Earlier this month I shared data from our 2010 Top Small Company Workplaces employee engagement research which showed that the 20 winners of our award this year had better (which is to say, lower) average 2009 turnover than the 20 finalists.  But how do the winners compare to their industry?

From the preliminary research we've done into this, they have better turnover than their industries – in some cases dramatically lower.  Here's a table that shows how this breaks down among seven of our 2010 winners, based on the latest (2009) industry benchmarking data:

What's our takeaway from this in terms of cost savings?  Well, given that...

• These two sources say that the average cost to replace a U.S. worker is $17,000 (this obviously includes the whole spectrum from entry-level staff through managers and executives),
• The seven firms above had average 2009 turnover of 11%, 6% of which was voluntary,
• Average turnover for the industries of these seven companies is 23%, and
• The seven companies had an average of 188 employees in 2009

...if these organizations had double the turnover they actually had to match their industries, you could expect that their voluntary turnover should have been double as well – 12% instead of 6%.  This share of their average workforce works out to slightly over 11 full-time employees.  If you accept the average, per-employee replacement cost of $17,000, that works out to an average annual savings, based on better-than-average turnover, of $187,000.

That's a significant payoff of employee engagement in my book.  It's one of the reasons these firms are so intentional about their people practices.

Related: This Ask An Expert column on our website, which discusses in more detail the costs of turnover, contains a retention quiz to help you see if your finger is on the pulse of your organization.