and the retention, is so fickle, that there have been plenty of people who I hired and I felt very strongly about, that I will put time into, whether it's handholding or making myself visible as the Area Manager, showing up for their onsite trainings, letting them know that they can reach out to me. I think that all of that's helpful, but it is a lot of time. Then sometimes…it's not impactful…It's kind of like a gamble. I feel like it's your job to do the best that you can, but it doesn't always work out in your favor. RESEARCHER: Sometimes you put more into in than you get out of it? 44% 56% 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree # Area Managers I feel it is important for me to invest time and effort in retaining employees, even if it takes time away from other work activities. EMPLOYEE CHURN 136 AM: Mm-hmm. RESEARCHER: What percentage of time would you say that that's the case when it comes to retaining people? AM: I would say about 40% of the time. (pause, nodding) Yeah. This same Area Manager voiced frustration about investing in employees who were then hired away by the school district in which they served, a reality echoed by another veteran in a team meeting observed. This type of thwarting of organizational investment is supported by some literature discussed in Chapter Two, which suggests the cost of training may fuel turnover by increasing marketability of employees to other employers (Alkahtani, 2015), though Clark and Estes (2008) refute training as linked to turnover. Still, the veteran AM quoted in the transcript excerpt above barely saw retention efforts offset by benefits, while peers, especially new AMs, strongly perceived retention efforts as worthwhile. Attribution theory – locus of control: Area Managers view turnover as largely out of their control. In Chapter One, the selection of Area Managers as the stakeholder group for this study was justified due to their organizational position as the people with the most direct, frequent contact with the field employees who turn over at significant rates. However, these frontline managers did not report feeling turnover was within their sphere of influence. Instead, they tended to view causes and control as external to themselves. This idea of attribution, or how one explains the causes of events (Anderman & Anderman, 2006), was explored in this study through two survey and interview items to ascertain Area Managers’ perceptions of retention efforts in relation to Weiner's (1985) attribution theory model. In Weiner’s model, causation is viewed in part as having internal or external locus of control to the individual (Anderman & Anderman, 2006; Weiner, 1985). This means an individual sees the cause of an event as connected to oneself, and therefore controllable, or connected to something outside oneself, and EMPLOYEE CHURN 137 therefore not controllable. As a review from Chapter Two, internal locus of control fuels effort both in cases of success and failure, while external locus of control is associated with hopelessness (Anderman & Anderman, 2006; Rueda, 2011; Weiner, 1985). The first survey and interview items about attribution asked Area Managers about reasons for turnover on their own teams. This item dually captured declarative/conceptual knowledge of turnover and was discussed earlier in the knowledge results section. As previously reported and depicted in Figures 13 and 14, there was a striking difference in AM perception of management as connected to turnover depending upon whether they were being asked about employees in general versus their own teams. As Figure 15 earlier in this chapter shows, for employees in general, AMs as a group cited various managerial turnover influences 29 times compared to only one mention when asked about their own teams. Also, as previously stated, five of the six turnover causes connected to management received no responses when AMs considered their own teams; meanwhile, their top answers focused on things beyond the control of the AM (schedule, limited hours, resuming education, career change, pay, and benefits). This nearly unanimous attribution of turnover to external causes was consistent with AM team meeting observations, where the only turnover causes discussed were external to the AM, as shown in Figure 28, such as relocation, long-term illness, taking a full-time job elsewhere, or the partner school hiring the employee. Furthermore, in interviews, typicality of external causes for turnover outnumbered internal causes 57 to 12, depicted in Figure 29. While veteran AMs voiced more turnover causes overall (45) compared to new AMs (24), the two groups aligned in percentages attributed to internal causes (average 66%) versus external causes (average 34%), as Figure 30 represents. Interestingly, two AMs interviewed repeatedly referred to luck as the source of what they perceived as less frequent turnover as compared to peers. These AMs, however, did not have hard data on their peers’ turnover and were only going of what they EMPLOYEE CHURN 138 deduced in team meetings. Whether attributing turnover or retention success to outside factors, all of this demonstrates low internal locus of control, or high external locus of control, among AMs over their own employees’ turnover. See Figure 15 for Frequency of Area Manager Selection of Management Issues as a Top Cause for Employee Turnover: All Industries Versus Area Managers’ Own Teams (Interview and Survey Results Combined) Figure 28 Attribution: Typicality of Internal versus External Locus of Control for Turnover (Observation Results) Typicality ofInternal versus External Locus of Control for Turnover: Observation Results Internally Attributed Turnover Cause Externally Attributed Turnover Cause EMPLOYEE CHURN 139 Figure 29 Attribution: Typicality of Internal versus External Locus of Control for Turnover (Interview Results) Figure 30 Attribution: Typicality of Internal versus External Locus of Control for Turnover: New and Returning Area Managers (Interview Results) 12 / 17% 57/ 83% Typicality of Internal versus External Locus of Control for Turnover: Interviews Results 33% 35% 67% 65% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% New AMs Returning AMs Typicality of Internal versus External Attribution for Turnover: New AMs and Returning AMs, Interview Results Internally Attributed Turnover Cause Externally Attributed Turnover Cause EMPLOYEE CHURN 140 The second attribution item was posed in the survey. Area Managers rated their agreement with a statement about the influence of their retention strategy focus and effort on actual retention. Figure 31 shows nearly unanimous agreement with the statement. New AMs agreed more strongly with the statement, with 50% strongly agreeing and 50% agreeing compared to 30% of veterans strongly agreeing, 60% agreeing, and 10% disagreeing. This general belief about retention influence aligns with AMs’ perceived cost-benefit of retention efforts as already discussed, though with weaker agreement about influence on outcomes. However, Figure 31 also shows results that directly contradict interview, survey, and observation data presented in the preceding paragraph that indicate AMs have a strong external locus of control with turnover. Furthermore, one AM disagreed with the statement that retention focus and effort have an influence on employee retention, which harkened back to interviews, where one AM (previously quoted) repeated statements indicating helplessness and referred to the “gamble” of retention efforts as not always paying off. EMPLOYEE CHURN 141 Figure 31 Attribution: Perceived Locus of Control of Area Manager Influence on Retention (Survey Results) n = 18 Weighted 𝑋 = 3.3 SD.P = 0.58 σ 2 = .33 Synthesis of Motivation Results and Key Findings Across methods, results for expectancy value of retention efforts compared to turnover attribution showed significant discrepancy. When asked about retention effort, AMs generally held a positive view of time and focus being worthwhile and influential. Yet AMs also saw turnover causes as heavily external to their control. In other words, AMs viewed their own positive influence on retention up until the point of turnover, at which time the onus shifted to external factors. Furthermore, while all AMs indicated heavy external locus of control over turnover, there was less agreement between veteran and new AMs about retention influence, with new AMs holding a more optimistic outlook than their seasoned counterparts. 6% 56% 39% 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree # Area Managers The amount of focus and effort I put into retention strategies has a strong influence on my employees' retention. EMPLOYEE CHURN 142 Area Manager Organizational Influences on Employee Turnover The third and final area of results and findings involves organizational influences on employee turnover. Organizational influences were framed by two dimensions of workplace culture: cultural models, or invisible elements of culture, and cultural settings, which are visible elements of culture (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001; Schneider et al., 1996). As outlined in Chapter Two and displayed in the conceptual framework, this study explored two cultural model influences and four cultural setting influences applied to the study topic of turnover and Area Managers as stakeholders. The two cultural model influences were accountability for turnover and attitude, or encouragement for new retention strategies. The four cultural settings influences were goals for retention, incentives to focus on retention, formative feedback about retention efforts and turnover, and organizational resources for effective training and compensation. As previously stated, these influences are shown in the conceptual framework as surrounding knowledge and motivation influences to represent that organizational resources and/or barriers directly impact manager knowledge and motivation, all of which then merge to affect goal attainment. Results and key findings will be presented for each organizational influence, followed by a summary of key results and findings for organizational influences. Cultural models – accountability: Accountability practices for employee turnover are lacking. Area Managers’ sense of personal responsibility for turnover was not necessarily supported by concrete organizational accountability practices. Accountability, as explained in Chapter Two, refers to answerability for performance to a supervisor, consumers, or some other constituency (Firestone & Riehl, 2005). In this study, accountability dealt with if or how KCI holds Area Managers responsible for turnover of their own employees. Accountability was addressed in three survey items and two interview items, the latter with follow-up questions. EMPLOYEE CHURN 143 The first survey item about accountability measured Area Manager agreement with a statement about KCI communicating the importance of the AM role in retention. Figure 32 shows AMs were split on this topic, with 67% agreeing or strongly agreeing, and 34% disagreeing or strongly disagreeing. When comparing tenure of AMs, new AMs more strongly agreed with this statement by 15% compared to their veteran counterparts. In team meetings, voicing of the importance of AMs in retention was not observed. Instead, the focus was almost entirely on AMs dealing with current staffing vacancies and hiring for replacements, as previously detailed, and once on preparing for predicted seasonal turnover (“Make sure you’re preparing for spring break…college students have finals and move home”). In interviews, AMs were asked who at KCI is responsible for employee turnover. Most AMs indicated there are multiple parties responsible, such as direct supervisors, Human Resources, training, and executives, but most AMs ultimately brought the onus back on themselves and their Program Managers. One AM mentioned a supervisor voicing the importance of retention as it related to reputation with school partners and described multiple ways the Department of Education and Training conveys retention importance in training and email communications. EMPLOYEE CHURN 144 Figure 32 Organizational Communication of Managers’ Importance in Retention (Survey and Observation Results) n = 18 Weighted 𝑋 = 2.8 SD.P = 0.79 σ 2 = .62 Despite AMs citing themselves as responsible for turnover, actual accountability was rated lower on surveys, reported less frequently in interviews, and absent in observed team meetings. Figure 33 illustrates that half of AMs reported being held accountable for turnover by KCI, and half did not. Among interviewees, all AMs cited a lack of accountability across 12 separate instances, the majority (9) voiced by veterans. This aligns with survey results, where new AMs more strongly agreed that they are held accountable (62%) compared to veterans (40%). Interviewed AMs reflected: “I don’t think that I am held accountable;” “I haven’t had to deal with accountability. I haven’t had my supervisors say, ‘Hey, what’s going on?’ “No. I don’t even know that we have a system in place to track that…it’s not really addressed.” Two AMs mentioned post-turnover conversations with their supervisor, and one of these additionally 6% 28% 50% 17% 0 2 4 6 8 10 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree # Area Managers KCI communicates the importance of my role in retaining employees. Tenure differential: New AMs agree 15% more than veterans. Counter observation: # mentions in team meetings of AM role in retention: 0. EMPLOYEE CHURN 145 viewed profit and loss statements and parent and client surveys as sources of accountability, though these were not explicitly tied to retention by KCI. Figure 33 Accountability for Turnover (Survey and Interview Results) n = 18 Weighted 𝑋 = 2.6 SD.P = 0.60 σ 2 = .36 Surveyed AMs were also split on whether their peers are held accountable, as seen in Figure 34. How AMs would know about peer accountability was a question that arose among interviewees, with one AM pointing out, “I don’t really hear any talk about necessarily retention, or, ‘Why do you have so many people quitting?’ I guess I can’t really speak to whether or not they’re having that conversation.” Another AM commented: I don’t have a really good idea. I don’t spend a lot of time looking at other people’s like HR tracking sheets. I don’t know how much turnover other people have had compared to me…it’s not something that has come up on team calls either.” A veteran questioned if peer accountability measures could be in place given turnover realities: 50% 44% 6% 0 2 4 6 8 10 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree # Area Managers KCI holds me accountable when my employees turn over. Discrepant responses: 100% of interviewees reported lack of accountability in 12 instances. Tenure differential: New AMs agree 22% more than veterans. EMPLOYEE CHURN 146 I don’t know if they are. I would assume so, but if they are, then something’s not…breaking through, because I feel like there seems to be a high turnover, more than I think that is the expected amount. I don’t know if they are. Discussion about accountability for turnover was not observed in team meetings, where instead, as previously described, reports of staffing holes, having to substitute in programs, and pressured hiring dominated meeting content with a sense of normalcy and no reference to consequences issued by the organization. Figure 34 Peer Accountability for Turnover (Survey Results) n = 18 Weighted 𝑋 = 2.5 SD.P = 0.60 σ 2 = .36 Area Managers’ beliefs about responsibility for turnover were generally not supported by reports of concrete accountability practices by KCI. While AMs attributed responsibility for turnover to themselves as well as other personnel, they generally could not point to how anyone 56% 39% 6% 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree # Area Managers KCI holds my Area Manager peers accountable when their employees turn over. EMPLOYEE CHURN 147 was held responsible, including themselves. New AMs more strongly felt the organization conveyed AM turnover responsibility and held them accountable compared to veterans, who largely reported a lack of accountability by the organization for themselves and their peers. Though survey responses indicated split agreement regarding accountability, interview responses and observations provided little to no evidence to support the half of AMs who reported accountability measures by the organization. This may indicate an intrinsic assumption of responsibility among AMs regardless of a lack of a concrete accountability framework provided by the organization and/or a lack of understanding of accountability. Cultural models - new strategy encouragement: Peers are the primary source of support for retention strategies. Most Area Managers reported feeling encouraged and supported to try new retention strategies; however, this support seemed to come more from among peers than KCI. The importance of trying new retention strategies was presented in Chapter Two, where successful leaders and organizations were found to be associated with openness, risk-taking, and frequent failure (Dyer et al., 2011; Northouse, 2016). Furthermore, the childcare industry’s greatest turnover turnaround story in the U.S. military involved significant changes to retention efforts (Floyd & Phillips, 2013). In this study, encouragement for new strategy use was addressed in one survey item and one interview item. Among survey respondents, two-thirds said KCI encourages them to try new retention strategies, while one-third said they are not encouraged. Agreement to the statement in Figure 35 was stronger among new AMs (75%) compared to veterans (60%). Response rates on a similar item for interviewees were reversed, with one-third of interviewees feeling encouraged by the organization or their supervisor, and two-thirds denying such support exists. Supervisory encouragement was typically reported in the form of receiving industry wisdom and experience, while other times, supervisor support was presumed (“I know the support will be there”) or was EMPLOYEE CHURN 148 in the form of support for AM ideas: “I think I have a lot of ideas, and I’m encouraged to put them out there and do them.” Among interviewees who said they did not feel encouraged, two specifically and repeatedly cited heavy focus on the profit and loss statement: “Sometimes it feels like that’s the only thing that’s important.” Figure 35 New Retention Strategy Encouragement Survey and Interview Results) n = 18 Weighted 𝑋 = 2.8 SD.P = 0.63 σ 2 = .40 Often, AMs mentioned their peers as their primary source of encouragement for trying new strategies: We do a good job peer to peer…I think that’s the number one thing is the peer to peer conversation…It’s advice. Sometimes it’s strategy, just depending on if they used something in the past that has worked for them. It’s usually just we’re bouncing ideas off each other. 33% 56% 11% 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree # Area Managers KCI encourages me to try new strategies to retain employees. Inverted responses: 33% of interviewees feel encouraged. Tenure differential: New AMs feel encouraged 15% more than veterans. EMPLOYEE CHURN 149 This peer support dynamic was additionally observed in team meetings. In one meeting, an AM presented on hiring strategy and encouraged AMs to tap into each other for ideas. In another meeting, peers reported collaborating to promote high performing staff in across areas. Support for new retention strategies appeared to be both structured and spontaneous, coming from the organization (supervisors) to an extent, but mostly from peers. Responses regarding support for new retention strategies were inverted for the survey versus interviews. As with prior items, surveys appeared to yield more positive answers than interviews, where perhaps respondents’ need to generate evidence in open-ended inquiry created less agreement to the existence of organizational resources. Cultural settings - retention goals: Concrete retention goals are lacking despite Area Manager report. Area Managers reported knowing the organization has retention goals and of having their own; however, this was not supported by evidence. Chapter Two described the importance of organizational goals as the foundation of employee performance, compulsory to an organizational framework and shared progress, and the standard against which success is measured (Bolman & Deal, 2013; Clark & Estes, 2008; Lewis, 2011). AMs were asked about both organizational and individual retention goals in two survey items and two interview items with follow-up questions. Area Managers were split on claiming to know organizational retention goals. As seen in Figure 36, 56% agreed to knowing KCI has specific employee retention goals, while 45% did not. Among these responses, once again, new AMs voiced greater agreement (75%) compared to their veteran counterparts (40%). Veteran perceptions align better with interview responses, where no AMs could identify specific organizational retention goals. One new AM inferred organizational retention focus from Department of Education and Training initiatives and communications, as well as the present study, but could not articulate a specific organizational EMPLOYEE CHURN 150 goal. One veteran expressed wondering at a past goal from years past but could not remember the goal nor its source or present standing. Specific goals were also not stated in team meetings. Figure 36 Awareness of Organizational Retention Goals (Survey and Interview Results) n = 18 Weighted 𝑋 = 2.6 SD.P = 0.68 σ 2 = .47 When asked if they had their own retention goals, Area Managers resoundingly agreed (89%), as Figure 37 depicts. However, in the open-ended setting of interviews, two-thirds of AMs were unable to articulate any pre-set goals. A veteran AM indicated a goal of retaining 100% of Program Managers, while a new AM articulated a 100% retention goal for all staff: “My goal’s always going to be to keep everybody, because I like continuity and the teamwork in keeping that team.” However, it is noteworthy that, in other parts of the interview, this latter AM expressed assumption of employee departure and the voicing that to employees directly. No 6% 39% 50% 6% 0 2 4 6 8 10 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree # Area Managers I am aware of KCI having specific employee retention goals. Discrepant responses: # of interviewees who knew of organizational retention goals: 0. Tenure differential: Veteran AMs disagree 35% more than new AMs. EMPLOYEE CHURN 151 other interviewees had pre-set retention goals. Some appeared to spontaneously generate goals in response to the question (“I think obviously our goal is 100% retention”), while several cited retention strategies in lieu of goals. When one veteran with strategies was asked about a specific goal, the AM responded, “No, but I’m wondering if I should,” while a new AM commented, “I really don’t have a goal just yet.” Another veteran said, “I don’t have any at the moment” and, like an aforementioned AM, reported assuming staff will depart and having communicated that to staff. On this item, there was no significant difference among veterans and new AMs, and no mentions of retention goals for the organization nor individual AMs was observed in team meetings. Figure 37 Area Manager Proclamation of Own Retention Goals (Survey and Interview Results) n = 18 Weighted 𝑋 = 3.0 SD.P = 0.47 σ 2 = .22 11% 78% 11% 0 5 10 15 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree # Area Managers I have specific employee retention goals for my own team. Discrepant responses: Interviewees who stated: • Concrete goal: 33% • No pre-set goal: 67% EMPLOYEE CHURN 152 Similar to previously reported findings, AM survey responses were once again significantly more positive than those shared in interviews. Survey perceptions were greater than when interview evidence was sought. There also appeared to be some lack of understanding of goals versus strategies. Strategy outside the framework of concrete goals was mirrored in team meetings observed, where retention efforts were sometimes shared or encouraged but without a strategic framework or intentional target. Cultural settings – incentives: Retention focus is not organizationally incentivized but still has a motivating force. Most Area Managers did not see KCI as providing incentives for them to focus on employee retention. Incentives, as discussed in Chapter Two, have the potential to tap into behavioral learning theory, where Thorndike’s Law of Effect (1911) indicates positive responses to behavior increase the likelihood of the behavior being repeated (Mayer, 2011). The potential for incentives to