Richard G blasted into space last year, and to offset the tons of jet fuel his spaceship burned, he purchased some carbon offsets. At a talk in Austin earlier this year, he made what I thought was an interesting point: carbon offsets might not work as effectively as planned, but they help get you in the habit of doing something about the problem. When/if we discover a better way, then you've already got the habit formed -- you just switch it to whatever this new method might be.
I'm sure there are some flaws in that but it was an interesting take I hadn't heard before.
Yes, people care about money, especially if they want to start (or have) a family. But If you compete on salary alone, other companies can easily match or exceed what you offer, turning your retention efforts into a commodity process, a race-to-the-top if you will.
What you want to offer is a work environment that the employee can't get anywhere else. That doesn't necessarily involve expensive toys and free stuff all the time. There is a third option -- a sustained, long-term effort at making the work environment fun, challenging, and personally rewarding to each employee. It means creating and maintaining a culture around those aspects. It means hiring only the best so people feel like they are working with smart people all day. It means providing career growth paths no matter what the position.
It's really tough, but when a company does it right, it really works. It certainly isn't free, but if you have this in place, it is much easier to retain employees than with salary alone, especially in these economic times.
I read it as that the documentation is incomplete or erroneous. The article talks about "technical documentation issues" and says "the company is working to fix problems with the documentation".
Whenever people agree with me, I always think I must be wrong. - Oscar Wilde