Are we simply managing staffing changes, or are we intentionally designing for the human experiences those decisions create?
An employee’s experience begins the first time they learn about an opportunity and start imagining themselves in that role. They learn about the organization and the position, then cross-reference their existing skills with the ones they are excited to build or strengthen. Then they decide whether this specific role, at this particular organization, at this time in their life, is worth the effort and risk.
Next come the application, interviews, hiring, onboarding, and integration. Each stage offers an opportunity to communicate organizational culture and invite someone new to join as it evolves.
In parallel, an employer identifies a need to expand its team, whether to take on emerging work or to redistribute and delegate responsibilities currently held by others. Leadership identifies or allocates resources, develops a job description, and shares the opportunity with its networks and the wider world.
This process itself creates expectations among the existing team about what filling the role will mean for their individual and collective professional experiences. As they meet candidates through the interview process, those expectations, and often their excitement, grow. The bullet points of a job description begin to come to life, and a person emerges who might fulfill the needs they've identified.
With this shift, the organization begins to change. Relationships shift, responsibilities evolve, and new perspectives and ways of working influence the experiences of everyone involved.
How often do we stop to ask how everyone is experiencing this change? Or listen for what may be said or felt under the surface?
For one employee, a new colleague may represent much-needed relief. For another, the same arrival may feel threatening as responsibilities, relationships, or influence begin to shift. Some may be excited by the perspectives and skills a new person brings, while others may worry about differences in communication, working styles, or expectations.
And while leadership may be confident that the organization needs this new role, does everyone share that understanding? Do they feel equally confident about the person selected to fill it?
These reactions aren't necessarily signs of resistance or dysfunction. They are part of the human experience of change. The question is whether organizations create opportunities to surface those expectations and concerns, or allow them to shape relationships and culture without ever being discussed.
An important window also exists between the decision to hire someone and their actual arrival. Once an offer is accepted, how intentionally do you use that time? Are existing employees prepared for changes to their responsibilities? Are expectations being discussed? Is the new employee learning not only what they'll do, but also how the organization works, how relationships are built, and what success might look like?
The transition begins before the new employee walks through the door. So does the opportunity to design for it.
Departures
Just as the arrival of someone new changes an organization, so does their departure.
Over time, the needs and expectations of both employees and organizations evolve. An employee may discover that the opportunities, relationships, or working conditions that once made a role appealing no longer meet their needs. An organization may shift its priorities, change its structure, or develop new expectations of the people doing the work.
Sometimes these changes are recognized and addressed together. Other times, tensions develop, expectations go unspoken, and the distance between what each party needs keeps growing.
Eventually, one side may decide the relationship should end. An employee may choose to leave, or an employer may decide it is time to part ways.
The departure is rarely experienced by only the person leaving.
Colleagues may feel sadness, frustration, relief, confusion, or fear. They may question what happened, whether the decision was fair, what it means for their own future, or how their work and relationships will change. Responsibilities must be redistributed. Knowledge and relationships may be lost. The stories people tell themselves about the organization and its leadership may begin to shift.
Yet how often do organizations create space to understand these reactions? Do leaders ask what colleagues are worried about, what they believe will change, or what they need to move forward? Are there opportunities to acknowledge the loss of a relationship, the uncertainty of shifting responsibilities, or the questions that may arise about organizational decisions?
And when confidentiality limits what leaders can share, how do they still create opportunities for honest conversations about the impact of the departure?
Honoring the Person Who Is Leaving
Another experience deserves equal attention: the one the departing person feels.
When an organization decides to end someone's employment, particularly because of performance or a perceived mismatch, how intentionally is that departure designed?
Can we create an experience that clarifies what didn't work while also honoring the employee's contributions, relationships, and accomplishments during their time with the organization? Can we help someone understand what they might carry forward into their next opportunity, rather than letting the circumstances of their departure define their entire experience?
After all, an employee's contributions don't disappear simply because the employment relationship ends.
Someone may have helped build a program, supported colleagues, strengthened relationships, or contributed ideas that continue to shape the organization long after they're gone. They may also have struggled in ways that ultimately made the relationship unsustainable. Both things can be true.
A human-centered departure doesn't require everyone to agree with the decision or feel good about the outcome. Nor does it mean avoiding difficult conversations or minimizing legitimate performance concerns. It does mean considering how the decision is communicated, whether expectations and concerns were made clear along the way, what opportunities exist for learning and closure, and how the person can be treated with dignity throughout the process.
It also invites the organization to reflect on its own role: Were expectations clear? Was feedback timely and useful? Were there opportunities to address concerns before the relationship reached this point?
When circumstances allow, the window between the decision and the actual departure offers an opportunity to help someone recognize their strengths, reflect on what they've learned, and consider their next chapter, while also honoring contributions, transferring knowledge, and preparing colleagues for the transition. Not every departure allows for this. Some are unexpected, immediate, or complicated by circumstances that limit what we can share or do. But those limitations don't eliminate the responsibility to approach the experience with care.
We put considerable thought into helping people imagine a future within our organizations. How much thought do we put into helping them imagine a future beyond their role? And how might that care shape the story they carry with them and the experiences of those who remain?
The Observation Deck
Whether someone is arriving or departing, organizational change extends far beyond the individual employee. Relationships, responsibilities, expectations, and team dynamics begin to shift.
Some of these changes are visible and anticipated.
Others unfold quietly, through conversations that aren't happening, assumptions that aren't being challenged, or concerns that people don't feel comfortable expressing.
This is where leaders can move to the observation deck, to step away from the immediate logistics of hiring or departure and observe the larger patterns emerging across the organization.
Who is affected by this transition? What are people hoping will happen? What might they be worried about? What assumptions are we making about how people will respond?
These conversations aren't necessarily about reaching consensus or getting everyone to agree with a decision. They're about developing a shared understanding of why change is happening, becoming curious about how different people may experience it, and uncovering the questions, concerns, and assumptions that might otherwise remain unspoken.
Of course, not everything unspoken can be uncovered simply by asking. People may not yet understand their own reactions, or they may not feel comfortable sharing them. The absence of expressed concern doesn't necessarily mean everyone is comfortable with the change. Leaders need to pay attention not only to what is said, but also to patterns in behavior, relationships, and people's experiences. They need to remain curious rather than assuming they already know what those patterns mean.
And then comes the important part: using what they learn.
Understanding people's experiences is not the end of the process. It's the starting point for designing a more intentional transition.
That might mean clarifying roles before a new colleague arrives, creating opportunities to build relationships, acknowledging uncertainty after a departure, helping a team redistribute responsibilities, or reconsidering how expectations are communicated. It might also mean recognizing that people need different things from the same transition, and that those needs may change as the organization evolves.
We cannot eliminate the uncertainty, discomfort, or emotion that accompanies talent changes. Nor can we design an experience that meets everyone's preferences or guarantees a particular outcome. But we can become more curious about what people are experiencing, more attentive to what remains unspoken, and more intentional about how we prepare for and respond to change.
Every arrival and departure creates a new version of an organization. The question is whether we let that new version emerge by default or help shape it through curiosity, understanding, and intentional design.