shape effort is paralleled in organizational settings, where rewards (and punishment) are easy, quick ways to influence behavior (Schein, 2010) and help workers measure their efforts against incentives (Bolman & Deal, 2010). Incentives were addressed in one survey, and incentives and rewards were addressed in two interview items. Survey respondents largely disagreed (73%) with a statement about KCI providing incentives to focus on employee retention, as Figure 38 demonstrates. Among these respondents, veterans far more strongly expressed a lack of incentives (90%) compared to new AMs (50%). Interview results paralleled surveys, with all but one Area Manager indicating a lack of organizational incentives in 11 different instances. AMs remarked: “I don’t think they incentivize me. Not to my knowledge;” “They don’t;” “There’s nothing out there;” “I don’t think that there is an outright visible incentive that KCI gives for retention;” “Is there any? I don’t think there is any, specifically anything.” EMPLOYEE CHURN 153 Figure 38 Organizational Incentives to Focus on Retention (Survey Results) n = 18 Weighted 𝑋 = 2.1 SD.P = 0.66 σ 2 = .43 Interviewees were also asked what rewards, if any, they receive when they retain staff. AMs again reported a lack of organizational recognition: “I’m not rewarded by KCI to retain employees;” “I don’t think it’s outright said that, if you retain your people, you get this…bonus or something.” One AM saw the annual bonus as a reward (“If I’m able to retain staff, that’s going to help my bottom line”), though the bonus was not reportedly articulated by the organization as a retention incentive nor reward. Another AM countered this view of the bonus as tied to staff retention saying, “Let me think about my bonus, and is anything tied to retention? Retention of clients, but not retention of employees.” A veteran AM mentioned one instance of casual praise from an executive regarding low turnover: 17% 56% 28% 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree # Area Managers KCI provides incentives for me to focus on employee retention. Tenure differential: Veteran AMs disagree 40% more than new AMs. EMPLOYEE CHURN 154 It was nice to hear, I think (executive) said once last year, he was like, “Oh, (AM name), you seem to have low turnover.” I’m like, “Oh, ok. Yeah.” I like that recognition, but it was just in passing in the hallway, so there isn’t much. Most often, AMs spoke about non-organizational rewards for retention. Such rewards were typically in the form of not having to personally deal with the consequences of turnover, such as filling staffing holes, or hiring and training new people, and therefore being able to attend to other duties: Your incentive is for yourself, to make your life a little bit easier…it’s such an incentive to be able to have a full staff, even if it’s for a month…then I can do a lot more if I’m not subbing and trying to interview and hire constantly. Another AM similarly stated, “I think the big piece is peace of mind, because there’s so much happening that if you were able to retain staff, you have so much more time to focus on the other pieces.” One veteran summed up the group’s sentiment: “It’s my own…I feel like I suffer…I lose if I lose people.” This idea that resolving or preventing staffing issues is personally rewarding for AMs was also seen throughout team meetings observed. With their own substituting and urgent hiring dominating conversation, AMs happily reported and celebrated when staffing holes were filled. Furthermore, continual hiring for anticipated vacancies was a strategy voiced by AMs and their supervisor: “I have no holes but always prepare;” “Don’t stop interviewing…you’ll have fall out just when you think you’re ok;” “Keep your pipeline going.” No mention of KCI-issued incentives to focus on retention nor rewards for retaining employees were observed in team meetings. Though survey responses largely disagreed with the existence of organizational incentives to focus on retention, once again, survey respondents were more positive in their responses than interviewees. Also, and once again, veterans held significantly more negative EMPLOYEE CHURN 155 views compared to new AMs. While AMs did not declare organizational incentives or rewards for focusing on retention, they did voice personal incentives centered around the avoidance of various turnover pains. This harkens back to motivation results and perceived cost already reported. Cultural settings - formative feedback: Turnover and retention data is not getting to Area Managers. When it comes to actionable information on employee turnover and retention strategies, most Area Managers indicate a lack of organizational feedback. As a reminder from Chapter Two, feedback provides workers direction and can be both informative and correctional, allowing workers to adjust their approach to goals as necessary (Clark & Estes, 2008; Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004). Feedback is also essential to learning when attempting new strategies (Schein, 2010). AMs need information on turnover and retention strategy efficacy to know if or how to modify efforts toward goal attainment. Feedback was addressed with two survey items and two interview items. As Figure 39 portrays, most Area Managers (72%) do not agree that KCI provides information on employee turnover that guides their retention strategies. As with other items, veteran AMs far more strongly disagreed (90%) compared to new AMs (50%). In interviews, 100% of AMs indicated a complete lack of feedback provided by the organization on turnover, as well as a lack of tools to measure retention strategy efficacy. AMs remarked: “I’ve not myself seen an actual report;” “I don’t have anything;” “There’s no data. There’s nothing really to say, ‘Oh, you lost 33% of your…’ Nothing like that;” “It’s not something that we’ve gotten reports on…It’s not like…we did this exit survey, and this is why they said they really left compared to what they told you.” EMPLOYEE CHURN 156 Figure 39 Formative Feedback Provided by the Organization AND Resources for Measuring Retention Strategy Efficacy (Survey and Interview Results; Identical Survey Results for Two Items) *Identical results for both items. n = 18 Weighted 𝑋 = 2.2 SD.P = 0.60 σ 2 = .36 One AM positioned the lack of feedback against focus on staffing crises: “I don’t think it’s been a lot of feedback around retaining staff. I think it’s, we kind of have been reactive in some ways, getting people properly placed.” A veteran voiced frustration at the lack of feedback: “Nobody really gives me that information. I hate it…I’ve never gotten a report or anything saying, ‘(AM name), you lost 25% of your staff during the 2016 school year.’” This same veteran noted retention data provided for other stakeholder groups but not staff: “We don’t do a 11% 61% 28% 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree # Area Managers KCI provides me information on employee turnover that guides my retention strategies with my own team.* AND KCI provides me tools to measure how effective my retention strategies are.* Tenure differential: Veteran AMs disagree 40% more than new AMs. Compared to interviews 100% of interviewees reported a total lack of feedback in 16 instances. EMPLOYEE CHURN 157 lot of retention, not for our employees. For students, for families, for clients, but not necessarily our employees.” One new AM compared the lack of feedback to prior organizations: “I don’t know that we dig down as deep as I’ve seen other companies do to find out what we could change, why are we losing these employees.” Two other AMs referred to an HR spreadsheet where AMs apply color coding to employees as it pertains to employment status (e.g. green means hired and working; red means no longer with the company). One of these AMs commented on applying the color coding as a source of some awareness of turnover, though not detailed nor provided by the organization: “It’s very eye opening knowing that all the red is there.” Feedback on turnover or retention strategy efficacy was not observed in team meetings. Some AMs in team meetings shared their retention strategy successes peer to peer, but none referred to methods or tools provided by the organization to measure turnover or strategy success. KCI turnover data is known to exist due to the gathering of such reports for this study. However, AMs indicated they are not receiving such information. As with prior items, survey responses, especially among new AMs, were again more positive than interviews or observations. This was despite the fact that no evidence of organizational formative feedback was reported by any interviewee nor observed in any meetings. Cultural settings - training and compensation resources: Area Managers feel better resourced for effective staff training than for compensation and rewards. As a final area of organizational influence, resources for effective application of employee training and compensation were explored, yielding different perceptions between the two topics. Training is connected to retention in that, as Chapter Two details, employee satisfaction is impacted by training (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009) and is thus proposed to positively impact turnover (Alkahtani, 2015). In childcare and afterschool industry literature, training also proved to EMPLOYEE CHURN 158 positively impact turnover by preparing staff, lowering stress, and forging professional attachments and career paths that support retention (Campbell et al., 2000; First Research Industry Profiles, 2015; Floyd & Phillips, 2013; Gong, 2012; Hale-Jinks et al., 2006; NAA, 2006; Nitardy, 2008; Whitebook et al., 2014). Compensation complements training as an organizational influence by ensuring equitable pay, rewarding loyalty and tenure, providing tuition reimbursement, and remaining competitive for workers (Abbasi & Hollman, 2009; Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009; Bolman & Deal, 2013; Daly, 2009; Lee & Mitchell, 2003). Training and compensation resources were addressed in two survey and two interview items. As Figures 40 and 41 depict, 89% of AMs believe KCI provides them adequate training resources, while only 56% of AMs say the same is true about resources for compensation and reward. Reports of training resources were mirrored in interviews, where 32 of the 39 (82%) resources cited where training related. These resources included online and live training frameworks and content, live training support through step-by-step guides and with KCI personnel, just-in-time training for unique situations, training documentation available at program sites and online, professional development tied to pay increases, and a mentor program that results in bonuses. The remaining resources mentioned included contests for enrollment and attendance, referral bonuses, market increases approved by executives, national association membership, pay for administrative work, a budget to manage, and annual raises. With compensation, a few AMs reported learning how to work with allotted resources to create retention wins. For instance, one AM talked about the support of an executive around labor budgeting: AM: I know when we opened (district), they just kind of told me what the pay range was…Try to make sure the educators fall into this range, and the Program Managers fall into that range, and just make it happen from there. EMPLOYEE CHURN 159 RESEARCHER: Is there anything else the company gives you so that you can be competitive with pay, or reward your team financially? AM: The autonomy to…let’s just say somebody gets a dollar more, or $.50 more, than what the range is. (Executive name) always taught us to, ‘Just come talk to me if we need to go outside of that for somebody.’ If (there is) a really good employee I don’t want to pass up, we can bend or stretch. Then she kind of showed me how to, so if I did that with the Program Manager, then maybe with the Educator you could kind of finagle that to where it can come out equal. Another AM shared the story of incentivizing an employee who desired a raise: “For one Program Manager who’s been with us for a little while, and she wanted more compensation, we tied it to her enrollment, so for every…full-time enrollment, she gets $.25 extra.” Working creatively and strategically to keep staff was reiterated in a team meeting, where the Regional Director relayed a story of an AM flexing a staff member’s schedule down to fewer days. However, utilizing compensation was not specifically mentioned. EMPLOYEE CHURN 160 Figure 40 Training Resources (Survey and Interview Results) n = 18 Weighted 𝑋 = 2.9 SD.P = 0.62 σ 2 = .39 Figure 41 Compensation Resources (Survey and Interview Results) n = 18 Weighted 𝑋 = 2.5 SD.P = 0.60 σ 2 = .36 6% 6% 78% 11% 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree # Area Managers KCI provides me the resources I need to effectively train my team. 6% 39% 56% 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree # Area Managers KCI provides me the resources I need to effectively compensate and reward my team. Alignment with interviews: 32 of 39 (82%) resources cited were training related. Nuances from interviews: Some AMs learned how to work with what they had wisely to get and keep great staff. EMPLOYEE CHURN 161 Most Area Managers felt well-resourced by KCI when it comes to training their team but less so with compensation. Some AMs learned from the organization how to work wisely with limited financial resources to get and keep great staff. Further, AMs cited labor budget autonomy that allows them to be flexible in hiring and providing increases at their discretion. Synthesis of Organizational Results and Key Findings Overall, Area Managers cited very limited organizational resources around employee retention and turnover. They most highly rated training resources, followed by some as needed strategies and encouragement for retention. Though feedback in the form of organizational turnover data exists at KCI, it was not reported to reach AMs. In the absence of organizational resources, AMs reported other sources of drive and support. For instance, though there was a lack of concrete accountability for turnover, AMs expressed an intrinsic sense of responsibility. Through KCI provided limited strategies for retention, AMs reported leaning significantly on peers for support and ideas. Though no specific retention incentives were offered, AMs still seemed motivated to avoid the distress of the hiring cycle. In some cases, such as retention goals, AM survey results indicating knowledge of organizational goals or of having their own were not supported in interviews whatsoever. This demonstrated an overall pattern of greater positivity on surveys as compared to open-ended interviews and observations. Summary and Implications A number of themes emerged across results. These include areas of limited knowledge with potential perpetuation of turnover, significant gaps in organizational supports around turnover, disparate reports by tenure and setting, possible learned helplessness, and lack of ownership. Each will be discussed along with implications related to the organizational retention goal. EMPLOYEE CHURN 162 First, while Area Managers have considerable direct experience with employee turnover, there are some knowledge limitations with the definition itself, as well as with impact on society and what constitutes reflective practices. These knowledge gaps could be the result of a lack of exposure to and engagement with such information and practices. Due to the lack of information provided by KCI about turnover and the absence of guided reflective practices, these gaps are logical. With societal impact, a lack of knowledge is also understandable given that consequences for society appear in very limited literature and are furthest removed from the day- to-day functions of an AM. However, any limitations in conceptual understanding of turnover and reflection could directly impact AM engagement with such topics and practices, thereby impeding retention efforts and goal attainment. Similarly, time to reflect to generate insights and strategies to overcome the painful turnover cycle appears to be held hostage by the crisis of covering one’s own staffing vacancies. This causes AMs to draw far more often upon prior and outside experience for retention strategies. Additionally, the very lack of time spent gaining strategic insights into turnover could be fueling its cyclical continuation. The lack of formative data coming from KCI may only be exacerbating this cycle. Conversely, AMs both individually and collectively, demonstrated that when they have time, they are more reflective about turnover and more proactive about retention. Therefore, without dedicated time and formative data, AMs and all stakeholders are likely to continue suffering from employee turnover. Another theme that emerged was that Area Managers clearly hold a belief in the importance of and responsibility for turnover. However, this belief is held almost solely internally and is not generally framed by concrete organizational supports. Any retention efforts appear outside the context of specific goals, incentives, feedback, or accountability. Without an organizational framework, AMs tend to put forth effort without specific direction or confidence; EMPLOYEE CHURN 163 in other words, they are “throwing retention strategies at the wall and seeing what sticks.” The ability to achieve the retention goal could be significantly diminished or at least slowed without strategic supports for AMs. Next, disparate answers between new and veteran respondents and in different settings suggest different experiences based upon tenure and/or possible cultural barriers. AMs were significantly more positive on surveys than they were in interviews or in what was observed in team meetings. This may indicate a desire to see things more positively when closed-ended questions were answered in an anonymous survey but an inability to sustain that when evidence was required in open-ended, in-person settings. The consistently greater negativity expressed behind closed interview doors by both new and veteran AMs may also imply a cultural model of an unstated agreement that AMs will not openly voice their struggles. Similarly, new AMs were consistently more positive than veterans about their perceptions of organizational resources. While this could be explained by having a genuinely different experience, this is less likely due to new and veteran AMs being supervised by shared Regional Directors and supported by shared central office departments. Greater veteran negativity could be the result of not recognizing newer resources that have come along more recently that new AMs identified, or it may indicate some degree of learned helplessness (Overmier, 2013) that developed over time with the company and/or in the industry. It is important to note, however, that statistical analysis was not conducted to determine the significance of percentage differences in new versus veteran responses. A connected theme that emerged was a lack of ownership. AMs viewed their own positive influence on retention up until the point of turnover, at which time the onus shifted to external factors. AMs overwhelmingly saw external causes for their own team’s turnover in direct contrast with their perceptions of managers and employees in general and in contrast to EMPLOYEE CHURN 164 literature. Similarly, some AMs cited children’s resilience with turnover before or after describing its negative effects on children. This suggests AMs may unable or unwilling to consider their personal impact on their own employees’ turnover. This could be due to lack of insight or to denial as a defense mechanism to something they see as negative. This also appears to parallel Weiner’s (1985) hedonic bias, or the tendency to attribute success internally but failure externally. Furthermore, the heavy external locus of control for turnover coupled with less agreement among veterans about retention influence reinforces the idea that learned helplessness develops for AMs over time and experience. External and stable attributions are predictive of lower motivation (Weiner, 1985), which is connected to persistence and mental effort (Clark & Estes, 2008). Therefore, AMs’ lack of engagement with their own influence could greatly undermine individual and collective retention efforts thereby thwarting achievement of the organizational retention goal. EMPLOYEE CHURN 165 CHAPTER FIVE: SOLUTIONS AND INTEGRATED IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION PLANS In the previous chapter, the first and second research questions were answered regarding the status of employee turnover at KCI and Area Manager influences related to achieving the turnover improvement goal. Results were presented according to Clark and Estes’ (2008) framework of knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational influences. Additionally, key findings were synthesized, and implications were stated. This chapter answers the final research question: 3. What are the recommended solutions to close the knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational gaps with regard to employee turnover at KCI? The chapter is organized similarly to Chapters Two and Four, with an emphasis on the Clark and Estes (2008) framework. Context-specific recommendations for knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational solutions are provided, followed by an integrated implementation and evaluation plan of solutions that incorporates the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Chapter Five closes with strengths and weaknesses of the study, limitations and delimitations, and recommendations for future study. Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences Knowledge Recommendations Introduction. The assumed knowledge influences for this study were framed by the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy (Krathwohl, 2002) and organized into three knowledge types: declarative (Area Managers’ concept of employee turnover); metacognitive (AMs’ self- assessment of their impact on employee turnover); and procedural (AMs’ knowledge of how to support employees). Within declarative knowledge, AMs’ concepts of the definition of turnover, causes of turnover, and turnover consequences for key stakeholders were assessed. A need for EMPLOYEE CHURN 166 conceptual knowledge of the definition of turnover was not validated, nor was a need for knowledge of turnover consequences for children, families, or the organization. A need for conceptual knowledge of turnover causes, as well as turnover consequences for society, were both found to be highly probable. Focusing on turnover causes was selected as an organizational priority because, in contrast to both literature and their perceptions of other managers as having significant impact, AMs denied their personal impact on their own team’s turnover, which could serve as a barrier to retention success in the future. Knowledge of turnover consequences for society, the stakeholder group furthest removed from AMs’ day-to-day functions, is not necessary for successful employee retention and thus was not prioritized. For metacognitive knowledge influences, the need for AMs to self-assess the impact of their work on employee turnover was found to be highly probable. Metacognitive knowledge was prioritized based upon significant literature citing the benefits of reflection on strategy and success. It was also prioritized for its potential to aid more intentional retention strategy compared to study findings of less-than-focused turnover dialog and application of retention efforts. For procedural knowledge, a need for AMs to know how to support their employees was found to be highly probable. This was prioritized due to results that demonstrated retention strategies known were generally gleaned from prior work experience or outside study, and that veterans had significantly more strategies than new AMs. Table 5 summarizes knowledge influences, as well as validation and priority status. Table 5 also provides the principles upon which organization-specific recommendations are made and one or more recommendations for each highly probable or validated knowledge influence. EMPLOYEE CHURN 167 Table 5 Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations Assumed Knowledge Influence Validated Yes, High Probability, or No (Y, HP, N) Priority Yes, No (Y, N) Principle and Citation Context-Specific Recommendation Area Managers (AMs) need to know how field employee turnover is conceptualized. (Declarative - conceptual) Definition: N Causes: HP Consequences for children, families, and organization: N Consequences for society: HP Causes: Y Consequences for society: N Conceptual knowledge can illuminate causal interrelationships (Krathwohl, 2002). Provide AMs information in the form of individual and collective monthly turnover rates, employee- reported reasons for departure, and qualitative exit interview data. AMs need to self-assess the interrelationship among their respective work activities and field employee turnover. (Metacognitive) HP Y Metacognitive reflective practices help learners adapt thinking for greater success (Baker, 2006; Krathwohl, 2002) and help companies critically assess knowledge gaps, biases, and flawed reasoning that serve to motivate new learning strategy (Cleverley, 2016). Social interaction and cooperative learning facilitate construction of new knowledge (Scott & Palinscar, 2006). Train AMs on the definition and value of reflection and on specific reflective practices to gain insight into employee turnover and retention strategies. Dedicate time to process reflection in AM team meetings and supervisory coachings. AMs need to know how to support employees through their HP Y Providing scaffolding within a person’s zone of proximal development Provide AMs information about the steps of effective managerial support EMPLOYEE CHURN 168 respective job functions both practically and emotionally. (Procedural) promotes appropriate instruction (Scott & Palinscar, 2006). Facilitating transfer promotes learning (Mayer, 2011). Social interaction and cooperative learning facilitate construction of new knowledge (Scott & Palinscar, 2006). strategies that have been shown to aid retention. Provide AMs a job aid that explains each step and how and when to implement each strategy. Invite strategy success stories in team meetings to benefit from the steps utilized by veteran AMs for assimilation into new AM application. Declarative knowledge solutions. Declarative knowledge pertains to what is known, including facts and events (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009; Berge & Hezewijk, 1999). Declarative knowledge can be factual, such as elements, events, details, or vocabulary, or it can be conceptual, depicting relationships among elements (Krathwohl, 2002). Study results showed Area Managers had conceptual knowledge of the definition of employee turnover, as well as of consequences of turnover for children, families, and the organization. However, AMs demonstrated a poverty of knowledge of managerial causes for employee turnover when it came to influence over their own employees. This was in direct conflict with their view of other managers as highly influential with retention and turnover and in contrast to a wealth of literature citing managerial impact (Abbasi & Hollman, 2000; Alkahtani, 2015; Argyri, McGregor as cited in Bolman & Deal, 2013; Buckingham & Coffman, 1999; Kwak & Choi, 2015; Maden et al., 2016; Mignonac & Richebé, 2013). This could be due to either a lack of AM awareness or an EMPLOYEE CHURN 169 unwillingness to see their personal impact on turnover and retention for their direct supervisees. Such insight deficiency or denial could greatly hinder acceptance and application of manager-focused retention strategies. To remedy this, conceptual knowledge that illuminates causal relationships (Krathwohl, 2002) is needed, so AMs can understand the nature and extent of their potential influence on turnover as a stepping stone to taking action. Thus, it is recommended that AMs be provided information on employee turnover, such as individual and collective monthly turnover rates, employee-stated reasons for departure, and qualitative exit interview results. According to Clark and Estes (2008), providing job-related information that is required for success is most appropriate when such knowledge is easy to incorporate without aid. Providing turnover information that implies or reveals turnover causality may help close gaps in Area Manager awareness or break denial of managerial influence. Additionally, an understanding of causal interrelationships afforded by Bloom’s conceptual knowledge framework (Krathwohl, 2002) could allow AMs to apply retention strategies to connected problem areas, thus increasing efficiency and return on investment for retention efforts. Conceptual knowledge is also generalizable (Krathwohl, 2002), which may support a more informed concept of turnover to apply to specific causes as well as novel scenarios. Lastly, conceptual knowledge aids development of procedural knowledge (Schneider et al., 2011), which could serve to bridge turnover information with strategic retention activities. Metacognitive knowledge solutions. Metacognitive knowledge refers to knowledge, control, and insight into one's own cognition and can include evaluating oneself, planning strategies for a specific context, or adjusting methods to complete a task (Baker, 2006; Krathwohl, 2002). Metacognitive reflective practices help learners adapt thinking for greater success (Baker, 2006; Krathwohl, 2002). In companies, metacognition is how companies learn to EMPLOYEE CHURN 170 learn, which promotes critical assessment of knowledge gaps, biases, and flawed reasoning that then motivates new learning strategy (Cleverley, 2016). Study results showed Area Managers lacked clarity and uniformity on their conceptual knowledge of reflective practices as well as dedicated time to reflect. Without an understanding of what reflection is, as well as methods and time to self-assess the interrelationship between manager activities and employee turnover, AMs’ ability to identify gaps, adapt thinking and practices, and achieve retention goals will be significantly hindered. Therefore, it is recommended AMs receive training on the definition and value of reflection and on specific reflection practices in order to gain insight into employee turnover and retention strategies. Furthermore, due to the enhancement of learning through social interaction (Scott & Palinscar, 2006), it is also recommended that time be dedicated to process reflections in team meetings and supervisory coaching sessions to maximize collective knowledge. The goal of training is to foster sustainable shifts in worker cognition and behavior aligned with job competencies (Salas et al., 2012), such as AMs understanding and practicing metacognition around employee turnover to improve retention. Training is comprised of planned, systematic activities devised to stimulate acquisition of knowledge, skills, and attitudes (Salas et al., 2012). Training provides information, as well as guided practice and corrective feedback (Clark & Estes, 2008). Thus, training is best suited to situations where learners need to know both what to do and how to do it (Clark & Estes, 2008), such as providing AMs the definition and value of reflection, followed by specific instruction in reflective practices. However, training impact depends upon delivery method and the skill being trained (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009). In their extensive review of nearly a decade of training literature, Aguinis and Kraiger (2009) found training is most effective when it incorporates a needs assessment, theory-based learning principles, opportunities for participants to make and learn from mistakes, evaluation for EMPLOYEE CHURN 171 documentation of impact, and supervisor/peer support for transfer into the workplace. Therefore, training on metacognitive practices for AMs will need to be thoughtfully designed in order to yield positive benefits that could impact retention goal attainment. Procedural knowledge solutions. Procedural knowledge means knowing how to do something, such as performing a specific skill or taking an action step (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009; Krathwohl, 2002). For AMs to know how to support employees through their respective job functions with effective retention strategies, they must know the strategies as well as when and how to apply them. Study results showed some Area Managers lacked any retention strategy know-how, while most others indicated their knowledge source was not the organization but rather prior professional experience, outside study, or peers. Additionally, veterans interviewed had significantly more strategies than new AMs. Without solid procedural knowledge of retention strategies for all AMs, there is a risk for ineffective and/or inefficient strategy application and ultimately diminished retention goal attainment. Therefore, it is recommended AMs are provided information about the steps of effective managerial support strategies that have been shown in literature to aid retention to bolster what they currently know or learn from peers. This approach is warranted because appropriate instruction is supported by providing scaffolding within a person’s zone of proximal development (Scott & Palinscar, 2006). It is further recommended that, because facilitation of transfer promotes learning (Mayer, 2011), AMs are provided a job aid that explains the steps of each strategy and when and how and when to implement each. Lastly, for new AMs to benefit from, assimilate, and apply veteran wisdom, it is recommended AMs share retention strategy success stories in team meetings. This aligns with Scott and Palinscar’s (2006) guidance that social interaction and cooperative learning facilitate construction of new knowledge. EMPLOYEE CHURN 172 Clark and Estes (2008) indicate job-related information that is required for success is suited to situations where such knowledge is easy to incorporate without aid. This approach is appropriate for sharing the numerous documented managerial supports for employees. Across industries, these include providing clear direction, listening to grievances, managing job expectations, training staff to cope with personal demands, and supporting workers when peers depart (Abbasi & Hollman, 2009; Alkahtani, 2015; Gong, 2012; Lee & Mitchell, 2003; Maden et al., 2016; Nitardy, 2008; Society for Human Resource Management, 2015). AMs also need to know success strategies specific to the childcare industry, such as manager integrity and fairness in fair performance ratings and accountability systems (Abbasi & Hollman, 2009; Alkahtani, 2015; Campbell et al., 2000; Floyd & Phillips, 2013; Kwak & Choi, 2015). However, to act upon this knowledge, AMs will need a job aid (Clark & Estes, 2008) that will provide a self-help guide as to when and how to implement each strategy. This supports an essential component of information processing with regard to application of learning (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006). Motivation Recommendations Introduction. The assumed motivation influences for this study were: perceived cost, based on Expectancy Value Theory (Area Managers’ view of the value of investing time and effort in retention strategies), and; locus of control, a component of Attribution Theory (AMs’ belief that employee retention is strongly influenced by their direct efforts rather than by external factors). As Table 6 depicts, a need for motivation through perceived cost of retention efforts was not validated. A need for motivation related to locus of control was validated. Focusing on attribution for turnover was selected as an organizational priority because AMs overwhelmingly attributed their own employees’ turnover to external factors. Such external locus of control for individuals as well as the collective AM team could fuel lower esteem, helplessness, hopelessness, and a presumption of uncontrollability resulting in inaction that ultimately blocks EMPLOYEE CHURN 173 retention goal achievement. Table 6 summarizes motivation influences, as well as validation and priority status. Table 6 also provides the principles upon which organization-specific recommendations are made and recommendations for the validated motivation influence. Table 6 Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations Assumed Motivation Influence Validated Yes, High Probability, or No (Y, HP, N) Priority Yes, No (Y, N) Principle and Citation Context-Specific Recommendation Area Managers (AMs) need to see the value of investing time and effort in retention strategies. (Expectancy Value Theory - Perceived Cost) N N Not a priority. AMs need to believe field employee retention is strongly influenced by their direct efforts rather than only by external factors. (Attribution Theory - Locus of Control) Y Y Internal locus of control generates positive emotion which fuel future efforts (Anderman & Anderman, 2006). Internal locus of control for failures may yield negative emotions, but the internal presumption of controllability ultimately drives corrective efforts (Anderman & Anderman, 2006; Rueda, 2011; Weiner, 1985). Provide AMs with attribution retraining that includes: feedback on knowledge and skills lacking for greater internal and controllable locus of control over employee turnover and retention; communication that such knowledge and skills can be learned with effort, and; teaching of knowledge and skills that connect AMs to their influence over their own team’s turnover and retention. EMPLOYEE CHURN 174 Extrinsic locus of control is associated with presumptions of permanent, unchangeable conditions that may evoke pity and hopelessness (Weiner, 1985). Attribution solutions. Attribution pertains to how one explains the causes of events (Anderman & Anderman, 2006). Attribution theory differentiates causation by locus of control (internal or external to the individual), stability (over time and contexts), and controllability (by the individual or not) (Anderman & Anderman, 2006; Weiner, 1985). Consideration of these factors results in thoughts, emotions, and behaviors that help an individual make sense of things and subsequently choose whether to pursue a goal, persist towards it, and exert mental effort (Rueda, 2011). As stated in Chapter Two, internal locus of control drives effort, in cases of both success and failure, while external locus of control breeds hopelessness (Anderman & Anderman, 2006; Rueda, 2011; Weiner, 1985). In other words, attributions, whether adaptive or maladaptive, ultimately impact motivation (Anderman & Anderman, 2009; Pintrich, 2013). Study results revealed significant discrepancies in locus of control. While Area Managers viewed their retention efforts as influential on retention, they also almost unanimously cited external causes for their own team’s turnover. As summarized in Chapter Four, AMs reported internal locus of control with retention, but external locus of control with turnover. This finding aligns with Weiner’s (1985) hedonic bias, or the tendency to attribute success internally but failure externally. As previously discussed with declarative knowledge, this finding was in contrast to AMs’ views of other managers as influential on turnover and in conflict with significant literature regarding the impact of managers on turnover (Abbasi & Hollman, 2000; Alkahtani, EMPLOYEE CHURN 175 2015; Argyris, McGregor as cited in Bolman & Deal, 2013; Buckingham & Coffman, 1999; Kwak & Choi, 2015; Maden et al., 2016; Mignonac & Richebé, 2013). Because external and stable attributions are typically demotivating (Weiner, 1985) in how they foster a deep sense of uncontrollability, retention goal efforts and achievement are potentially jeopardized by this mindset held by AMs. Therefore, in order to shift attribution internally and ignite motivation for retention efforts, it is recommended that AMs receive attribution retraining. Such retraining would include: feedback on knowledge and skills lacking for greater internal and controllable locus of control over employee turnover and retention; communication that such knowledge and skills can be learned and employed with effort, and; teaching of knowledge and skills that connect AMs to their influence over their own team’s turnover and retention. Such training would recognize the reality of certain uncontrollable factors, such as employee life changes or geographic moves. Elen and Clark (2006) indicate attribution retraining provides significant positive outcomes across various dimensions of performance and achievement. Furthermore, they hypothesize that, as adaptive attributions become automated through such training, positive effects may extend across additional areas of performance. These findings are supported by Lazowski and Hulleman (2016), whose meta-analysis of motivation interventions in education found attribution retraining improved long-term outcomes for students. Providing accurate and productive feedback, in this case retention and turnover data, while stressing learning, effort, and strategy, may increase adaptive attribution and therefore elevate motivation (Rueda, 2011). Conversely, as stated in Chapter Two, if feedback is negatively focused on the individual, biased or prejudicial, or based in the past, it may diminish worker motivation (Clark & Estes, 2008). By fostering internal attributions supported by accurate, objective, timely, actionable feedback, AMs will be more likely to choose, persist, and expend mental energy on retention activities. EMPLOYEE CHURN 176 Organization Recommendations Introduction. Organizational culture is the greatest factor that attracts and retains employees (Schneider et al., 1996). Culture includes elements that are invisible, known as cultural models, and those that are visible, known as cultural settings (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001; Schneider et al., 1996). For an organization to achieve goals, such as KCI’s employee retention goals, cultural models and settings need to be congruent with each other and with the organization’s mission, and performance solutions should align with organizational culture (Clark & Estes, 2008). The assumed cultural model influences for this study were: accountability (KCI holding Area Managers accountable for employee turnover), and; new strategy encouragement (KCI conveying support for AMs trying new retention methods). The assumed cultural setting influences for this study were: retention goals (KCI setting and communicating retention targets to guide AM performance expectations); incentives (KCI providing AMs incentives to drive investment in retention strategies); formative feedback (KCI providing AMs feedback on employee turnover and retention strategy efficacy), and; training and compensation resources (KCI providing AMs resources to effectively deliver employee training and competitive compensation strategies). As Table 7 shows, study results validated a need for organizational accountability, incentives, and feedback. Accountability was prioritized because without positive consequences for retention and negative consequences for turnover, AMs are unlikely to take individual or collective action to improve high turnover at KCI. Incentives were prioritized to serve as an extension of accountability, driving AMs to focus on retention and rewarding those who succeed. Feedback was prioritized because without data on their own team’s turnover and retention strategies, AMs will be unable to think and act strategically with regard to retention, which will potentially waste resources and fail to positively impact turnover. Results also indicated a high probability of a need for new strategy encouragement and retention EMPLOYEE CHURN 177 goals, both of which were prioritized. While some AMs felt encouraged to try new ways to retain employees, much of this came from peers or spontaneously from supervisors. KCI being more intentional about such encouragement could empower AMs to act with creativity and confidence when trying new methods. Goals were prioritized because AMs simply cannot contribute to a goal they know nothing about, such as organizational retention goals, nor can they expect to improve their own team’s turnover without defined individual targets. Training and compensation results were split, where a need for training resources was not validated, but a need for compensation and rewards for staff was highly probable. Compensation was not prioritized for two reasons: one, because AMs seemed to have found or been guided in ways to be creative with current compensation resources, and; two, because the organization as not-yet profitable is unlikely to have greater financial resources to provide AMs towards compensation or rewards. Table 7 summarizes organization influences, as well as validation and priority status. Table 7 also provides the principles upon which organization-specific recommendations are made and recommendations for the validated organization influences. Table 7 Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations Assumed Organization Influence Validated Yes, High Probability, or No (Y, HP, N) Priority Yes, No (Y, N) Principle and Citation Context-Specific Recommendation Cultural Model Influence 1: The organization needs to hold AMs accountable for employee turnover. Y Y Accountability serves as a contract between leaders, who determine performance objectives, and supervisees, who are responsible for carrying them out KCI should instill a culture of accountability for employee retention and turnover by defining an accountability framework that includes clear expectations of AM performance related to employee retention, EMPLOYEE CHURN 178 (Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004 When accountability is avoided, the consequences for organizations are low performance standards and inattention to results (Lencioni, 2002). rationalization of AM methods, and use of data to benchmark progress and report outcomes. Cultural Model Influence 2: The organization needs to convey a supportive attitude towards AMs trying new retention strategies. HP Y Frequent failure is necessary for innovation and a possible pathway that expedites success (Dyer, Gregerson, & Christensen, 2011). KCI should regularly encourage AMs to strategically experiment with new retention strategies and positively and publicly reinforce AMs who have done so. Cultural Setting Influence 1: The organization needs to set and communicate employee retention goals to guide AM performance expectations. HP Y Learning, motivation, and performance are enhanced when participants have clear, current, and challenging goals (Kluger & DeNisi, 1996). Organizational goals provide the basis from which individual performance goals are defined (Clark & Estes, 2008) and serve as a benchmark against which goal and organizational progress and success are assessed (Lewis, 2011). KCI should share organizational retention goals with AMs and assist with AMs setting individual retention goals. Cultural Setting Influence 2: The organization needs to provide AMs incentives Y Y Changes in reward and punishment are among the fastest, easiest ways to influence employee KCI should establish a system of acknowledging AMs for successful retention as defined by organizational goals and EMPLOYEE CHURN 179 to drive investment in retention strategies. behavior. When organizations communicate rewards that are meaningful to employees, employees can weigh goal-focused efforts against the incentive (Bolman & Deal, 2010). Tangible incentives (financial rewards or gifts) can lessen intrinsic motivation, while recognition fuels intrinsic motivation (Clark & Estes, 2008). use recognition and rewards that AMs indicate are meaningful to them. Cultural Setting Influence 3: The organization needs to provide AMs formative feedback on employee turnover and retention strategy efficacy. Y Y Informational feedback provides direction for employees on how to carry out leaders' objectives (Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004). Informational and corrective feedback helps employees make adjustments to their goal approach when needed (Clark & Estes, 2008). KCI should provide AMs data regarding their employees’ retention and turnover and assist AMs in weighing data against specific retention efforts to establish efficacy for adjustments or future investment. Cultural Setting Influence 4: The organization needs to provide AMs resources to effectively deliver employee training and competitive compensation strategies. Training: N Compen- sation: HP N Not a priority. EMPLOYEE CHURN 180 Cultural model solutions – accountability for retention and turnover. Accountability refers to an employee’s answerability for performance to a supervisor, consumer, or another party (Firestone & Riehl, 2005). Accountability systems include performance reporting and consequences, thereby influencing upon which objectives employees place focus (Firestone & Riehl, 2005). Study results showed some Area Managers had a personal sense of responsibility for employee turnover, and some claimed the organization held them responsible, but when required to generate