Welcome Back? Job Performance and Turnover of Boomerang Employees Compared to Internal and External Hires

Abstract

“Boomerang” employees are workers who leave an organization and are later rehired by that same organization. Although many organizations rehire former employees, only a handful of studies have examined this phenomenon. The present study uses a large, longitudinal data set to examine the performance and turnover of boomerang employees rehired into management positions (n = 1,318). Further, we provide some of the first comparisons between boomerang employees and two traditional sources of employees: external hires (n = 20,850) and internal promotions (n = 8,546). Evaluations of job performance before and after being rehired revealed that boomerang managers’ performance tended to remain the same—rather than increase or decrease—after being rehired. Furthermore, boomerang managers performed similarly to internally and externally hired managers in the first year on the job, but both internal and external hires improved more than rehires over time. Internal and external hires were also less likely to turn over from the organization than rehires. Finally, supplemental analyses indicated that boomerang managers who turned over a second time tended to do so for reasons similar to their initial turnover reasons. The overall results call into question some of the assumed benefits of rehiring and suggest that organizations consider factors such as the reason for initial departure, the time horizon of performance, and the availability of other types of hires before considering boomerang employees.

Hello again: Managing talent with boomerang employees

“…Despite the popular perception among HR and recruitment professionals that boomerangs should outperform other employees in general (c.f. Apy & Ryckman, 2014; Brin, 2018; Flesher, 2017; Grensing‐Pophal, 2020; HR Exchange, 2019; Nelson, 2016), our null performance findings between boomerangs and internal hires are consistent with findings from retail (Arnold et al, in press) and healthcare settings (Keller et al, in press). In addition, when Swider et al (2017) compared boomerang athletes to a narrow subset of stayers with similar career timelines, they also found that boomerangs did not perform as well as the stayers.…”

“…Building on the definition presented in Shipp, Furst‐Holloway, Harris, and Rosen (2014), we define boomerangs as returning employees who terminated their employment voluntarily or involuntarily, and who left for employment (e.g., a new position at a competing firm, career change, or self‐employment) or non‐employment reasons (e.g., education, parenting) (see also Arnold et al, in press, Figure 1). Excluded from this definition are interns, seasonal workers, those returning from furlough or temporary leave, or who transferred to a new location.…”

“…Despite the potential of boomerang employees to serve as a rich source of talent and the willingness of managers to rehire employees who left in good standing (Workforce Institute at Kronos and WorkplaceTrends, 2015), we know little about the outcomes of pursuing a boomerang talent management strategy and how it might compare to relying on an internal talent management strategy (see Arnold et al, in press, for a notable exception examining performance ratings). Our expectation is that the process of leaving and returning will create behavioral and psychological differences between boomerangs and stayers, in large part because the boomerang creates a renegotiated psychological contract with the organization upon rehire.…”

“…Second, boomerangs have been shown to be better performers when they gained practical experience in the interim firm (Swider, Liu, Harris, & Gardner, 2017), and outperformed other external hires when they were placed in roles that involve relational demands and administrative coordination (Keller, Kehoe, Bidwell, Collings, & Myer, in press). Third, boomerangs bring knowledge and networks from interim employment, which should give them an advantage over internal hires (Bruque, Moyano, & Piccolo, 2016), although enhanced performance compared to internal hires has not yet been found in other samples of boomerangs (Arnold, Van Iddekinge, Campion, Bauer, & Campion, in press; Swider et al, 2017).…”

“…Third, we build on the theoretical talent management model presented by Collings and Mellahi (2009) by suggesting that the boomerangs' ability to rebuild their psychological contract may explain why different groups within the labor pool (i.e., stayers and boomerangs) report different outcomes. Finally, we expand on the model of boomerang performance (Arnold et al, in press; Keller et al, in press; Swider et al, 2017) to identify other benefits that accrue to boomerang employees such as increased compensation, enhanced job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and greater time spent on extra‐role behaviors.…”