Properly done, exit interviews with are an excellent opportunity to obtain information about what your organisation is doing well − and, what your organisation needs to do to improve. Typically conducted by the Human Resources department, they are a rich source of information for organisational improvement.

Exit interviews assume that employees departing under favourable circumstances will be more forthcoming on their perceptions of the work environment and provide more objective information. This can then be used to strengthen managerial or organisational performance.

The interviews are voluntary, although they are frequently combined with the mandatory administrative functions such as returning company property and calculating the final paycheque. If the employee is leaving on unfavourable terms, there is the risk of emotional and biased responses that may not be based on facts.

To conduct exit interviews properly, and to avoid the temptation of prejudice by each party, I have developed a standard list of five core questions. The responses are recorded for each candidate (with their knowledge) and then combined into a master list of responses to each question. After five or six exit interviews, strong patterns emerge that are later reinforced or embellished by subsequent interviews. I then conduct an analysis of the responses and present my findings to senior leadership, along with my observations and recommendations.

I always start the session by informing the employee that the purpose of the interview is to gain objective information that will help make the company a better place to work. Individual responses are confidential, but combined responses, without attribution, are forwarded to executive leadership for their consideration. Here are my five top questions or conversation starters that I use regularly:

1. Please describe your workplace environment.

Here is where most employees will either praise or criticise the work environment. It is where special problems are uncovered that may not be known by the leadership. If one interviewee is upset about something, it is noted but no action is anticipated after the employee’s departure. However, if this theme is repeated with others, then it suggests an area that needs attention. Care must be taken to insure that the responses are informative and not accusatory.

2. The purpose of this question is to provide productive feedback that can be applied to individual or group supervisory development initiatives. Frequently, the responses are not surprising, for example: Frustration about getting straight answers, lack consistent job priorities, uncertainty of decision-making authority, and an eagerness to be a part of the problem solving processes.

3. Do your colleagues work at top efficiency and productivity? If not, why not?

This is a variation on question 2 and it gets into the heart of what works and what doesn’t work in your organisation. It focuses the responses on specific issues rather than providing a laundry list of complaints that may or may not have merit. The interviewer has the opportunity to press for specific details that may lead to improved performance. Representative responses frequently include shortage of information or material, numerous machine breakdowns, improper communication within the organisation, and tolerance of sloppy work. The goal is to isolate specific causes to these problems so that workable solutions can be considered and implemented.

4. If you were given the opportunity to sit down with the CEO, what three pieces of advice would you give him or her?

This forces the employee to focus on constructive criticism, e.g. “if my equipment did not breakdown so often, my budget could record a surplus”. HR managers commonly hear the complaint that employees can see problems at their level and are frustrated that senior management does not respect their observations. Surprisingly, in today’s digitally wired and global environment, many of the responses now focus on lost business opportunities, productivity gains and improved profitability metrics.

5 (a) What do you like about working here?

5 (b) What do you dislike about working here?

This two-part question has the intention of gaining insight on the positive aspects of employment with the company as well as to isolate areas of concern. From this information, strategies can be developed to improve on the positive aspects and eliminate or minimize the negative aspects. Responses to these questions can be narrative, or can be combined with a standardized questionnaire with multiple-choice answers or a high-low ranking of specific subjects (for example, appropriateness of salary and benefits).

Each interviewer can generate his/her own line of questioning. The point to remember is that for the exercise to have any value, it must be focused on gathering data that can be used to advance the objectives of the organisation and make it a better place for employees and their managers. This will please not only them, but also the customers, owners and other stakeholders who have a vested interest in the success of the organisation.

Professor Moore is an Associate Consultant at the Foundation for Human Resources Development