examples of concrete accountability practices by KCI, AMs had none to report beyond their supervisor asking what happened to a departed employee. Because lack of accountability is associated with low performance standards and inattention to results (Lencioni, 2002), the continued absence of accountability for retention and turnover by KCI will likely perpetuate high turnover and the significant consequences to all stakeholders as detailed in Chapters Two and Four. Therefore, it is recommended KCI instill a culture of accountability around employee retention and turnover by defining an accountability framework that includes clear expectations of AM performance related to retention, rationalization of AM methods, and use of data to benchmark progress and report outcomes. While this is a solution to a lack of organizational accountability (cultural model), this approach dually addresses aspects of cultural settings with an accountability framework of specific policies and procedures. Accountability acts as the contract between organizational leaders, who set performance objectives, and their supervisees, who are responsible for carrying them out (Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004). Fair accountability systems typically include clear expectations, reporting of outcomes, and consequences aligned with degrees of performance, such as positive consequences for meeting or exceeding expectations, and negative consequences for not fully meeting or failing to meet expectations (Grimshaw et al., 2006). Shared assumptions, such as those held in a culture of accountability, unify group activity that turn collective beliefs into EMPLOYEE CHURN 181 performance reality (Schein 2010). Clark and Estes (2008) also stress the importance of evaluating individual contributions to team goals to prevent social loafing, or the tendency for group members to perform at lower levels thinking their lesser contribution will not be noticed among the larger group. Therefore, by KCI developing a culture of accountability for retention and turnover, as well as a concrete accountability framework, AMs will be more likely to understand and deliver on performance expectations and improve employee turnover. Cultural model solutions - new retention strategy encouragement. Change for employees can potentially create anxiety related to learning new behaviors. Workers must cease old methods before being skilled in new ones, creating “learning anxiety” (Schein, 2002, p. 303), or temporary feelings of incompetence, fear of failure, and loss of power and identity. Employees need encouragement to try and persist through the discomfort of new behaviors, or they will be inclined to avoid such efforts and thus remain stuck in ineffective patterns. Study results showed Area Managers feel somewhat encouraged to try new retention strategies, but the source of the encouragement was typically peers and only sometimes KCI. This limited organizational support for new methods is in contrast to KCI’s core values, which include a focus on innovation. Without the organization’s explicit and regular encouragement for AMs to try new retention strategies, AMs will likely remain stagnant and unmotivated, and KCI will undermine one of its core values. Thus, it is recommended that KCI should regularly encourage AMs to strategically experiment with new retention strategies and positively and publicly reinforce AMs who have done so. Connecting new behaviors with company success is among key steps in transforming organizations (Kotter, 1995). Multiple highly successful organizations, such as Apple, IDEO, and Virgin, were found to view frequent failure as not only necessary for innovation but potentially expediting success (Dyer et al., 2011). Furthermore, Northouse (2016) cites openness EMPLOYEE CHURN 182 and risk-taking as frequently listed traits of successful leaders, while Clark and Estes (2008) note active involvement of top management is critical to improvement processes. As Chapter Two described, the biggest documented turnaround in employee turnover in the childcare industry occurred in the U.S. military and involved intentional adjustments to retention strategies (Floyd & Phillips, 2013). Therefore, KCI issuing regular and direct encouragement to AMs to try new retention approaches could be pivotal to establishing promising new strategies that curb turnover. Cultural setting solutions - retention goals. Organizational goals provide a map for employees, clearly defining a starting point, desired destination, and path between (Lewis, 2011). Study results demonstrated that Area Managers, as with accountability practices, claimed in surveys they knew of KCI’s retention goals and/or held retention goals of their own, but when interviewed, were unable to articulate any specific retention goals for the organization, and few verbalized concrete retention goals of their own. Without clear organizational retention goals, AMs will not view turnover as a priority to address, nor will they understand their needed respective contributions to improving outcomes. Similarly, without individual retention goals, AMs will not have a target on which to focus efforts nor measure progress and success. Therefore, it is recommended that KCI clearly communicate organizational retention goals and assist in helping AMs develop related individual goals. Kluger and DeNisi (1996) indicate goals that are clear, current, and challenging enhance participant learning, motivation, and performance. Broader organizational goals provide the basis from which individual employee performance targets are developed (Clark & Estes, 2008) and would further guide KCI’s accountability criteria. Goals also serve as a benchmark against which progress with the goal area and for the organization as a whole are gauged (Lewis, 2011). Furthermore, goals would provide one essential part of effective feedback, which according to EMPLOYEE CHURN 183 Kluger and DeNisi (1996) includes information that is directly tied to goals. While lack of goals is associated with employee self-focus (Clark & Estes, 2008), shared goals inspire organizational consensus (Schein, 2010). Both Clark and Estes (2008) and Lewis (2011) point out the importance of rationalizing goals for employees as an important component of garnering employee buy-in for the goal and related processes. Thus, KCI clearly and strategically communicating desired retention outcomes and rationale may be key to focusing AM efforts and thereby impacting organizational improvement with turnover. Cultural setting solutions – incentives to focus on retention and turnover. Incentives operate on behavioral learning theory established by educational psychologist E. L. Thorndike in 1911. In his Law of Effect, behaviors followed by positive responses increase the likelihood of the behavior being repeated, while negative responses diminish the likelihood that a behavior will be repeated (Mayer, 2011). In organizations, the application of this theory has the potential to influence employee behavior, such as Area Managers’ focus on retention. Study results indicated Area Managers largely experienced a lack of incentives by KCI to focus on employee retention, as well as a lack of rewards for successful retention. More often, AMs were incentivized by seeking to avoid the negative consequences of turnover personally incurred, such as having to find and train a replacement, dealing with frustrated parents and school partners and stressed program staff in the interim, and having to substitute themselves. Without KCI providing incentives for AMs to focus on retention and rewarding success to that end, AMs may not glean KCI’s value for retention and thus deprioritize retention efforts. This could result in AMs and KCI remaining in a costly cycle of fighting high turnover from a defensive instead of proactive stance. Therefore, it is recommended that KCI establish a system of acknowledging AMs for successful retention as defined by organizational goals and use recognition and rewards that AMs have indicated are meaningful to them. EMPLOYEE CHURN 184 Schein (2010) indicated changes in reward and punishment are among the fastest, easiest ways to influence employee behavior. When organizations articulate rewards that are meaningful to employees, employees can then consider goal-related efforts against the incentive at hand (Bolman & Deal, 2010). The type of incentive should be considered carefully, however, in order to align with organizational values and assumptions (Schein, 2010). In fact, Elmore (2002) reported the incentive structure design and use of incentives in ways that align with organizational mission and goals are actually more important that the types of incentives offered (Elmore, 2002). Clark and Estes (2008), however, voice caution in consideration of the potential impact of incentives on motivation. For, tangible incentives, such as financial rewards or gifts, can lessen intrinsic motivation, while recognition fuels intrinsic motivation (Clark & Estes, 2008). Therefore, incentives for AMs to focus on retention should be designed thoughtfully to reflect KCI’s values and mission as well as drive intrinsic AM motivation. Cultural setting solutions – feedback on retention and turnover performance. Feedback is essential to learning (Schein, 2010). In the workplace, informational feedback serves to direct employees about how to carry out objectives defined by organizational leaders (Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004). Without feedback from the organization, workers may not learn from mistakes therefore repeating them, or they may lack clarity about how to contribute to organizational goals, thus thwarting their achievement. Study results indicated Area Managers do not receive any feedback from the organization about employee retention and turnover. This lack of information is likely to prevent AMs from gaining insight into their influence over and efforts to improve employee turnover, while further risking ill- or non-advised retention efforts that limit efficacy and potentially waste resources. Therefore, it is recommended KCI provide AMs regular data regarding their employees’ retention and turnover and assist AMs in weighing data against specific retention efforts to establish efficacy for adjustments or future investment. EMPLOYEE CHURN 185 Feedback has the potential to influence employees from various directions. Hackman et al. (as cited in Boone and Bowen, 1987) identified top-down feedback, meaning supervisor-to- supervisee, as critical to job redesign, while Schein (2010) indicated 360-degree feedback from supervisor, peers, and subordinates is essential in organizational improvement. Different types of feedback exist, such as informational and corrective, the combination of which, according to Clark and Estes (2008), helps employees adjust their approach to goals. Because feedback is about how one is doing, it is particularly important to learning when workers are attempting new strategies, as are as opportunities to make mistakes that do not disrupt the organization (Schein, 2010). The approach taken to feedback impacts its influence, where feedback is most helpful to those who have asked for it, when it is within consensus about what is measured and how, and when it is unbiased and based in the present yields (Schein, 2010). Thus, KCI’s feedback for AMs about employee turnover should informational, corrective, timely, and non-judgmental. Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan Implementation and Evaluation Framework The implementation and evaluation plan are informed by the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016), a model founded on Don Kirkpatrick’s (1958) original Four Level Model of Evaluation and updated by Kirkpatrick’s son and daughter-in-law. The original model defines four levels of professional training evaluation in the following order: reaction, learning, transfer, and results. The revised model reverses the order to focus on the results first to reflect their importance, to tie them directly to initiatives planned and implemented, and to correct previous over-emphasis on the first two levels (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). With the end in mind, the New World Model incorporates leading indicators that provide ongoing measurement of progress towards desired outcomes and insight into whether efforts and specific initiatives are on track. These indicators include internal outcome EMPLOYEE CHURN 186 metrics for individual, team, and department progress, such as measures of quality, production, compliance, satisfaction, efficiency, and cost, as well as external indicators that signal response by customers, clients, the market, and the industry, such as customer acquisition, attrition, retention, and satisfaction. The New World Kirkpatrick Model additionally places intentional focus on behavior from both the participant standpoint, meaning to what extent participants are applying the behaviors learned in training that are critical to goal achievement, and the organization standpoint, meaning to what extent the organization is driving desired behaviors through accountability and support to influence employees and increase the likelihood of application. By focusing on results and the focused, collective efforts of participants and the employer, the New World Kirkpatrick model provides a solid framework with high probability of garnering stakeholder investment and yielding goal attainment. Organizational Purpose, Need, and Expectations Kids' Club Incorporated (KCI) is an international student enrichment and afterschool childcare provider with a mission to foster a love of learning for children, support schools, and give parents peace of mind. KCI seeks to fulfill this mission by providing a wide range of high quality, affordable student enrichment programs in partnership with school districts in the U.S. and Canada. Study results indicated KCI has high employee turnover, exceeding already high childcare industry historical trends. For children, turnover of the employees providing their daily programs diminishes program quality and safety as well as child developmental outcomes. For parents, turnover negatively impacts trust in the organization, creates questions and frustration, and risks tuition hikes to offset employer costs that would impede family access. For the organization, turnover lessens return on investment in employee hiring, training, and development, thereby threatening long-term viability and mission fulfillment. This study EMPLOYEE CHURN 187 examined the knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational influences that impact frontline managers with regard to employee retention and turnover. Proposed solutions include: 1. Knowledge and Skills a. Provide Area Managers (AMs) retention and turnover data. b. Provide AMs training on and time to practice metacognition to gain insight into their own team’s retention and turnover. c. Provide AMs information and job aids regarding effective employee support strategies, as well as time to share success stories among peers. 2. Motivation a. Retrain AMs on attribution for employee turnover to increase internal locus of control. 3. Organization a. Develop a culture of accountability for employee turnover and retention, as well as a concrete accountability framework for AMs. b. Encourage AMs to try new retention strategies. c. Share organizational retention goals with AMs and assist AMs in setting related individual goals. d. Provide AMs formative feedback on retention efforts to measure efficacy and inform needed adjustments. e. Tie organizational recognition and rewards to AM retention goal attainment. These proposed solutions should help KCI improve employee retention and decrease employee turnover, thereby positively impacting quality and safety for children, trust and access for families, and long-term viability and mission fulfillment for the organization. EMPLOYEE CHURN 188 Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators Table 8 shows Level 4 outcomes, metrics, and methods for external and internal outcomes. The achievement of internal outcomes due to organizational information, training, and supports should help bring external outcomes to fruition. Table 8 Level 4 - Results and Leading Indicators: Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes Outcome Metric(s) Method(s) External Outcomes 1. Increased parent and school partner satisfaction. 1a. Net Promoter Scores and surveys of parents and clients. 1b. Number of solicited and unsolicited referrals that result in new client and/or enrollment acquisition. 1a. KCI will collect formative survey data quarterly. 1b. KCI will collect referral source data from new clients and parents quarterly. 2. Decreased parent complaints and/or disenrollment related to field employee turnover. Number of family dis- enrollments cited as related to program staff turnover. KCI will collect customer service call logs and parent exit data to determine complaints or causes of disenrollment that may be tied to turnover (e.g. quality, safety, relationship with/trust in staff). This data will be cross-checked against actual employee turnover at program locations cited in exit interviews. Internal Outcomes 3. Decreased voluntary field employee turnover. Voluntary employee turnover rates for within school year (August to May), between school years (June to August), and comparing same months from year-to-year (e.g. March 2017 to March 2018). HR will collect field employee turnover data monthly and report monthly turnover for past school year. 4. Increased field employee retention. Employee retention rates for within school year (August HR will determine employee retention rates. EMPLOYEE CHURN 189 to May), between school years (June to August). 5. Decreased organizational costs for employee hiring and training. Monthly profit and loss statements for current and prior school year with cost breakdowns by department (HR for hiring, Department of Education and Training for training). Finance will track hiring and training costs monthly. 6. Manageable stress and focus on hiring and training replacements. Regional Director report on Area Manager team. Regional Directors will report quarterly on how their AMs are doing with stress and time focused on hiring and training replacements for employees who have turned over. 7. Increased employee engagement and satisfaction. Field employee engagement survey results. HR will survey field employee engagement bi-annually. Level 3: Behavior Critical behaviors. The stakeholders of focus are the Area Managers (AMs) who directly oversee and support field employees comprised of Program Managers, Educators, and Coaches. The first critical behavior AMs must define individual employee retention goals that support organizational goals. The second critical behavior is that AMs must apply effective managerial supports and retention strategies. The third critical behavior is that AMs must review monthly turnover data to gain insight into their own employees’ departures and to inform adjustments to retention strategies as needed. The metrics, methods, and timing for each of these critical behaviors appear in Table 9. EMPLOYEE CHURN 190 Table 9 Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Area Managers Critical Behavior Metric(s) Method(s) Timing 1. AM development of employee retention goals that support organizational goals. Written employee retention goals for each AM that align with organizational goals. AMs will develop individual retention goals for their own team of employees that align with organizational goals. Within 30 days. 2. AM application of effective managerial support and retention strategies. The number of strategies AMs articulate employing to support and retain their own team. 2a. AMs will employ a minimum of three strategies per month that are known to be effective in supporting employee retention through literature, training, and/or AM experience. 2a. Within 30 days and monthly thereafter. 2b. AMs will employ a minimum of two new strategies per quarter that are known to be effective in supporting employee retention through literature, training, and/or AM experience. 2b. Within 90 days and quarterly thereafter. 2c. AMs will share strategy success stories among peers in team meetings. 2c. Within 60 days and monthly thereafter. 2d. AMs will adjust retention strategy approach based upon turnover data, retention outcomes, and retention strategy efficacy. 2d. Within 60 days and monthly thereafter. 3. AM review of monthly turnover data for insight and to guide adjustments to retention strategies. The amount of time dedicated to processing turnover data each month individually, with one’s supervisor, and among peers in team meetings. 3a. AMs will allot 30 minutes per month to review field employee turnover data. 3a. Within 30 days and monthly thereafter. EMPLOYEE CHURN 191 3b. AMs will participate in 1:1 and team debriefs of turnover data and related insights with their Regional Directors and peers. 3b. Within 30 days and monthly thereafter; within 1 week of receiving turnover data from HR each month. Required drivers. Area Managers (AMs) will need the support of their supervisors and the organization to successfully apply new information, training, and tools and to feel supported to sustain critical behaviors over time. This will require a combination of organizational drivers in the form of support, to reinforce, encourage, and reward critical behaviors, and accountability, to monitor and ensure new behaviors are applied and maintained. Table 10 shows the recommended drivers to support AMs’ critical behaviors for improving employee retention. Table 10 Required Drivers to Support Area Managers’ Critical Behaviors Method(s) Timing Critical Behaviors Supported 1, 2, and/or 3 Reinforcing Assistance from Human Resources (HR) and Regional Directors (RDs) for Area Manager development of employee retention goals that support organizational goals Within 30 days with annual review 1 Training explaining how to read and make meaning of monthly turnover reports Upon initiation of improvement efforts 3 Training on the definition and value of reflective practices and how to apply to turnover data Within 30 days 3 EMPLOYEE CHURN 192 Job Aid and training detailing effective managerial supports and retention strategies Upon initiation of retention improvement efforts and then updated quarterly with proven AM success strategies 2 Encouraging Attribution retraining so AMs understand their influence over employee turnover and retention Within 30 days 1, 2, 3 AM team meeting time dedicated to peers sharing retention strategy success stories and troubleshooting retention challenges Monthly 2, 3 AM 1:1 time with RD to troubleshoot retention challenges and encourage new strategy experimentation Weekly 2, 3 Rewarding Monetary reward for retention built into AM bonus scheme Annually 2 Public acknowledgement of retention success, such as a mention in team meetings and by email to Directors and Executives Quarterly 2 Monitoring HR tracking of employee retention overall and by AM Monthly 1, 2, 3 AM 1:1 time with RD to discuss turnover data and retention goal progress Monthly 1, 3 Development of organizational accountability framework with regard to AM performance with employee retention efforts and results Within 60 days 1, 2, 3 Organizational support. In order to adequately support Area Managers in improving employee retention and turnover, KCI will need to implement the aforementioned drivers in full and as scheduled. Thus, it is recommended KCI utilize an employee turnover dashboard reviewed weekly in Executive team meetings. This dashboard will include a log of individual drivers, timing, completion, and results. This method is consistent with the Executive team’s EMPLOYEE CHURN 193 current internal reporting approach and adopts the New World Kirkpatrick Model’s commitment to Levels 3 and 4. Level 2: Learning Learning goals. Following completion of the recommended solutions, Area Managers will be able to do the following: 1. Interpret employee turnover data. (Declarative Knowledge) 2. Summarize the definition and value of reflective practices and be able to carry out with regard to employee turnover data. (Metacognitive Knowledge, Procedural Knowledge) 3. Use effective managerial strategies to support employees and their retention. (Procedural Knowledge) 4. Deconstruct locus of control over employee retention and turnover to attribute influence more internally. (Motivation) 5. Integrate performance expectations with regard to employee retention, providing rationalization for retention strategies and monitoring progress towards goals. (Accountability) 6. Feel encouraged by supervisors and the organization to try new retention strategies. (New Strategy Encouragement) 7. Establish their own retention goals in support of organizational goals. (Goal Setting) 8. Use formative feedback to determine the efficacy of their retention strategies and to guide adjustments to retention efforts. (Formative Feedback) 9. Recognize organizational incentives for focusing on employee retention and turnover. (Incentives) Program. The learning goals listed in the previous section will be achieved through a training program that employs a blended model of asynchronous and synchronous learning, EMPLOYEE CHURN 194 assessments, and job aids. Asynchronous learning will occur in the KCI online training portal, while live training will occur via online web conferencing. Training topics will empower Area Managers to set employee retention goals of their own, successfully interface with turnover data, utilize effective management strategies, reflect and adjust retention efforts, and correct overly extrinsic locus of control for turnover. The program will consist of three online training modules followed up by three live application webinars on: the definition, value, and application of reflective practices with regard to turnover data (45 minutes); effective management strategies that support employee retention (90 minutes); attribution retraining with regard to locus of control over employee retention and turnover (60 minutes). The program will also include a fourth live training webinar on how to read employee turnover reports and set employee retention goals that support organizational goals (60 minutes). The total anticipated time for completion combining synchronous and asynchronous learning is four hours, 15 minutes. For some trainings online and live, a job aid will be provided as pre-reading and/or for AMs to have in front of them during the training on which to follow along, reflect, and take notes. One job aid will be a goal setting template. Another job aid will be a sample turnover reports annotated for how to read. A third job aid will be a list of effective managerial strategies known to aid retention. As part of the asynchronous online training, Area Managers will participate in post-module multiple choice assessments focusing on application of concepts from the training module. AMs will also have the option to download and/or print the training slides for future reference. For live trainings on topics not preceded by an online module, AMs will receive pre-reading. Synchronous live training that follows online modules and/or pre-reading will focus on applying what Area Managers learned asynchronously through discussion, application practice, role-play, peer modeling, and teaching back to each other. AMs who have greater success with retention will be invited to share their strategies and wisdom with their EMPLOYEE CHURN 195 peers. AMs will then continue to process their application of concepts and experimentation with new strategies in weekly team meetings and one-on-ones with their Regional Director. Components of learning. A training plan needs to include evaluation that confirms the intended learning occurred. