People Analytics by Glover & Co. — See Your Team's Data

Making sense of your team

The fact you're asking puts you ahead of most ten-person shops — worrying about the one-year mark before the next class hits it is exactly the right time to worry. A housekeeping note first: I hold your roster for this session only, and going forward, share only what you're comfortable sharing — initials work fine.

Assumptions, labeled so you can correct them: annual base salaries · year-only hires plotted mid-year · current employees only (that matters, as you'll see) · no pay ranges exist yet, so the pay view uses your team's own distribution — building real ranges is what Comp Planning by Glover & Co. is for.

1. The tenure line — "do people really leave at year one?" The honest answer: a roster of people who stayed can't prove a cliff — the people who'd prove it aren't on the list. But the shape is worth a look: a loyal core (one hire a year, 2020–2024, all still here — honor those anniversaries out loud), then

a hole where 2025 should be, and four of nine aboard under eight months. Consistent with your worry; nine people is a team, not a statistic, so "worth a look," not "proven." Send the leavers (initials fine) and I'll draw the cliff itself instead of its shadow.

The date that matters: Sam, Dana, Alex, and Pat all hit one year between January and June 2027. That's the window a retention plan has to beat — you have four to ten months of runway. Stay interviews in the next month or two beat exit interviews next summer.

2. The turnover cost card — if the year-one pattern repeats on the 2026 class, the working math (labeled practice judgment, 50–75% of salary per skilled seat): $112,000–$168,000 of exposure. That's the number that makes a retention budget look cheap.

3. One thing I have to name plainly before the charts. In both matched role pairs, the longer-tenured person earns less — Rachel ($69k, 2020) vs Tom ($78k, 2021); Jen ($64k, 2022) vs Mike ($72k, 2023). I don't know anyone's demographics from a roster and I won't guess — and I won't run a do-it-yourself pay equity analysis, because that's a legal exercise with privilege questions. What I can say: the pattern is visible, it deserves attention before your next pay decision, and the note to counsel and to Erin is drafted and ready to send.

Branded one-page team snapshot attached — tenure line, pay view, cost card — assumptions printed on the charts.

Educational, not legal advice. Seek counsel if you would like a legal opinion.
AI does not replace human judgment — this is a decision you own.