Image retrieved from: http://www.630wpro.com/common/page.php?pt=EMPLOYERS+%3E+Exit+Interviews%3A+What+to+Consider&id=3691&is_corp=0
After analyzing the 228 exit interviews, the researchers (Kulik, et al. 2012) found that 22% of the employees said they left for reasons related to path one. They left based on these premeditated plans and when the opportunity arose they automatically quit their job as a result. Some examples of these reasons employees left according to Path One left are to pursue an overseas experience or start a business on their own. These reasonings seem a little different from what Lee and Mitchell (1994) described in the Unfolding Model. However, these reasons are similar to Path One in the fact that the employees left their organization for some premeditated reason. Kulik, Treuren, and Bordia (2012) argue that the key feature to the first path in the Unfolding Model (Lee & Mitchell, 1994) is that it does not focus on whether an employee is satisfied or dissatisfied with their job. Since the employees from these interviews said that the reasons they were leaving were not because of issues with satisfaction levels, the researchers concluded these premeditated plans match closely with what Lee and Mitchell (1994) were attempting to describe. These premeditated plans are considered scripts that employees were following and automatically acted on when the right time presented itself (Kulik, Treuren, and Bordi, 2012).
For Path Two, 15% of the employees said they left as a result of a situation that caused them to evaluate staying with the organization or leave for some other non-specific direction. One example of a reason an employee gave for leaving was their manager and the final situation that led them to quit was getting a poor performance review from the manager. Many employees suggested there was a second event that caused them to follow through with their alternatives. Examples of these second events were situations where the employee became ill or had new family responsibilities. These events were more personal to each employee and helped solidify the employee's decision to leave (Kulik, Treuren, and Bordi, 2012).
As already mentioned, in path three employees start evaluating whether they could form a new attachment with another organization as a result of some shock situation. Based on what this plan entails, 31% of the employees listed reasons similar to the factors that were described in the Unfolding Model's path three. Employees listed reasons such as, they could get paid more for the same job at a different organization. This study found something unique about this path that was not mentioned in the Unfolding Model. When employees listed reasons for leaving as a result of comparing current organization to another they then listed there was a second shock event that lead to them wanting to form new relations with a new organization Examples of this second shock were death of a family member or difficulty in childcare. When these types of situations presented themselves this forced employees to follow through with forming new relations with another organization (Kulik, Treuren, and Bordi, 2012).
The main benefit this study has for organizations is the suggestions the researchers found in the study regarding the two paths under path four of the Unfolding Model. Recall that the different paths for path four do involve job satisfaction. The researchers found 7% of employees left based on path four A and 25% left for reasons similar to path four B (Kulik et al., 2012). The researchers similar to Mobley (1977) suggest organizations should monitor satisfaction levels to prevent employees from leaving (Kuliek et al., 2012). To help with the issue of turnover Kulik et al. (2012) suggest managers be trained on the Unfolding Model and learn the different paths employees can take when deciding to leave. This model provides managers with reasons for why employees may leave their job. Based on the findings of this study the researchers have come up with suggestions for what organizations should do to reduce turnover rates. Their first suggestion is to recruit and select employees whose skills are an accurate match to the type of tasks they will be doing in their job. Next, organizations should use mentors and teams to work on long term projects to create better relationships among the workplace. Relationships with coworkers and supervisors has been found to influence job satisfaction (Britt & Jex, 2008). Their last recommendation was to offer monetary and nonmonetary perks to help retain more employees (Kulik, Treuren, and Bordi, 2012).