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) define the following components of Level 2 learning for such evaluation: knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence, and commitment. Evaluating knowledge measures whether participants know and understand the training content. Skills evaluation refers to trainees demonstrating their new knowledge by putting it into practice, even if just by simulation. Evaluating attitude determines if participants see value of applying the training content on the job. Evaluating confidence and commitment helps determine whether trainees have had enough practice, feedback, time for questions to address any remaining uncertainty or barriers to implementation so trainers can clear a path for committing to and actually applying their new learning. Level 2 evaluation is formative, occurring both during training, allowing trainers to make adjustments, and after training. Table 11 lists the methods of evaluating learning and timing for each component. Table 11 Components of Learning for the Program Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing Declarative Knowledge “I know it.” Knowledge checks using multiple choice In the asynchronous online training post-assessment Knowledge checks throughout live training discussions and activities Periodically during the synchronous live webinars Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.” Application of concepts to real-world scenarios In the asynchronous online training post-assessment Skill demonstration, role play, and teach backs During synchronous live webinars and team meetings Post-training application test After synchronous live webinars EMPLOYEE CHURN 196 Retrospective post-test assessment survey asking participants about their level of proficiency before and after training After online and live training Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.” Post-training question about value of task to be implemented on the job In the asynchronous online training post-assessment Observation of participants’ statements and actions demonstrating whether they see the benefit of what they are being asked to do on the job During the synchronous live training by trainer Discussion of the value of what participants are being asked to do on the job At the end of synchronous live webinars Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.” Survey using scaled items regarding confidence in applying new skill on the job Following completed training on a topic Discussion with participants During synchronous live training following practice and feedback and at the end of webinars Commitment “I will do it on the job.” Survey using scaled items regarding commitment to applying new skill on the job Following completed training on a topic Discussion with participants At the end of synchronous live webinars Level 1: Reaction The final area of training measurement captures participant reactions. Level 1 is defined by Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) as customer satisfaction level, or the extent to which trainees find the learning experience engaging, relevant to their real-world work, and favorable. Such participant reactions are predictive of the level of learning achieved, perceived value of training, and eventual application of learning on the job. Level 1 evaluation is both formative and summative. It occurs throughout training to check participant comfort with aspects of the learning environment, such as content, pacing, and instructor interaction, as well as to allow for trainer adjustment, and it occurs following training. Table 12 details methods and timing of measuring Level 1 reactions. EMPLOYEE CHURN 197 Table 12 Components to Measure Reactions to the Program Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing Engagement Completion of online modules by required deadlines Ongoing during asynchronous portion of training Attendance at live training At the beginning of synchronous live webinars Observation of participants by trainer and Regional Director During the synchronous live webinars Relevance Brief “pulse-check” with participants Periodically throughout synchronous live webinars Post-training evaluation inquiring about relevance After online modules in module assessment Customer Satisfaction Brief “pulse-check” with participants to identify any barriers to learning Periodically throughout synchronous live webinars Post-training evaluation inquiring about satisfaction with training experience After online modules in module assessment Evaluation Tools Immediately following the program implementation. Throughout asynchronous training, the online learning management system (LMS) will collect data about the completion of online training modules by participants compared to deadlines, which will indicate the Level 1 engagement with the online training approach. Each online module will conclude with a post- training evaluation, which will gather Level 1 engagement or interest in the content, participant perception of relevance of the course material to actual work, and participant satisfaction with the online training experience. The post-training evaluations will also measure participants’ Level 2 learning by inquiring about new knowledge and skills, including application to work- based scenarios, as well as by gathering participant attitudes about the value of what was learned, EMPLOYEE CHURN 198 their sense of proficiency as a result of training, and their confidence and commitment to apply what was learned on the job. During the synchronous live training, the trainer will log attendance and observe participation to measure Level 1 engagement, as well as periodically conduct a “pulse-check” regarding training by asking participants about training content relevance and barriers to learning that may be impacting satisfaction. Level 2 learning will be evaluated using periodic declarative and procedural knowledge checks during live training discussion and activities and post-training application tests. Level 2 attitudes will be measured throughout live training via trainer observation of participants’ statements and actions demonstrating their perception of value of what is being learned. Finally, Level 2 confidence and commitment will be evaluated in discussion with participants following live practice and feedback. Attitudes, confidence, and commitment will also be assessed in a post-live training survey. Appendix E shows example Level 1 and 2 rating items, such as those that would be included in post-online and post-live training surveys. Delayed for a period after the program implementation. KCI leadership will administer a survey to participants six weeks after the implementation of the training and then again at 15 weeks. This survey will contain scaled and open-ended items using the Kirkpatrick Blended Evaluation approach (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) to measure participants’ retrospective report of training relevance and satisfaction (Level 1), attitude towards training content (Level 2), application of training to addressing employee retention and turnover (Level 3), and the extent to which their application of training content has impacted desired results, or improvement with employee retention and turnover in support of larger organizational goals (Level 4). Appendix F shows example Blended Evaluation items that address all four Kirkpatrick EMPLOYEE CHURN 199 levels as well as tie back to results and leading indicators previously listed in Table 8 and the required drivers to support Area Manager critical behaviors listed in Table 10. Data Analysis and Reporting A blended approach to analyzing and reporting key performance indicators (KPIs) will be used, drawing upon Level 4 leading indicators and results and Level 3 behaviors listed previously in Tables 8 and 9. Table 13 lists each of the KPIs to be measured, as well as coordinating metrics, frequency of reporting, and graphic representation in a dashboard. The dashboard will serve as a tool to communicate the status of KPIs with the executive team, and to cascade to other relevant departments as a means of internal accountability. Examples of the dashboard representation for the first KPI listed, Voluntary Field Employee Turnover, is shown following Table 13. Table 13 Possible Key Performance Indicators for Internal Reporting and Accountability Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Metric Frequency Dashboard Representation Voluntary Field Employee Turnover Monthly Turnover Rate Monthly People Graph (Monthly Turnover, School Year-to-Date Turnover, Average Number Employees) and Bar Chart (Target Turnover Rate to School Year Cumulative) Field Employee Retention Monthly Retention Rate Monthly Table (Target Rate to Actual and Prior Year) Field Employee Engagement & Satisfaction Employee Engagement Survey Bi- Annually Table (Satisfaction Rating and Prior Year) Hiring & Training Costs Profit and Loss Statements Monthly Table (Planned Budget to Actual Spend) EMPLOYEE CHURN 200 Parent and School Partner Satisfaction Net Promoter Score Bi- Annually Bar Chart (Satisfaction Rating and Prior Year) Parent Complaints/Dis- enrollments R/T Turnover Customer Service Logs, Exit Surveys Monthly Table (Number of Turnover-Related Complaints and Top Complaints) Area Manager Stress & Focus Area Manager Survey Quarterly Bar Chart (Self-Reported Stress Level Related to Turnover and Ability to Focus on Other Business Priorities) AM Turnover Goal Progress Area Manager Goals Compared to Turnover Report Quarterly Table (Degree to Which Progress is on Track to Meet Goals) Accountability Measures Taken Regional Director Survey Quarterly Bar Chart (Number of Needed Interventions by Regional Director) Example KPI Dashboard Representation EMPLOYEE CHURN 201 Summary The New World Kirkpatrick Model (2016) was used as the framework for developing this study’s recommended solutions, implementation strategies, and evaluation plan in order to maximize the likelihood of improving employee retention and turnover at KCI. The advantage of the reverse application of Kirkpatrick’s (1958) original model is in how it concentrates activity at all levels on desired outcomes as monitored through the required drivers, which are the greatest predictor of success (Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick, 2016). This outcome focus, then, drives critical integration of all methods and metrics such that they answer to desired results. Furthermore, ongoing formative data collection throughout and after implementation of solutions provides flexibility to adjust course throughout implementation as needed as well as internal accountability. Thus, the New World Kirkpatrick Model affords KCI optimal conditions for a positive return on expectations for implemented solutions. Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach Any methodological approach comes with strengths and weaknesses. For this study, using the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework was a strength in identifying numerous EMPLOYEE CHURN 202 organizational influences that may be compounding Area Manager knowledge, skills, and motivation around employee turnover, as opposed to only viewing managerial influence. Clark and Estes’ integration of the four Kirkpatrick (1998) levels of evaluation aided in the migration of results and findings into fully aligned integrated implementation and evaluation plans. Specifically, the application of the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) placed focus on desired outcomes, from which all four levels of interventions and measurement were developed with support from existing literature and study findings. This resulted in a robust plan for KCI to consider for implementation with formative data allowing for continual refinement of solutions. Potential weaknesses of the study include that, as a micro-organizational case study, findings and solutions may lack external generalizability, especially in consideration of the fact that most industry providers are non-profit companies with a far smaller reach compared to KCI. Additionally, given the fast-paced environment of KCI and its continued growth, it is unknown whether the entire suite of proposed solutions and evaluation methods will be adopted, and if not, this may lessen the potential positive impact of those implemented. Limitations and Delimitations Limitations are study elements that are out of the control of the researcher (Simon, 2011) and may impact or limit participation, results, or findings. In this study, one limitation was the small population size of Area Managers (18). Also, there were no prior studies or previously established instruments to draw upon for measuring Area Manager turnover influences for this industry, which means survey, interview, and observation methods were original and lacked established validity or reliability. However, items were based upon theory and findings from studies that utilized valid and reliable instrumentation, thus aiding content validity. Among interviewees, responses demonstrated varied levels of articulation and perceptivity to topics EMPLOYEE CHURN 203 raised, leaving the researcher to reword terms at times and ask clarifying questions to discern meaning. In terms of document analysis, organizational turnover data for prior years was collected by various personnel with different approaches to representing data and therefore not known to be complete, accurate, or consistent. Also, turnover data for the year of the study was initially found to be inaccurate by the researcher during the course of document analysis, resulting in the organization conducting a data clean-up to produce more accurate information. The completeness and accuracy of the resulting information remains in question to some extent given that individual monthly reports did not entirely align with cumulative reports. Such internal turnover reports were not developed for the purpose of research, and thus at times lacked meaningful insights, such as the use of “voluntary separation” as the leading termination reason. In this study, the presence of the researcher as member of the organization was chosen for all phases of data collection. Despite efforts to offset researcher bias, it is possible knowledge of participants and organizational processes subjectively influenced researcher interactions and interpretation of data. Additionally, for participants, the presence of the researcher may have been perceived as intrusive or fostered social desirability to present well, thus impacting participants’ reactivity and limiting validity and reliability. Lastly, interviews were conducted in the central office or on gotomeeting.com, which created filtered information gathered outside the Area Managers’ usual work setting. Delimitations are study elements that are within the control of the researcher that reflect chosen restraints on the study (Simon, 2011). As previously stated, this organizational study has limits to external generalizability due to its for-profit status and international size, which is far less common in the afterschool industry than are non-profit, smaller scale providers. Therefore, recommendations would need to be thoughtfully applied to or adapted for other organizations to consider managerial hierarchy and organizational resources already in effect or available. EMPLOYEE CHURN 204 Future Study Recent and historical afterschool workforce studies have had an over representation of participants holding management or higher positions. This has resulted in skewed employee data favoring full-time, more highly educated and compensated staff who work in the profession for longer periods of time and at greater levels of satisfaction compared the far more common program staff who make up the bulk of the industry. There has also been little information on a national scale about industry turnover rates, a few state studies as the exception. Thus, the afterschool care industry would benefit from more study related to employee retention and turnover at the field employee level in terms of job and industry tenure, reasons for and rates of turnover, and responsiveness to retention interventions. Additionally, the industry would benefit from national dialog on retention and turnover with causes and generalizable solutions central to idea sharing. KCI would benefit from deeper study of its employee retention, tenure, and turnover by examining correlations with employee role types, employee demographics, specific managers, geographic markets, compensation packages, and advancement opportunities. KCI would also capture more actionable turnover data by having managers code separations as voluntary or involuntary, followed by selecting a specific reason code drawn from the reasons provided in this study’s survey (in Appendix A) that are supported by afterschool and cross-industry turnover and management literature. Because KCI was also found to have high retention, the organization could seek to better understand the differences between the population of those being retained and those who are churning at such high rates, as well as the managers therein. Conclusion This study sought to understand the status field employee turnover at Kids’ Club Incorporated (KCI) in relation to its turnover improvement goal and to assess the knowledge, EMPLOYEE CHURN 205 skills, motivation, and organizational influences of those most influential with retention and turnover - frontline Area Managers (AMs). Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis served as the general conceptual and methodological framework for the study. Document analysis revealed high employee turnover, far surpassing industry norms and prior year performance. However, analysis also found high employee retention, suggesting that the rapid and ongoing churn of about a quarter of KCI’s employees is the source of its high turnover. Survey, interview, and observation results of Area Managers illuminated thematic gaps, including: areas of limited knowledge with turnover; minimally perceived organizational supports for retention; disparate reports of organizational resources and ability to influence by manager tenure (veterans were generally less positive) and by study setting (AMs in interviews were far less positive and unable to identify resources versus in anonymous surveys); significant external locus of control over turnover, including possible learned helplessness; and lack of ownership and accountability for turnover. The implications of these findings point to the risk of ongoing high turnover, where AMs may remain at odds with their own influence due to lack of critical knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational resources. By implementing the recommended solutions, KCI may begin to effectively address its field employee turnover in ways that reduce employee churn and elevate numerous outcomes for children, families, and the organization. EMPLOYEE CHURN 206 References Abbasi, S. M., & Hollman, K. W. (2000). Turnover: The real bottom line. Public Personnel Management, 29(3), 333-342. Afterschool Alliance. (2012). Uncertain times: Afterschool programs still struggling in today's economy. Retrieved from http://www.afterschoolalliance.org/documents/ Uncertain_Times/Uncertain-Times-2012.pdf Afterschool Alliance. (2014). America after 3pm: Afterschool programs in demand. Retrieved from http://www.afterschoolalliance.org/documents/AA3PM-2014/AA3PM_ National_Report.pdf Afterschool Alliance. (2015). 21st century community learning centers overview. Retrieved from http://afterschoolalliance.org/documents/21stCCLC_Overview_030515.pdf Aguinis, H., & Kraiger, K. (2009). Benefits of training and development for individuals and teams, organizations, and society. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 451-474. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163505 Alkahtani, A. H. (2015). Investigating factors that influence employees' turnover intention: A review of existing empirical works. International Journal of Business and Management, 10(12), 152-166. doi: 10.5539/ijbm.v10n12p152. Alkin, M. C. (2011). Section R: How are quantitative data analyzed? Evaluation essentials: From A to Z (pp. 166-179). New York: The Guilford Press. Anderman, E., & Anderman, L. (2006). Attributions. Retrieved from http://www.education.com/ reference/article/attribution-theory/ Baker, L. (2006). Metacognition. Retrieved from http://www.education.com/reference/article/ metacognition/ EMPLOYEE CHURN 207 Bandura, A. (2005). The evolution of social cognitive theory. In K. G. Smith & M. A. Hitt (Eds.), Great minds in management (pp. 9–35). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Retrieved from http://site.ebrary.com/lib/uscisd/reader.action?docID=10233605 Berge, T. t., & Hezewijk, R. v. (1999). Procedural and declarative knowledge: An evolutionary perspective. Theory & Psychology, 9(5): 605-624. doi:10.1177/0959354399095002 Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2013). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership (5th Ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Boone, L. E., & Bowen, D. D. (eds.). (1987). The great writings in management and organizational behavior. New York: Random House. Buckingham, M., & Coffman, C. (1999). First, break all the rules: What the world's greatest managers do differently. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster. Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Employment Projections Program. (n.d.). Employment by detailed occupation, 2012 and projected 2022. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_table_110.htm Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Employment Projections Program. (n.d.). Replacement needs, projected 2012-22. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/emp /ep_table_110.htm Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational employment statistics. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/oes/2014/may/high_low_paying.htm Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor. (n.d.). Occupational outlook handbook, 2014-15 edition, childcare workers. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/ooh/personal-care- and-service/childcare-workers.htm EMPLOYEE CHURN 208 Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor. (n.d.) Turnover [Def. 1]. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/bls/glossary.htm#T Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor. (n.d.) Turnover rate [Def. 1]. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/bls/glossary.htm Campbell, N. D., Appelbaum, J. C., Martinson, K., & Martin, E. (2000). Be all that we can be: Lessons from the military for improving our nation's child care system. Washington, D.C.: National Women's Law Center. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ ED441582.pdf Capps, P. (2008). The use of Kirkpatrick's four levels of evaluation by performance improvement practitioners (Order No. 3342991). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.libproxy1 .usc.edu/docview/304606448?accountid=14749 Cascio, W. F. (2006). Managing human resources: Productivity, quality of work life, profits (7th ed.). Burr Ridge, IL: Irwin/McGraw-Hill. Child Care Aware. (2015). Parents and the high cost of child care. Retrieved from http://usa.childcareaware.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Parents-and-the-High-Cost-of- Child-Care-2015-FINAL.pdf Cho, Y. S., & Jung, J. Y. (2014). The relationship between metacognition, entrepreneurial orientation, and firm performance: An empirical investigation. Academy of Entrepreneurship Journal, 20(2), 71-86. Choy, S., & Haukka, S. (2010). Effective employment-based training models for childcare workers. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 50(1), 141-163. Retrieved from http:// libproxy.usc.edu.libproxy1.usc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.libproxy1.usc.edu/ docview/855605252?accountid=14749 EMPLOYEE CHURN 209 Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc. Cleverley, P. H. (2016). Deep learning in organizations: Avoiding the illusion of knowledge through metacognition. Retrieved from http://paulhcleverley.com/2016/01/02/deep-learning- in-organizations/ Cole, P. (2011). Building an afterschool workforce: Regulations and beyond. Afterschool Matters, 13, 12-21. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ980175 Compensation force. (2015). 2015 turnover rates by industry. Retrieved from http://www.compensationforce.com/2016/04/2015-turnover-rates-by-industry.html Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3 rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications. Daly, E. (2006). Behaviorism. Retrieved from http://www.education.com/reference /article/behaviorism/ Daniel, J. (2012). Sampling essentials: Practical guidelines for making sampling choices. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications. Dembo, M., & Eaton, M. J. (2000). Self-regulation of academic learning in middle-level schools. The Elementary School Journal, 100(5), 473–490. doi:10.1086/499651 Denler, H., Wolters, C., & Benzon, M. (2006). Social cognitive theory. Retrieved from http://www.education.com/reference/article/social-cognitive-theory/. Dennehy, J., & Noam, G. G. (2005). Evidence for action: Strengthening after-school programs for all children and youth: The Massachusetts out-of-school time workforce. Boston, EMPLOYEE CHURN 210 MA: Achieve Boston, an Initiative of Boston After School and Beyond. Retrieved from http://www.pearweb.org/pdfs/OSTWorkforceReport.pdf Dyer, Gregerson, & Christensen (2011). Innovator's DNA: Mastering the five skills of disruptive innovation. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. Earle, A. (2009). Roadmap to afterschool for all: Examining current investments and mapping future needs. Retrieved from http://www.afterschoolalliance.org/documents/roadmap/ RoadmapToAfterschoolForAllReport.pdf Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory. Retrieved from http://www.education. com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/ Elen, J., Clark, R. E., Lowyck, J., & European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction. (2006). Handling complexity in learning environments: Theory and research (1st ed.). Boston: Elsevier. Ellis, P. F., & Kuznia, K. D. (2014) Corporate elearning impact on employees. Global Journal of Business Research, 8(4), 1-15. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com. libproxy1.usc.edu/docview/1561477738?pq-origsite=summon&accountid=14749 Elmore, R. F. (2002). Bridging the gap between standards and achievement: The imperative for professional development in education. Washington, DC: Albert Shanker Institute. Fink, A. (2013). How to conduct surveys: A step-by-step guide (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Firestone, W. A., & Riehl, C. (2005). A new agenda for research in educational leadership. New York: Teachers College Press. First Research Industry Profiles. (2015). Child care services - quarterly update 12/7/2015. Austin: Hoover's Inc. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.libproxy1.usc.edu/ docview/1746603322?accountid=14749 EMPLOYEE CHURN 211 Firestone, W. A., & Riehl, C. (2005). A new agenda for research in educational leadership. New York: Teachers College Press. Floyd, L., & Phillips, D. (2013). Child care and other support programs. Future of Children, 23(2), 79-97. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.libproxy2.usc.edu/docview/ 1651849190?accountid=14749 Fowler, Jr., F. J. (2013). Survey research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Fukkink, R., & Lont, A. (2007). Does training matter? A meta-analysis and review of caregiver training studies. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 22(3), 294-311. doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2007.04.005 Fusco, D. R. (2008). School vs. afterschool: A study of equity in supporting children's development. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 22(4), 391. Retrieved from http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.libproxy1.usc.edu/docvie w/2 03889813?accountid=14749 Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist, 36(1), 45-56. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3601_5 Geoffroy, M., Côté, S. M., Giguère, C., Dionne, G., Zelazo, P. D., Tremblay, R. E., & Séguin, J. R. (2010). Closing the gap in academic readiness and achievement: The role of early childcare. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 51(12), 1359-1367. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2010.02316.x Glebbeek, A. & Bax, E. (2004). Is high employee turnover really harmful? An empirical test using company records. The Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 277-286. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.libproxy2.usc.edu/stable/20159578 EMPLOYEE CHURN 212 Gong, Y. (2012). What makes people stay? The different effects of on-the-job and off-the-job embeddedness on voluntary turnover (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest (Order No. 3536387) Grimshaw, J., Baron, G., Mike, B., & Edwards, N. (2006). How to combat a culture of excuses and promote accountability. Strategy & Leadership, 34(5), 11-18. doi:10.1108/ 108785706106847 Gross profit margin [Def. 1]. (n.d.). InvestorWords. Retrieved January 30, 2016, from http://www.investorwords.com/2250/gross_profit_margin.html. Guilding, C., Lamminmaki, D., & McManus, L. (2014). Staff turnover costs: In search of accountability. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 36, 231-243. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.10.001 Hale-Jinks, C., Knopf, H., & Kemple, K. (2006). Tackling teacher turnover in child care: Understanding causes and consequences, identifying solutions. Childhood Education, 82(4), 219-226. doi:10.1080/00094056.2006.10522826 Hall, K. W., Williams, L. M., & Daniel, L. G. (2010). An afterschool program for economically disadvantaged youth: Perceptions of parents, staff, and students. Research in the Schools, 17(1), 12. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.libproxy1.usc.edu/ docview/808527948/fulltextPDF?accountid=14749 Halpern, R. (2002). A different kind of child development institution: The history of after- school programs for low-income children. Teachers College Record, 104(2), 178-211. doi:10.1111/1467-9620.00160 Hansen, F., Smith, M., & Hansen, R. (2002). Rewards and recognition in employee motivation. Compensation & Benefits Review, 34, 64–72. Harding, J. (2013). Chapter 6: Identifying conceptual themes and building theory. EMPLOYEE CHURN 213 Qualitative data analysis from start to finish (pp. 107-126). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Hatcher, D. W., FitzSimons, C. W., & Turley, J. R. (2014). The role of out-of-school time in reducing hunger and preventing obesity. Afterschool Matters, 20. 9-12. Retrieved from http://www.niost.org/pdf/afterschoolmatters/asm_2014_20_fall/ASM_RoleofOutofSch oolTime.pdf Haynie, J. M., Shepherd, D., Mosakowski, E., & Earley, P. C. (2010). A situated metacognitive model of the entrepreneurial mindset. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(2), 217-229. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.10.001 Haynie, J. M., Shepherd, D. A., & Patzelt, H. (2012). Cognitive adaptability and an entrepreneurial task: The role of metacognitive ability and feedback. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(2), 237-265. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00410.x Hentschke, G. C., & Wohlstetter, P. (2004). Cracking the code of accountability. University of Southern California Urban Education, Spring/Summer, 17–19. Huang, D., Cho, J., Nam, H. H., La Torre, D., Oh, C., Harven, A., Huber, L. P., Rudo, Z., & Caverly, S. (2010). Examining Practices of Staff Recruitment and Retention in Four High- Functioning Afterschool Programs: Extended Study from the National Afterschool Partnership Report. CRESST Report 769. Los Angeles, CA: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing. Employee Assistance Professionals Association. (2004). Worries about children's afters0school activities lower productivity of working parents. Journal of Employee Assistance, 37(2), 30. Fink, A. (2013). How to conduct surveys: A step-by-step guide (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson. EMPLOYEE CHURN 214 Kirkpatrick, D. L., & Kirkpatrick, J. D. (1958). Evaluating training programs: The four levels (Rev. ed. 2006). San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler. Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation. Alexandria, VA: ATD Press. Kirschner, P., Kirschner, F., & Paas, F. (2006). Cognitive load theory. Retrieved from http://www.education.com/reference/article/cognitive-load-theory/ Klinkner, J. M., Riley, D., & Roach, M. A. (2005). Organizational climate as a tool for child care staff retention. YC Young Children, 60(6), 90-95. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org. libproxy1.usc.edu/stable/42729328?pqorigsite=summon&seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254-284. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254 Kotter, J. P. (2007). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review, 85(1), 96–103. Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 212–218. Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2009). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Kurpius, S. E. R., & Stafford, M. E. (2006). Testing and measurement: A user-friendly guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Kwak, W. J., & Choi, S. B. (2015). Effect of rating discrepancy on turnover intention and leader- member exchange. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 32(3), 801-824. doi:10.1007/s10490-015-9414-3 EMPLOYEE CHURN 215 Laughlin, L. (2013). Who's minding the kids? Child care arrangements: Spring 2011. Current population reports. series P-70(135). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Census Bureau. Lazowski, R. A., & Hulleman, C. S. (2016). Motivation interventions in education: A meta- analytic review. Review of Educational Research, (86)2, 602-640. Lee, T. W. and Mitchell, T. R. (2003). Control turnover by understanding its causes." The Blackwell Handbook of Principles of Organizational Behaviour. Locke, Edwin A. Blackwell Publishing, 2003. Blackwell Reference Online. 27 February 2016 <http://www.blackwellreference.com/subscriber/tocnode.html?id=g9780631215066_chunk_ g97806312150668> Lewis, L. K. (2011). Organizational change: Creating change through strategic communication. UK: Wiley-Blackwell. Lencioni, P. (2002). The five dysfunctions of a team. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Longenecker, C. (2007). The training practices of results-oriented leaders. Industrial and Commercial Training, 39(7), 361-367. doi:10.1108/00197850710829067 Longenecker, C., & Fink, L. (2005). Management training: Benefits and lost opportunities (part I). Industrial and Commercial Training, 37(1), 25-30. doi:10.1108/00197 850510576457 Maden, C., Ozcelik, H., & Karacay, G. (2016). Exploring employees’ responses to unmet job expectations: The moderating role of future job expectations and efficacy beliefs. Personnel Review, 45(1), 4-28. doi:10.1108/PR-07-2014-0156Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Pearson Education. Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Pearson Education. EMPLOYEE CHURN 216 McEwan, E. K., & McEwan, P. J. (2003). Making sense of research: What's good, what's not, and how to tell the difference. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press Inc. McGee, H. M., & Johnson, D. A. (2015). Performance motivation as the behaviorist views it. Performance Improvement, 54(4), 15-21. doi:10.1002/pfi.21472 McGuire, D., & Grubbins, C. (2010). The slow death of formal learning: A polemic. Human Resource Development Review, 9(3), 249-265. Retrieved from http://search.proquest. com.libproxy2.usc.edu/docview/757170933?accountid+14749 Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Michel, S. (2011). The history of child care in the U.S. Retrieved from http://www. socialwelfarehistory.com/programs/child-care-the-american-history/ Mignonac, K., & Richebé, N. (2013). No strings attached? How attribution of disinterested support affects employee retention. Human Resource Management Journal, 23(1), 72. doi:10.1111/j.1748-8583.2012.00195.x Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. National Afterschool Association. (2016). State of the profession report. Washington, DC: National AfterSchool Association. National AfterSchool Association. (2017). The state of afterschool quality: Promoting professionalism. Washington, DC: National AfterSchool Association. National AfterSchool Association. (2006, August). Understanding the afterschool workforce: Opportunities and challenges for an emerging profession. Washington, DC: Cornerstone for Kids. EMPLOYEE CHURN 217 Nitardy, C. (2008). The relationship between career development and intent to stay in a high turnover industry, early childhood education and care (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest (Order No. 3295695) Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice (7th ed.). Western Michigan University: Sage Publications. Overmier, J. B. (2013). Learned helplessness Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/obo/ 9780199828340-0112 Parker, L. E. (1993). When to fix it and when to leave: Relationships among perceived control, self-efficacy, dissent, and exit. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(6), 949-959. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.78.6.949 Patton, M. Q. (1987). How to use qualitative methods in evaluation. CSE program evaluation kit (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Pazzaglia, A. M., Stafford, E. T., Rodriguez, S. M. (2016). Survey methods for educators: Analysis and reporting of survey data (part 3 of 3). (REL 2015-164). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Northeast & Islands. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs. Percentage calculator. (n.d.) Retrieved from https://percentagecalculator.net/ Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667–686. Platt, G. (2006). It's time training pros faced up to the ROI challenge. Training & Coaching Today, 20. EMPLOYEE CHURN 218 Qualtrics Insight Platform. https://www.qualtrics.com. Richardson, J. (2007). No tears for the dear departed 'inservice' - its time has come. Journal of Staff Development, 28(3), 61, 64. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.libproxy1. usc.edu/docview/211509220?accountid=14749 Roche, K. M., Astone, N. M., & Bishai, D. (2007). Out-of-school care and youth problem behaviors in low-income, urban areas. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 28(3), 471-488. doi:10.1007/s10834-007-9072-9 Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Rueda, R. (2011). The three dimensions of improving student performance. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Salas, E., Tannenbaum, S. I., Kraiger, K., & Smith-Jentsch, K. A. (2012). The science of training and development in organizations: What matters in practice. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 13(2), 74-101. doi:10.1177/1529100612436661 Salkind, N. J. (2017). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics: Using Microsoft Excel 2016 (4 th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership: Edgar H. Schein (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Schneider, B., Brief, A., & Guzzo, R. (1996). Creating a culture and climate for sustainable organizational change. Organizational Dynamics, 24(4), 7–19. Schneider, M., Rittle-Johnson, B., & Star, J. R. (2011). Relations among conceptual knowledge, procedural knowledge, and procedural flexibility in two samples differing in prior knowledge. Developmental Psychology, 47(6), 1525-1538. doi: 10.1037/a0024997 Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information processing theory. Retrieved from EMPLOYEE CHURN 219 http://www.education.com/reference/article/information-processing-theory/ Scott, S. & Palinscar, A. (2006). Sociocultural theory. Retrieved from http://www.education. com/reference/article/sociocultural-theory/ Simon, M. K. (2011). Dissertation and scholarly research: Recipes for success (2011 Ed.). Seattle, WA: Dissertation Success, LLC. Society for human resource management. (n.d.). Calculate retention. Retrieved from https://www.shrm.org/search/pages/default.aspx?k=calculate%20retention Society for human resource management. (n.d.). Calculate turnover. Retrieved from https://www.shrm.org/search/pages/default.aspx?k=calculate%20turnover Society for human resource management. (2015). SHRM survey findings: Employee recognition programs - 2015. Retrieved from http://www.shrm.org/research/surveyfindings/documents/ shrm-globoforce-employee-recognition-2015.pdf Soulé, D., Gottfredson, D., & Bauer, E. (2008). It's 3 p.m. do you know where your child is? A study on the timing of juvenile victimization and delinquency. Justice Quarterly, 25(4), 623-646. doi:10.1080/07418820801930126 Star, J. R., & Seifert, C. (2006). The development of flexibility in equation solving. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31(3), 280-300. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych. 2005.08.001 The Herman trend alert. (2015). Employee retention - the #1 issue - again. Retrieved from http://www.hermangroup.com/alert/archive_8-5-2015.html The holistic approach to training. (2011). Development and Learning in Organizations: An International Journal, 25(1), 28-29. doi:10.1108/14777281111096825 The research advisors (2006). Sample size table. Retrieved from http://research- advisors/com/tools/SampleSize.htm EMPLOYEE CHURN 220 Tracy, S. J. (2012;2013;). Qualitative research methods: Collecting evidence, crafting analysis, communicating impact (1. Aufl.;1; ed.). GB: Wiley-Blackwell. Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92(4), 548-573. doi:10.1037//0033-295X.92.4.548 Weiss, R. S. (1994). Learning from strangers: The art and method of qualitative interview studies. New York, NY: The Free Press. Weitzman, B. C., Mijanovich, T., Silver, D., & Brazill, C. (2008). If you build it, will they come: Estimating unmet demand for after-school programs in America's distressed cities. Youth & Society, 40(1), 3-34. doi:10.1177/0044118X08314262 Whitebook, M., Phillips, D., & Howes, C. (1990). The national child care staffing study: Who cares? Child care teachers and the quality of care in America. Berkeley, CA: Child Care Employee Project. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED323032.pdf Whitebook, M., Phillips, D., & Howes, C. (2014). Worthy work, still unlivable wages: The early childhood workforce 25 years after the National Child Care Staffing Study. Berkeley, CA: Center for the Study of Child Care Employment, University of California, Berkeley. Retrieved from http://www.irle.berkeley.edu/cscce/2014/report-worthy-work-still- unlivable-wages/ Whitebook, M., & Sakai, L. (2003). Turnover begets turnover: An examination of job and occupational instability among child care center staff. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 18(3), 273-293. doi:10.1016/S0885-2006(03)00040-1 Zigler, E., Marsland, K., & Lord, H. (2009). The tragedy of child care in America. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Retrieved from http://site.ebrary.com/lib/uscisd/ detail.action?docID=10351582 EMPLOYEE CHURN 221 APPENDIX A Survey Protocol The principal researcher posed the following multiple-choice questions to all KCI Area Managers through a Qualtrics.com online survey. Parenthetical notations demonstrate the tie to the conceptual framework and research questions. These notations were for the researcher and are for reader awareness only. They did not appear in the survey presented to participants. The introduction and questions proceeded as follows: Welcome to the Area Manager Survey! Please take a few minutes to answer questions about EMPLOYEE RETENTION and TURNOVER from your perspective as an AREA MANAGER for Kids' Club Inc. IMPORTANT: Your responses are entirely anonymous and will help drive specific recommendations to Kids' Club Inc. about how best to support you and your Area Manager colleagues with employee retention -- so please answer candidly. As a THANK YOU for your participation, you will find a participation code at the end of this survey, which you can use to enter a drawing for two $25 Visa gift cards! Let's get started! 1. (KNOWLEDGE - Declarative/conceptual) From the definitions below, choose the one that most closely describes your understanding of employee turnover: a. Employee discipline by Human Resources. b. Employee separation from a workplace, whether voluntary or involuntary. c. Employee promotion within an organization. d. Employee lay-off due to organizational downsizing. EMPLOYEE CHURN 222 2. (KNOWLEDGE - Declarative/conceptual) Think about workers in all types of industries. What do you think are the five most common reasons people voluntarily choose to leave their jobs? (You must choose five answers.) a. Conflict with coworker(s) b. Inadequate training c. Dissatisfaction with pay, benefits d. Worker geographic relocation e. Helpless against poor management f. Stressful work g. Job is not what employee thought it was going to be h. To resume education i. Organizational unfairness (e.g. unjust policies, performance ratings, promotions) j. Lack of employee recognition k. Dislike of the work itself l. Lack of accountability (i.e. ways to make sure everyone is doing their job) m. Unstable job market / mobile workforce n. Dislike schedule o. Life change (e.g. marriage, family) p. Superiors/management lack integrity q. Career change r. Other: (specify) 3. (KNOWLEDGE - Declarative/conceptual; MOTIVATION – Attribution/locus of control) Now think about your own team of employees. What are the five most common EMPLOYEE CHURN 223 reasons YOUR employees choose to voluntarily leave their jobs? (You must choose five answers.) a. Conflict with coworker(s) b. Inadequate training c. Dissatisfaction with pay, benefits d. Worker geographic relocation e. Helpless against poor management f. Stressful work g. Job is not what employee thought it was going to be h. To resume education i. Organizational unfairness (e.g. unjust policies, performance ratings, promotions) j. Lack of employee recognition k. Dislike of the work itself l. Lack of accountability (i.e. ways to make sure everyone is doing their job) m. Unstable job market / mobile workforce n. Dislike schedule o. Life change (e.g. marriage, family) p. Superiors/management lack integrity q. Career change r. Other: (specify) (Transition) Please respond to the following statements about EMPLOYEE TURNOVER based upon how strongly you agree or disagree with each statement. 