Retaining experts: administrators' views on retention incentives and older employees.

Tara C Moon, Susan Beck, Rebecca J Laudicina
{"title":"Retaining experts: administrators' views on retention incentives and older employees.","authors":"Tara C Moon,&nbsp;Susan Beck,&nbsp;Rebecca J Laudicina","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A survey of members of the American Society for Clinical Laboratory Science (ASCLS) in 2012 examined laboratory administrators' views on retention incentives and older Clinical Laboratory Professionals (CLP). Results indicated that retention strategies currently in place are not concordant with the ones CLP think are important. Further, with the exception of ergonomic equipment, administrators reported low feasibility for the workplace changes favored by practitioners. While all administrators attributed positive traits to older CLP, older administrators held more favorable views. Administrators perceived older CLP as productive, having a high level of technical skills and loyal. The combination of technical competence and work ethic make retention of older CLP attractive to laboratory administrators and advantageous for combatting workforce shortages. This study highlights the discordance between the retention incentives valued by CLP and those viewed as feasible by administrators. Findings should be used by administrators to refine incentive packages that better reflect the desires of CLP.</p>","PeriodicalId":72611,"journal":{"name":"Clinical laboratory science : journal of the American Society for Medical Technology","volume":"27 3","pages":"162-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical laboratory science : journal of the American Society for Medical Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A survey of members of the American Society for Clinical Laboratory Science (ASCLS) in 2012 examined laboratory administrators' views on retention incentives and older Clinical Laboratory Professionals (CLP). Results indicated that retention strategies currently in place are not concordant with the ones CLP think are important. Further, with the exception of ergonomic equipment, administrators reported low feasibility for the workplace changes favored by practitioners. While all administrators attributed positive traits to older CLP, older administrators held more favorable views. Administrators perceived older CLP as productive, having a high level of technical skills and loyal. The combination of technical competence and work ethic make retention of older CLP attractive to laboratory administrators and advantageous for combatting workforce shortages. This study highlights the discordance between the retention incentives valued by CLP and those viewed as feasible by administrators. Findings should be used by administrators to refine incentive packages that better reflect the desires of CLP.

留住专家:管理者对留住激励和老员工的看法。
2012年,一项针对美国临床实验室科学学会(ASCLS)成员的调查调查了实验室管理人员对保留激励措施和老年临床实验室专业人员(CLP)的看法。结果表明,目前的保留策略与CLP认为重要的策略不一致。此外,除符合人体工程学的设备外,管理人员报告从业人员青睐的工作场所变化的可行性较低。虽然所有的管理员都认为年长的CLP具有积极的特征,但年长的管理员持更有利的观点。管理员认为老的CLP工作效率高,技术水平高,忠诚度高。技术能力和职业道德的结合使得保留老CLP对实验室管理人员具有吸引力,并有利于解决劳动力短缺问题。本研究强调了CLP所重视的挽留激励与管理者认为可行的挽留激励之间的不一致。管理人员应利用调查结果来完善激励方案,以更好地反映中电的愿望。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信