I’ve seen a similar idea with employees, but a bit more forgiving. I can’t find the article, but it was about when it makes sense to replace someone vs keep them. The idea was to keep them if they get 70% of their work correct / do 70% of the job well and go to the market for a new hire if they don’t hit that.
It seems low, but with the inefficiency caused by turnover I guess 70% is where they settled.
It seems low, but with the inefficiency caused by turnover I guess 70% is where they settled.