4. (KNOWLEDGE - Metacognition) When one of my employees voluntarily leaves his/her job, I take time to reflect on the turnover to gain insight. EMPLOYEE CHURN 224 Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 5. (KNOWLEDGE - Declarative/conceptual) When program employees turn over, there are consequences for program children. Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 6. (KNOWLEDGE - Declarative/conceptual) When program employees turn over, there are consequences for program families. Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 7. (KNOWLEDGE - Declarative/conceptual) When program employees turn over, there are consequences for KCI. Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 8. (KNOWLEDGE - Declarative/conceptual) When program employees turn over, there are consequences for society. Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 9. (MOTIVATION - Expectancy Value/perceived cost) I feel it is important for me to invest time and effort in retaining employees, even if it takes time away from other work activities. Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 10. (MOTIVATION - Attribution/locus of control) The amount of focus and effort I put into retention strategies has a strong influence on my employees' retention. Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 11. (ORGANIZATION - Cultural Model/accountability) KCI communicates the importance of my role in retaining employees. Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree EMPLOYEE CHURN 225 12. (ORGANIZATION - Cultural Model/accountability) KCI holds me accountable when my employees turn over. Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 13. (ORGANIZATION - Cultural Model/accountability) KCI holds my Area Manager peers accountable when their employees turn over. Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree (Transition) Please respond to the following statements about EMPLOYEE RETENTION based upon how strongly you agree or disagree with each statement. 14. (ORGANIZATION - Cultural Setting/goals) I am aware of KCI having specific employee retention goals. Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 15. (ORGANIZATION - Cultural Setting/goals) I have specific employee retention goals for my own team. Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 16. (KNOWLEDGE - Procedural) I know how to apply different types of employee retention strategies. Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 17. (ORGANIZATION - Cultural Model/attitude) KCI encourages me to try new strategies to retain employees. Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 18. (ORGANIZATION - Cultural Setting/feedback) KCI provides me information on employee turnover that guides my retention strategies with my own team. Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree EMPLOYEE CHURN 226 19. (ORGANIZATION - Cultural Setting/feedback) KCI provides me tools to measure how effective my retention strategies are. Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 20. (ORGANIZATION - Cultural Setting/incentives) KCI provides incentives for me to focus on employee retention. Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 21. (ORGANIZATION - Cultural Model/training and compensation resources) KCI provides me the resources I need to effectively train my team. Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 22. (ORGANIZATION - Cultural Model/training and compensation resources) KCI provides me the resources I need to effectively compensate and reward my team financially. Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree (Transition) For the final two items, please provide some information about your tenure as an Area Manager and the age of your programs. 23. (DEMOGRAPHIC) Please choose the statement below that fits you: This is my first school year as an Area Manager for KCI or any afterschool organization. This is my second or more school year as an Area Manager for KCI or any afterschool organization. 24. (DEMOGRAPHIC) Please choose the statement below that fits you: All the programs I oversee are brand new this school year to KCI. All the programs I oversee are returning programs to KCI (i.e., in their second or more year with KCI). EMPLOYEE CHURN 227 I manage both new and returning programs for KCI. (Closing) This concludes the survey. Thank you for your participation! If you would like to be entered in a drawing for a $25 Visa gift card, please send the following participation code to michele.wilkens@(organizational email) Participation Code: XXXXX Two winners will be announced within the next 2 weeks. EMPLOYEE CHURN 228 APPENDIX B Survey Results Q1 - From the definitions below, choose the one that most closely describes your understanding of employee turnover: # Answer % Count 1 a. Employee discipline by Human Resources. 0.00% 0 2 b. Employee separation from a workplace, whether voluntary or involuntary. 100.00% 18 3 c. Employee promotion within an organization. 0.00% 0 4 d. Employee lay-off due to organizational downsizing. 0.00% 0 Total 100% 18 EMPLOYEE CHURN 229 Q2 - Think about workers in all types of industries. What do you think are the 5 most common reasons people voluntarily choose to leave their jobs? (You must choose 5 answers.) # Answer % Count 1 Conflict with coworker(s) 16.67% 3 2 Inadequate training 22.22% 4 3 Dissatisfaction with pay, benefits 83.33% 15 4 Worker geographic relocation 16.67% 3 EMPLOYEE CHURN 230 5 Helpless against poor management 38.89% 7 6 Stressful work 33.33% 6 7 Job is not what employee thought it was going to be 50.00% 9 8 To resume education 16.67% 3 9 Organizational unfairness (e.g. unjust policies, performance ratings, promotions) 27.78% 5 10 Lack of employee recognition 27.78% 5 11 Dislike of the work itself 27.78% 5 12 Lack of accountability (i.e. ways to make sure everyone is doing their job) 11.11% 2 13 Unstable job market / mobile workforce 5.56% 1 14 Dislike schedule 22.22% 4 15 Life change (e.g. marriage, family) 38.89% 7 16 Superiors/management lack integrity 11.11% 2 17 Career change 44.44% 8 18 Other: (specify) 5.56% 1 Total 100% 18 r. Other: (specify) r. Other: (specify) Work no longer fulfills professional development goals. Reached growth potential with organization. EMPLOYEE CHURN 231 Q3 - Now think about your own team of employees. What are the 5 most common reasons YOUR employees choose to voluntarily leave their jobs? (You must choose 5 answers.) # Answer % Count 1 Conflict with coworker(s) 5.56% 1 2 Inadequate training 0.00% 0 3 Dissatisfaction with pay, benefits 61.11% 11 4 Worker geographic relocation 38.89% 7 EMPLOYEE CHURN 232 5 Helpless against poor management 5.56% 1 6 Stressful work 33.33% 6 7 Job is not what employee thought it was going to be 44.44% 8 8 To resume education 72.22% 13 9 Organizational unfairness (e.g. unjust policies, performance ratings, promotions) 0.00% 0 10 Lack of employee recognition 0.00% 0 11 Dislike of the work itself 22.22% 4 12 Lack of accountability (i.e. ways to make sure everyone is doing their job) 0.00% 0 13 Unstable job market / mobile workforce 11.11% 2 14 Dislike schedule 77.78% 14 15 Life change (e.g. marriage, family) 44.44% 8 16 Superiors/management lack integrity 0.00% 0 17 Career change 66.67% 12 18 Other: (specify) 16.67% 3 Total 100% 18 Other: (specify) Other: (specify) Insurance offered to PT employees under 30 hrs # of hours Most leave for a full time job. I can only offer part time. EMPLOYEE CHURN 233 Q4 - When one of my employees voluntarily leaves his/her job, I take time to reflect on the turnover to gain insight. # Answer % Count 1 Strongly disagree 0.00% 0 2 Disagree 11.11% 2 3 Agree 50.00% 9 4 Strongly Agree 38.89% 7 Total 100% 18 EMPLOYEE CHURN 234 Q5 - When program employees turn over, there are consequences for program children. # Answer % Count 1 Strongly disagree 0.00% 0 2 Disagree 0.00% 0 3 Agree 33.33% 6 4 Strongly Agree 66.67% 12 Total 100% 18 EMPLOYEE CHURN 235 Q6 - When program employees turn over, there are consequences for program families. # Answer % Count 1 Strongly disagree 0.00% 0 2 Disagree 0.00% 0 3 Agree 55.56% 10 4 Strongly agree 44.44% 8 Total 100% 18 EMPLOYEE CHURN 236 Q7 - When program employees turn over, there are consequences for KCI. # Answer % Count 1 Strongly disagree 0.00% 0 2 Disagree 5.56% 1 3 Agree 27.78% 5 4 Strongly agree 66.67% 12 Total 100% 18 EMPLOYEE CHURN 237 Q8 - When program employees turn over, there are consequences for society. # Answer % Count 1 Strongly disagree 0.00% 0 2 Disagree 44.44% 8 3 Agree 55.56% 10 4 Strongly agree 0.00% 0 Total 100% 18 EMPLOYEE CHURN 238 Q9 - I feel it is important for me to invest time and effort in retaining employees, even if it takes time away from other work activities. # Answer % Count 1 Strongly disagree 0.00% 0 2 Disagree 0.00% 0 3 Agree 44.44% 8 4 Strongly agree 55.56% 10 Total 100% 18 EMPLOYEE CHURN 239 Q10 - The amount of focus and effort I put into retention strategies has a strong influence on my employees' retention. # Answer % Count 1 Strongly disagree 0.00% 0 2 Disagree 5.56% 1 3 Agree 55.56% 10 4 Strongly agree 38.89% 7 Total 100% 18 EMPLOYEE CHURN 240 Q11 - KCI communicates the importance of my role in retaining employees. # Answer % Count 1 Strongly disagree 5.56% 1 2 Disagree 27.78% 5 3 Agree 50.00% 9 4 Strongly agree 16.67% 3 Total 100% 18 EMPLOYEE CHURN 241 Q12 - KCI holds me accountable when my employees turn over. # Answer % Count 1 Strongly disagree 0.00% 0 2 Disagree 50.00% 9 3 Agree 44.44% 8 4 Strongly agree 5.56% 1 Total 100% 18 EMPLOYEE CHURN 242 Q13 - KCI holds my Area Manager peers accountable when their employees turn over. # Answer % Count 1 Strongly disagree 0.00% 0 2 Disagree 55.56% 10 3 Agree 38.89% 7 4 Strongly agree 5.56% 1 Total 100% 18 EMPLOYEE CHURN 243 Q14 - I am aware of KCI having specific employee retention goals. # Answer % Count 1 Strongly disagree 5.56% 1 2 Disagree 38.89% 7 3 Agree 50.00% 9 4 Strongly agree 5.56% 1 Total 100% 18 EMPLOYEE CHURN 244 Q15 - I have specific employee retention goals for my own team. # Answer % Count 1 Strongly disagree 0.00% 0 2 Disagree 11.11% 2 3 Agree 77.78% 14 4 Strongly agree 11.11% 2 Total 100% 18 EMPLOYEE CHURN 245 Q16 - I know how to apply different types of employee retention strategies. # Answer % Count 1 Strongly disagree 0.00% 0 2 Disagree 16.67% 3 3 Agree 66.67% 12 4 Strongly agree 16.67% 3 Total 100% 18 EMPLOYEE CHURN 246 Q17 - KCI encourages me to try new strategies to retain employees. # Answer % Count 1 Strongly disagree 0.00% 0 2 Disagree 33.33% 6 3 Agree 55.56% 10 4 Strongly agree 11.11% 2 Total 100% 18 EMPLOYEE CHURN 247 Q18 - KCI provides me information on employee turnover that guides my retention strategies with my own team. # Answer % Count 1 Strongly disagree 11.11% 2 2 Disagree 61.11% 11 3 Agree 27.78% 5 4 Strongly agree 0.00% 0 Total 100% 18 EMPLOYEE CHURN 248 Q19 - KCI provides me tools to measure how effective my retention strategies are. # Answer % Count 1 Strongly disagree 11.11% 2 2 Disagree 61.11% 11 3 Agree 27.78% 5 4 Strongly agree 0.00% 0 Total 100% 18 EMPLOYEE CHURN 249 Q20 - KCI provides incentives for me to focus on employee retention. # Answer % Count 1 Strongly disagree 16.67% 3 2 Disagree 55.56% 10 3 Agree 27.78% 5 4 Strongly agree 0.00% 0 Total 100% 18 EMPLOYEE CHURN 250 Q21 - KCI provides me the resources I need to effectively train my team. # Answer % Count 1 Strongly disagree 5.56% 1 2 Disagree 5.56% 1 3 Agree 77.78% 14 4 Strongly agree 11.11% 2 Total 100% 18 EMPLOYEE CHURN 251 Q22 - KCI provides me the resources I need to effectively compensate and reward my team financially. # Answer % Count 1 Strongly disagree 5.56% 1 2 Disagree 38.89% 7 3 Agree 55.56% 10 4 Strongly agree 0.00% 0 Total 100% 18 EMPLOYEE CHURN 252 Q23 - Please choose the statement below that fits you: # Answer % Count 1 This is my FIRST SCHOOL YEAR as an Area Manager for KCI or ANY after school / student enrichment organization. 44.44% 8 2 This is my SECOND or MORE SCHOOL YEAR as an Area Manager for KCI or ANY after school / student enrichment organization. 55.56% 10 Total 100% 18 EMPLOYEE CHURN 253 Q24 - Please choose the statement below that fits you: # Answer % Count 1 All the programs I oversee are brand new this school year to KCI (i.e., in their very first contract year with KCI). 33.33% 6 2 All the programs I oversee are returning programs to KCI (i.e., in their second or more contract year with KCI). 27.78% 5 3 I manage both new and returning programs for KCI (i.e., some are in their very first contract year with KCI; others are in their second or more contract year with KCI). 38.89% 7 Total 100% 18 EMPLOYEE CHURN 254 APPENDIX C Interview Protocol The principal researcher posed the following questions to six individual KCI Area Managers. The principal researcher asked predetermined standardized questions but allowed for a semi-structured approach for spontaneous follow-up probes for the purposes of clarification, detail enhancement, and to remain conversational. Parenthetical notations demonstrate the tie to the conceptual framework and research questions. These notations were for the researcher and provide the reader awareness only. They were not stated in the interview. Each interview proceeded as follows: Introduction "Thank you for agreeing to talk with me today. As a reminder from the information sheet provided, your participation is voluntary. If there are any questions you do not wish to answer, or if you wish to stop the interview at any time, that is fine. Also, your identity will be protected when I write up the interviews, so no one will be able to connect your responses with you personally now or in the future. Therefore, you can feel free to answer openly and honestly. Is that all clear?" "As we talk, I will be recording your responses on my personal cell phone, so that I may later transcribe our conversation. I may also take written notes at times to help myself with the transcription later. The recording is confidential and will be destroyed after transcription. Is that okay with you?" "Do you have any questions before we begin?" Opening Questions "Okay, we're going to start by talking about something that occurs in every single industry out there - that's employee turnover." EMPLOYEE CHURN 255 1. (KNOWLEDGE - Declarative/conceptual) "How do you define employee turnover?" 2. (KNOWLEDGE - Declarative/conceptual) "In any industry, what are some common causes of employee turnover that you're aware of?" 3. (KNOWLEDGE - Declarative/conceptual; MOTIVATION - Attribution/locus of control) "Employee turnover is common in childcare and in our afterschool industry. Based on your experience with your own field employees, what have been some specific causes for turnover?" 4. (KNOWLEDGE - Metacognitive) "When an employee on your team voluntarily leaves his/her job, what, if anything, do you do to reflect on the departures? 5. (ORGANIZATION - Cultural Model/accountability) "Who at KCI is responsible for employee turnover?" "How are they held accountable for employee turnover? 6. (ORGANIZATION - Cultural Model/accountability) "To what degree does KCI hold you accountable for employee turnover?" "How so?" "What about your Area Manager colleagues? To what degree are they held accountable for employee turnover?" "How do you know?" 7. (KNOWLEDGE - Declarative/conceptual) "When employees turn over in our afterschool industry, what do you see to be the consequences for children, if any?" "What do you see to be the consequences of employee turnover for families, if any?" "What do you see to be the consequences of employee turnover for KCI, if any?" EMPLOYEE CHURN 256 "What do you see to be the consequences of employee turnover for society, if any?" Transition "Okay, we talked about employee turnover. Let's shift now to the opposite of employee turnover - employee retention, or keeping employees in position and with the company." 8. (ORGANIZATION - Cultural Setting/goals) "Tell me about any field employee retention goals KCI has that you are aware of." "How were these goals communicated?" "Tell me about any retention goals you have for your own team." "How were these goals determined?" 9. (KNOWLEDGE - Procedural) "Tell me about some specific employee retention strategies you use." "How do you know how to use these retention strategies?" "What, if any, retention strategies have you heard of but don't know how to apply?" 10. (ORGANIZATION - Cultural Setting/feedback) "How, if at all, do you get information about your own team's turnover or retention?" "How does this information affect your retention strategies?" 11. (ORGANIZATION - Cultural Setting/feedback) "What, if anything, does KCI provide you to help you measure how effective your retention strategies are?" 12. (ORGANIZATION - Cultural Setting/incentives) "How, if at all, does KCI incentivize you to focus on employee retention?" "What specific retention activities do you feel incentivized to carry out?" "How, if at all, are you rewarded for retaining employees?" EMPLOYEE CHURN 257 13. (ORGANIZATION - Cultural Model/attitude) "How, if at all, does KCI encourage or support you in trying new ways to retain employees?" 14. (MOTIVATION - Expectancy Value/perceived cost) "When you think about investing time in retention efforts, what do consider the cost and the payoff?” 15. (ORGANIZATION - Cultural Model/resources for effective training and compensation) "What resources does KCI provide you to help you deliver effective training? 16. (ORGANIZATION - Cultural Model/resources for effective training and compensation) "What resources does KCI provide you to help you provide your team competitive compensation and financial rewards? 17. (ORGANIZATION - Cultural Setting/resources) "What, if anything, do you wish KCI would provide you to help you retain employees?" Interview Conclusion The interview will conclude with the following: "Thank you for your time and all you shared today. I really appreciate it. Again, your responses will be kept confidential, and your identity will be protected." EMPLOYEE CHURN 258 APPENDIX D Observation Protocol What follows is the template for observations of Area Manager team meetings for recording hand-written field notes. The researcher will also collect any printed agendas and other handouts from each meeting. EMPLOYEE CHURN 259 Observation Protocol: Field Notes Date Observation # Information Sheets Distributed Location Time Start Time End # Area Managers Present in person by speakerphone Others Present Description of Setting/Context Retention KMO-Related Inferences Diagram of Activity What are AMs' knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational influences related to achieving the org. retention goal? EMPLOYEE CHURN 260 Time Stamp Observation of Activity Retention KMO-Related Inferences What are AMs' knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational influences related to achieving the org. retention goal? EMPLOYEE CHURN 261 Related Documents Collected Retention KMO-Related Inferences Post-Observation Reflections/Impressions Related to Retention KMO Influences Emerging Questions/Initial Analysis Future Action/Focus for Future Observations What are AMs' knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational influences related to achieving the org. retention goal? EMPLOYEE CHURN 262 APPENDIX E Sample Post-Training Survey Items Measuring Kirkpatrick Levels 1 and 2 1. The training held my interest. (Level 1 Engagement) Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 2. This training was relevant to the work I do. (Level 1 Relevance) Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 3. I am satisfied with my training experience today. (Level 1 Customer Satisfaction) Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 4. From the definitions below, choose the one that most closely describes your understanding of employee turnover: (Level 2 Declarative Knowledge) a. Employee discipline by Human Resources. b. Employee separation from a workplace, whether voluntary or involuntary. c. Employee promotion within an organization. d. Employee layoff due to organizational downsizing. 5. On the turnover report shown below, what is the employee turnover rate for Area Manager G’s team for the month of February? (Level 2 Procedural Knowledge) a. 20% b. 50% c. 62% d. 90% 6. Understanding how to read and interpret employee turnover reports is valuable to my work. (Level 2 Attitude) Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree EMPLOYEE CHURN 263 7. I feel confident I can read and interpret next month’s employee turnover report. (Level 2 Confidence) Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 8. I am committed to applying my knowledge of how to read and interpret employee turnover reports each month going forward. (Level 2 Commitment) Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree EMPLOYEE CHURN 264 APPENDIX F Sample Blended Evaluation Items Measuring Kirkpatrick Levels 1, 2, 3, and 4 1. The training information has been applicable to my recent work. (Level 1 Relevance) Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 2. What information was most relevant? (Level 1 Relevance) 3. What information was least relevant? (Level 1 Relevance) 4. What information should be added to this training in the future to increase its relevance to Area Managers? (Level 1 Relevance) 5. What information, if any, do you feel was missing from training? (Level 2 Knowledge, Skills) 6. How has your confidence using what you learned changed since training? (Level 2 Confidence) 7. I have successfully applied what I learned in training to my work. (Level 3 Transfer) Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 8. If you selected Strongly Disagree or Disagree for #7 above, please indicate the reasons (check all the apply): (Level 3 Transfer) a. What I learned is not relevant to my work. b. I do not have the necessary knowledge and skills. c. I do not feel confident applying what I learned to my work. d. I do not have the resources I need to apply what I learned to my work. e. I do not believe applying what I learned will make a difference. f. No one is tracking what I am or am not doing anyway. g. Other (please explain): EMPLOYEE CHURN 265 9. What else, if anything, do you need in order to successfully apply what you learned? (Level 3 Transfer) 10. I feel encouraged to apply what I learned by my supervisor. (Required Drivers - Encouraging) Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 11. I have time with my supervisor and peers to share success stories and troubleshoot challenges related to what I learned. (Required Drivers - Encouraging) Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 12. I am incentivized to apply what I learned. (Required Drivers - Rewarding) Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 13. I have been or will be rewarded for successfully applying what I learned. (Required Drivers - Rewarding) Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 14. I have my own performance goals related to what I learned. (Required Drivers - Reinforcing, Monitoring) Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 15. I am held accountable for applying what I learned and making progress. (Required Drivers - Monitoring) Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 16. I am already seeing positive results from applying what I learned. (Level 4 Results) Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree 17. I see a positive impact in the following areas as a result of applying what I learned (check all that apply): (Results and Leading Indicators) a. Decreased voluntary employee turnover of my own staff EMPLOYEE CHURN 266 b. Increased engagement and satisfaction among my own staff c. Decreased cost and effort hiring and training replacement workers d. Decrease in my own stress e. Increased ability to focus on other business priorities aside from turnover f. Decreased parent complaints or disenrollment related to turnover g. Increased parent and school partner satisfaction 1. Please provide one or more examples of positive outcomes from applying this training: (Level 4 Results) 18. Please share any suggestions you have for improving this training:

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The moderating role of knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences on employee turnover: A gap analysis

PDF

Stop the revolving door: the influence of emotionally intelligent leadership practices on employee retention in non‐profit human service organizations

PDF

Teacher retention influences: an evaluation study

PDF

The role of professional development and certification in technology worker turnover: An evaluation study

PDF

Employment rates upon MBA graduation: An evaluation study

PDF

Nonprofit donor retention: a case study of Church of the West

PDF

Line staff and their influence on youth in expanded learning programs: an evaluation model

PDF

Provisional admission in higher education: a case study in retention, persistence, and matriculation in academia

PDF

The effects of organizational culture on millennial engagement and turnover in start-ups: an innovation study

PDF

One to one tablet integration in the mathematics classroom: an evaluation study of an international school in China

PDF

Affluent teens and school stress: an evaluation study

PDF

Knowledge, motivation and organizational influences impacting recruiting practices addressing the gender gap in the technology industry: an evaluation study

PDF

Influencing teacher retention: an evaluation study

PDF

Exploring mindfulness with employee engagement: an innovation study

PDF

Analyzing the implementation of a learning management system into a post-merger & acquisition organization and its effects on sales performance (improvement model)

PDF

Supporting women business owners: the Inland Empire Women’s Business Center: an evaluation study

PDF

Evaluating emergency nurse leader capacity to reduce first-year employee turnover

PDF

Violence experienced by registered nurses working in hospitals: an evaluation study

PDF

Employee retention and the success of a for-profit cosmetics company: a gap analysis

PDF

Mitigating low employee engagement through improved performance management: an evaluation study

Asset Metadata

Creator Wilkens, Michele (author)

Core Title Employee churn in afterschool care: an evaluation study of manager influences on employee retention and turnover

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 09/28/2017

Defense Date 08/24/2017

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag after school,afterschool,afterschool industry,afterschool program,childcare,childcare industry,gap analysis,managers,OAI-PMH Harvest,retention,turnover

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Seli, Helena (committee chair), Datta, Monique (committee member), Hanson, Katherine (committee member)

Creator Email michelewilkens1@gmail.com,wilkens@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-439710

Unique identifier UC11265614

Identifier etd-WilkensMic-5792.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-439710 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-WilkensMic-5792.pdf

Dmrecord 439710

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Wilkens, Michele

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA