CHRO Advisor
People strategy and operational HR frameworks for business-aligned hiring, compensation, org design, performance management, and culture that scales. The CHRO translates business goals into people requirements and ensures the organization has the talent, structure, and culture to execute.
Keywords
CHRO, chief people officer, HR, human resources, people strategy, hiring plan, headcount planning, talent acquisition, recruiting, compensation, salary bands, equity, org design, organizational design, career ladder, title framework, retention, performance management, culture, engagement, remote work, hybrid, spans of control, succession planning, attrition, workforce planning, people analytics, eNPS, onboarding, offboarding, DEI, employer brand
Quick Start
Workforce Planning Decision Tree
START: Business goal identified
|
v
[Can existing team deliver this goal?]
|
+-- YES --> [Is current capacity sustainable?]
| |
| +-- YES --> No hiring needed. Optimize.
| +-- NO --> Hire for sustainability (backfill/support)
|
+-- NO --> [Is this a skill gap or capacity gap?]
|
+-- SKILL GAP --> [Can we develop internally in < 90 days?]
| |
| +-- YES --> Train/develop. No hire.
| +-- NO --> Hire specialist.
|
+-- CAPACITY GAP --> [Is this temporary or permanent?]
|
+-- TEMPORARY --> Contract/agency
+-- PERMANENT --> Full-time hire with business case
Core Responsibilities
1. Workforce Planning and Headcount
Every hire needs a business case. "We need more people" is not a business case.
Hiring Justification Framework
| Question |
Required Answer |
| What revenue or risk does this role address? |
Specific dollar amount or risk description |
| What happens if we don't fill this in 90 days? |
Concrete impact statement |
| Can existing team absorb this with re-prioritization? |
Yes/No with explanation |
| What's the fully-loaded cost (salary + benefits + equity + tools + overhead)? |
Dollar amount |
| What's the expected ramp time to full productivity? |
Weeks/months |
| Who will manage this person? |
Named manager with capacity |
Headcount Planning by Stage
| Stage |
Team Size |
CHRO Focus |
Hiring Speed |
| Pre-seed |
1-5 |
Founders hire directly |
1-2/quarter |
| Seed |
5-15 |
First structured interviews, no HR person yet |
2-4/quarter |
| Series A |
15-40 |
First People hire, comp bands, career ladder v1 |
4-8/quarter |
| Series B |
40-100 |
CHRO or VP People, full hiring process, HRIS |
8-20/quarter |
| Series C |
100-250 |
People team (3-5), manager training, performance system |
15-40/quarter |
| Growth |
250+ |
Full people function, analytics, L&D, total rewards |
30+/quarter |
2. Compensation Design
Compensation Band Architecture
Level Framework:
IC Track Management Track
--------- ----------------
L1: Junior/Associate --
L2: Mid-level --
L3: Senior M1: Manager (first-time)
L4: Staff/Principal M2: Senior Manager
L5: Distinguished/Fellow M3: Director
-- M4: VP
-- M5: SVP/C-level
Band Construction Method
| Step |
Action |
Data Source |
| 1 |
Define levels with clear competency criteria |
Internal role descriptions |
| 2 |
Benchmark each level against market |
Levels.fyi, Pave, Radford, Option Impact |
| 3 |
Set band width (typically 20-30% spread) |
Market data + internal equity |
| 4 |
Position band midpoint at target percentile |
P50 for cash, P50-P75 for total comp |
| 5 |
Define equity bands per level |
Stage-appropriate equity calculator |
| 6 |
Set promotion criteria between levels |
Performance + scope + impact |
Total Compensation Components
| Component |
Purpose |
Refresh Cadence |
| Base salary |
Market-rate cash compensation |
Annual review |
| Annual bonus |
Performance-linked variable pay |
Annual (if applicable) |
| Equity (options/RSUs) |
Long-term alignment and retention |
Initial grant + annual refresh |
| Benefits |
Health, 401k, perks |
Annual review |
| Signing bonus |
Competitive offer sweetener |
One-time |
Equity Grant Guidelines by Stage
| Stage |
IC Hire (L2-L3) |
Senior Hire (L4-L5) |
VP/C-Level |
| Seed |
0.25-1.0% |
1.0-2.5% |
2.0-5.0% |
| Series A |
0.05-0.25% |
0.25-0.75% |
0.5-2.0% |
| Series B |
0.01-0.10% |
0.10-0.30% |
0.25-1.0% |
| Series C+ |
0.005-0.05% |
0.05-0.15% |
0.10-0.50% |
3. Organizational Design
Spans of Control Guidelines
| Role Type |
Optimal Span |
Warning Signs |
| IC Manager (engineering) |
5-8 direct reports |
> 10: no coaching time. < 4: unnecessary layer |
| IC Manager (non-eng) |
6-10 direct reports |
> 12: overwhelmed. < 5: manager inflation |
| Manager of Managers |
4-7 direct reports |
> 8: can't support managers. < 3: too many layers |
| VP/Director |
5-8 direct reports |
> 10: strategic thinking suffers |
When to Add Management Layers
TRIGGER: Team growing past threshold
|
v
[Current span of control > optimal?]
|
+-- NO --> Don't add layer. Resist the urge.
+-- YES --> [Is there a strong internal candidate?]
|
+-- YES --> Promote from within (faster, culture-preserving)
+-- NO --> [Is external hire justified?]
|
+-- YES --> Hire manager with 90-day expectations
+-- NO --> Split team instead of adding layer
Org Design Anti-Patterns
| Anti-Pattern |
Symptom |
Fix |
| Title inflation |
Everyone is a "Head of" at 20 people |
Standardized level framework |
| Shadow org |
Real decisions made outside official structure |
Align authority with accountability |
| Matrix chaos |
Every person has 3 reporting lines |
One clear manager, dotted lines documented |
| Founder bottleneck |
All decisions flow through founder |
Delegation framework (see founder-coach) |
| Empire building |
Managers hire to grow team, not to deliver |
Tie headcount to business outcomes |
4. Performance Management
Calibrated Performance Framework
| Rating |
Label |
Distribution Target |
Action |
| 5 |
Exceptional |
5-10% |
Accelerated promotion, significant equity refresh, retention bonus |
| 4 |
Exceeds Expectations |
20-25% |
Above-market raise, stretch assignment, mentor role |
| 3 |
Meets Expectations |
50-60% |
Market adjustment, development plan, new challenges |
| 2 |
Needs Improvement |
10-15% |
PIP with 60-day milestones, weekly manager check-ins |
| 1 |
Underperforming |
2-5% |
Exit conversation or immediate role change |
Performance Review Cadence
| Activity |
Frequency |
Owner |
Participants |
| 1:1 meetings |
Weekly |
Manager |
Manager + direct report |
| Goal check-in |
Monthly |
Manager |
Manager + direct report |
| Peer feedback collection |
Quarterly |
People team |
Cross-functional peers |
| Performance review |
Semi-annual |
Manager + People |
Manager, report, skip-level |
| Calibration session |
Semi-annual |
People team |
All managers at same level |
| Promotion committee |
Semi-annual |
People + Leadership |
Committee of L4+ leaders |
PIP (Performance Improvement Plan) Structure
| Element |
Requirement |
| Specific gaps |
Observable behaviors, not vague criticism |
| Measurable goals |
3-5 targets with success criteria |
| Timeline |
30-60 days maximum |
| Support offered |
Training, mentoring, resources |
| Check-in cadence |
Weekly minimum |
| Clear outcome |
What happens if goals are met vs. not met |
| Documentation |
Written, signed, filed |
5. Retention Strategy
Retention Risk Assessment Matrix
| Factor |
Low Risk (1) |
Medium Risk (2) |
High Risk (3) |
| Comp competitiveness |
Above P50 |
At P50 |
Below P50 |
| Manager relationship |
Strong trust |
Adequate |
Friction or distrust |
| Career growth |
Clear path, progressing |
Path exists, slow progress |
No visible path |
| Engagement |
High eNPS, advocates |
Neutral |
Disengaged, passive |
| Tenure |
< 1 year or > 3 years |
1-2 years |
18-24 months (cliff danger) |
| External demand |
Low market demand |
Moderate |
Hot market, recruiters active |
Total score 6-8: Low risk. Monitor quarterly.
Total score 9-13: Medium risk. Proactive retention conversation needed.
Total score 14-18: High risk. Immediate intervention required.
Retention Intervention Ladder
Risk Level: LOW (6-8)
--> Standard: competitive comp, regular 1:1s, career conversations
Risk Level: MEDIUM (9-13)
--> Proactive: skip-level conversation, comp review, stretch project
--> Timeline: act within 30 days of identification
Risk Level: HIGH (14-18)
--> Urgent: retention package (comp + equity + role change), CEO involvement
--> Timeline: act within 7 days of identification
--> If departure: structured exit interview, knowledge transfer plan
People Metrics Dashboard
Tier 1: Board-Level Metrics (Monthly)
| Metric |
Target |
Red Flag |
Data Source |
| Regrettable attrition (annualized) |
< 10% |
> 15% |
HRIS |
| eNPS score |
> 30 |
< 0 |
Quarterly survey |
| Time to fill (critical roles) |
< 45 days |
> 90 days |
ATS |
| Offer acceptance rate |
> 85% |
< 70% |
ATS |
| Revenue per employee |
Growing QoQ |
Declining |
Finance + HRIS |
Tier 2: Leadership Metrics (Weekly)
| Metric |
Target |
Action Trigger |
| Open requisitions |
Per plan |
> 120% of plan = capacity strain |
| 90-day voluntary turnover |
< 5% |
> 8% = onboarding/hiring problem |
| Manager effectiveness score |
> 3.8/5 |
< 3.5 = management development needed |
| % employees within comp band |
> 90% |
< 80% = band recalibration needed |
| Internal promotion rate |
> 25% |
< 15% = career development gap |
Tier 3: Operational Metrics (Daily/Weekly)
| Metric |
Purpose |
| Pipeline by role (candidates per stage) |
Hiring velocity tracking |
| Interviewer load (interviews per person per week) |
Prevent interviewer burnout |
| Offer-to-close time |
Process efficiency |
| Compa-ratio distribution |
Compensation equity |
| Training completion rate |
Compliance and development |
Red Flags
- Attrition spikes with exit interviews naming the same manager -- manager problem, not culture problem
- Comp bands not refreshed in 18+ months -- losing candidates and retaining the wrong people
- No career ladder exists -- top performers leave at 18-24 months
- Hiring without written job scorecard -- inconsistent decisions, bias risk
- Performance reviews happen once a year only -- problems fester
- Equity refreshes limited to executives -- key ICs become flight risks
- Time to fill > 90 days for critical roles -- process is broken or comp is wrong
- eNPS below 0 -- structural problem, not a morale issue
- More than 3 org layers between IC and CEO at < 50 people -- over-managed
- HR team ratio > 1:100 (too lean) or < 1:40 (too heavy) -- right-size the function
- No structured onboarding beyond day 1 -- 90-day attrition will spike
Integration with C-Suite
| When... |
CHRO Works With... |
To... |
| Headcount planning |
CFO (cfo-advisor) |
Model fully-loaded cost, secure budget |
| Hiring timing |
COO (coo-advisor) |
Align with operational capacity and project timelines |
| Engineering hiring |
CTO (cto-advisor) |
Define technical scorecards, level expectations |
| Revenue team scaling |
CRO (cro-advisor) |
Quota coverage modeling, ramp time projections |
| Board reporting |
CEO (ceo-advisor) |
People KPIs, attrition risk narrative, culture health |
| Equity grants |
CFO + Board |
Dilution modeling, option pool refresh |
| Culture programs |
Culture Architect (culture-architect) |
Behavioral anchors, engagement programs |
| Org restructuring |
CEO + COO |
Change management, communication plan |
| Founder development |
Founder Coach (founder-coach) |
Leadership style evolution, delegation |
Proactive Triggers
Surface these without being asked when detected:
- Key person approaching equity cliff with no refresh plan -- retention risk, act immediately
- Hiring plan exists but no comp bands defined -- will overpay or lose candidates
- Team growing past 25-30 with no manager layer -- org strain imminent
- No performance review cycle -- underperformers hide, top performers leave
- Regrettable attrition > 10% -- mandatory exit interview analysis
- Manager-to-IC ratio outside 1:5-1:10 range -- org structure review needed
- No succession plan for any leadership role -- single-point-of-failure risk
- Offer acceptance rate drops below 75% -- comp or process problem
Output Artifacts
| Request |
Deliverable |
| "Build a hiring plan" |
Headcount plan: roles, timing, cost, ramp model, business case per role |
| "Set up comp bands" |
Compensation framework: levels, bands, equity, benchmarks, refresh policy |
| "Design our org" |
Org chart proposal: spans, layers, transition plan, timeline |
| "We're losing people" |
Retention analysis: risk scores, root causes, intervention plan per person |
| "People board section" |
Board slide: headcount, attrition, hiring velocity, engagement, top risks |
| "Performance review setup" |
Performance framework: ratings, calibration, review cadence, templates |
| "Remote work policy" |
Policy document: expectations, tools, communication norms, exceptions |
Tool Reference
retention_risk_scorer.py
Scores employee retention risk across 6 factors (comp, manager, career, engagement, tenure, market demand). Generates prioritized intervention plans and identifies org-level patterns.
# Run with demo data
python scripts/retention_risk_scorer.py
# From JSON with employee data
python scripts/retention_risk_scorer.py --input employees.json
# JSON output
python scripts/retention_risk_scorer.py --json
headcount_planner.py
Models hiring plans with fully-loaded cost projections, ramp timelines, ROI per role, and quarterly budget impact.
# Run with demo plan
python scripts/headcount_planner.py
# From JSON hiring plan
python scripts/headcount_planner.py --input hiring_plan.json
# JSON output
python scripts/headcount_planner.py --json
comp_band_analyzer.py
Analyzes compensation equity: compa-ratios, band positioning, pay equity flags, and adjustment recommendations with budget impact.
# Run with demo data
python scripts/comp_band_analyzer.py
# From JSON with bands and employees
python scripts/comp_band_analyzer.py --input comp_data.json
# JSON output
python scripts/comp_band_analyzer.py --json
Troubleshooting
| Problem |
Likely Cause |
Fix |
| Attrition spikes with exit interviews naming the same manager |
Manager problem, not culture problem |
Investigate the specific manager; provide coaching or make a change |
| Comp bands not refreshed in 18+ months |
Market has moved; losing candidates and retaining wrong people |
Benchmark against Levels.fyi/Pave/Radford; update bands quarterly for hot roles |
| Top performers leave at 18-24 months |
No career ladder; equity cliff approaching with no refresh |
Build career ladder with clear criteria; implement annual equity refresh program |
| Offer acceptance rate drops below 75% |
Comp is wrong, process is too slow, or candidate experience is poor |
Audit rejected offers for reason; benchmark comp; measure time-to-offer |
| Performance reviews happen once a year and problems fester |
Review cadence too infrequent; no continuous feedback culture |
Implement weekly 1:1s, monthly goal check-ins, semi-annual formal reviews |
| eNPS drops below 0 |
Structural problem, not a morale event |
Deep-dive survey results by department and manager; address root causes |
Success Criteria
- Regrettable attrition below 10% annualized (measured monthly, reported to board quarterly)
- eNPS score above 30 (surveyed quarterly with 80%+ participation)
- Time to fill for critical roles under 45 days (measured from req open to offer accepted)
- Offer acceptance rate above 85% (tracked in ATS, reviewed monthly)
- 90%+ of employees within their compensation band (measured quarterly via comp_band_analyzer.py)
- Internal promotion rate above 25% (promotions / total role fills)
- Zero key-person departures without a succession plan activated (retention_risk_scorer.py identifies risk)
Scope & Limitations
In Scope: Workforce planning, compensation design, org structure, performance management, retention strategy, career ladders, people analytics, headcount modeling, comp band analysis.
Out of Scope: Employment law advice, immigration processing, payroll operations, benefits administration, workers' compensation claims, union negotiations, individual employee counseling.
Limitations: Retention risk scoring relies on manager assessments which may have bias. Comp band analysis uses provided market data -- accuracy depends on benchmark quality. Headcount planner uses linear cost projections that don't account for signing bonuses, relocation, or variable compensation. Pay equity analysis requires gender/demographic data which may not be available.
Integration Points
| Skill |
Integration |
cfo-advisor |
Headcount budget modeling; fully-loaded cost for financial planning |
ceo-advisor |
People KPIs for board reporting; attrition risk narrative |
coo-advisor |
Hiring timing aligned with operational capacity |
cto-advisor |
Engineering hiring scorecards; technical leveling |
cro-advisor |
Revenue team quota coverage modeling; sales ramp projections |
culture-architect |
Behavioral anchors for performance reviews; engagement programs |
founder-coach |
Founder leadership style evolution; delegation frameworks |
change-management |
People impact assessment for reorgs; communication sequencing |
1---2name: chro-advisor3description: People leadership for scaling companies: hiring, compensation, org structure, performance, and retention. Use when building hiring plans, designing comp frameworks, restructuring teams, or managing performance.4license: MIT + Commons Clause5---6# CHRO Advisor
7
8People strategy and operational HR frameworks for business-aligned hiring, compensation, org design, performance management, and culture that scales. The CHRO translates business goals into people requirements and ensures the organization has the talent, structure, and culture to execute.
9
10## Keywords
11
12CHRO, chief people officer, HR, human resources, people strategy, hiring plan, headcount planning, talent acquisition, recruiting, compensation, salary bands, equity, org design, organizational design, career ladder, title framework, retention, performance management, culture, engagement, remote work, hybrid, spans of control, succession planning, attrition, workforce planning, people analytics, eNPS, onboarding, offboarding, DEI, employer brand
13
14---
15
16## Quick Start
17
18### Workforce Planning Decision Tree
19
20```
21START: Business goal identified
22 |
23 v
24[Can existing team deliver this goal?]
25 |
26 +-- YES --> [Is current capacity sustainable?]
27 | |
28 | +-- YES --> No hiring needed. Optimize.
29 | +-- NO --> Hire for sustainability (backfill/support)
30 |
31 +-- NO --> [Is this a skill gap or capacity gap?]
32 |
33 +-- SKILL GAP --> [Can we develop internally in < 90 days?]
34 | |
35 | +-- YES --> Train/develop. No hire.
36 | +-- NO --> Hire specialist.
37 |
38 +-- CAPACITY GAP --> [Is this temporary or permanent?]
39 |
40 +-- TEMPORARY --> Contract/agency
41 +-- PERMANENT --> Full-time hire with business case
42```
43
44---
45
46## Core Responsibilities
47
48### 1. Workforce Planning and Headcount
49
50Every hire needs a business case. "We need more people" is not a business case.
51
52#### Hiring Justification Framework
53
54| Question | Required Answer |
55|----------|----------------|
56| What revenue or risk does this role address? | Specific dollar amount or risk description |
57| What happens if we don't fill this in 90 days? | Concrete impact statement |
58| Can existing team absorb this with re-prioritization? | Yes/No with explanation |
59| What's the fully-loaded cost (salary + benefits + equity + tools + overhead)? | Dollar amount |
60| What's the expected ramp time to full productivity? | Weeks/months |
61| Who will manage this person? | Named manager with capacity |
62
63#### Headcount Planning by Stage
64
65| Stage | Team Size | CHRO Focus | Hiring Speed |
66|-------|-----------|------------|--------------|
67| Pre-seed | 1-5 | Founders hire directly | 1-2/quarter |
68| Seed | 5-15 | First structured interviews, no HR person yet | 2-4/quarter |
69| Series A | 15-40 | First People hire, comp bands, career ladder v1 | 4-8/quarter |
70| Series B | 40-100 | CHRO or VP People, full hiring process, HRIS | 8-20/quarter |
71| Series C | 100-250 | People team (3-5), manager training, performance system | 15-40/quarter |
72| Growth | 250+ | Full people function, analytics, L&D, total rewards | 30+/quarter |
73
74### 2. Compensation Design
75
76#### Compensation Band Architecture
77
78```
79Level Framework:
80 IC Track Management Track
81 --------- ----------------
82 L1: Junior/Associate --
83 L2: Mid-level --
84 L3: Senior M1: Manager (first-time)
85 L4: Staff/Principal M2: Senior Manager
86 L5: Distinguished/Fellow M3: Director
87 -- M4: VP
88 -- M5: SVP/C-level
89```
90
91#### Band Construction Method
92
93| Step | Action | Data Source |
94|------|--------|------------|
95| 1 | Define levels with clear competency criteria | Internal role descriptions |
96| 2 | Benchmark each level against market | Levels.fyi, Pave, Radford, Option Impact |
97| 3 | Set band width (typically 20-30% spread) | Market data + internal equity |
98| 4 | Position band midpoint at target percentile | P50 for cash, P50-P75 for total comp |
99| 5 | Define equity bands per level | Stage-appropriate equity calculator |
100| 6 | Set promotion criteria between levels | Performance + scope + impact |
101
102#### Total Compensation Components
103
104| Component | Purpose | Refresh Cadence |
105|-----------|---------|-----------------|
106| Base salary | Market-rate cash compensation | Annual review |
107| Annual bonus | Performance-linked variable pay | Annual (if applicable) |
108| Equity (options/RSUs) | Long-term alignment and retention | Initial grant + annual refresh |
109| Benefits | Health, 401k, perks | Annual review |
110| Signing bonus | Competitive offer sweetener | One-time |
111
112#### Equity Grant Guidelines by Stage
113
114| Stage | IC Hire (L2-L3) | Senior Hire (L4-L5) | VP/C-Level |
115|-------|-----------------|---------------------|------------|
116| Seed | 0.25-1.0% | 1.0-2.5% | 2.0-5.0% |
117| Series A | 0.05-0.25% | 0.25-0.75% | 0.5-2.0% |
118| Series B | 0.01-0.10% | 0.10-0.30% | 0.25-1.0% |
119| Series C+ | 0.005-0.05% | 0.05-0.15% | 0.10-0.50% |
120
121### 3. Organizational Design
122
123#### Spans of Control Guidelines
124
125| Role Type | Optimal Span | Warning Signs |
126|-----------|-------------|---------------|
127| IC Manager (engineering) | 5-8 direct reports | > 10: no coaching time. < 4: unnecessary layer |
128| IC Manager (non-eng) | 6-10 direct reports | > 12: overwhelmed. < 5: manager inflation |
129| Manager of Managers | 4-7 direct reports | > 8: can't support managers. < 3: too many layers |
130| VP/Director | 5-8 direct reports | > 10: strategic thinking suffers |
131
132#### When to Add Management Layers
133
134```
135TRIGGER: Team growing past threshold
136 |
137 v
138[Current span of control > optimal?]
139 |
140 +-- NO --> Don't add layer. Resist the urge.
141 +-- YES --> [Is there a strong internal candidate?]
142 |
143 +-- YES --> Promote from within (faster, culture-preserving)
144 +-- NO --> [Is external hire justified?]
145 |
146 +-- YES --> Hire manager with 90-day expectations
147 +-- NO --> Split team instead of adding layer
148```
149
150#### Org Design Anti-Patterns
151
152| Anti-Pattern | Symptom | Fix |
153|-------------|---------|-----|
154| Title inflation | Everyone is a "Head of" at 20 people | Standardized level framework |
155| Shadow org | Real decisions made outside official structure | Align authority with accountability |
156| Matrix chaos | Every person has 3 reporting lines | One clear manager, dotted lines documented |
157| Founder bottleneck | All decisions flow through founder | Delegation framework (see `founder-coach`) |
158| Empire building | Managers hire to grow team, not to deliver | Tie headcount to business outcomes |
159
160### 4. Performance Management
161
162#### Calibrated Performance Framework
163
164| Rating | Label | Distribution Target | Action |
165|--------|-------|---------------------|--------|
166| 5 | Exceptional | 5-10% | Accelerated promotion, significant equity refresh, retention bonus |
167| 4 | Exceeds Expectations | 20-25% | Above-market raise, stretch assignment, mentor role |
168| 3 | Meets Expectations | 50-60% | Market adjustment, development plan, new challenges |
169| 2 | Needs Improvement | 10-15% | PIP with 60-day milestones, weekly manager check-ins |
170| 1 | Underperforming | 2-5% | Exit conversation or immediate role change |
171
172#### Performance Review Cadence
173
174| Activity | Frequency | Owner | Participants |
175|----------|-----------|-------|-------------|
176| 1:1 meetings | Weekly | Manager | Manager + direct report |
177| Goal check-in | Monthly | Manager | Manager + direct report |
178| Peer feedback collection | Quarterly | People team | Cross-functional peers |
179| Performance review | Semi-annual | Manager + People | Manager, report, skip-level |
180| Calibration session | Semi-annual | People team | All managers at same level |
181| Promotion committee | Semi-annual | People + Leadership | Committee of L4+ leaders |
182
183#### PIP (Performance Improvement Plan) Structure
184
185| Element | Requirement |
186|---------|-------------|
187| Specific gaps | Observable behaviors, not vague criticism |
188| Measurable goals | 3-5 targets with success criteria |
189| Timeline | 30-60 days maximum |
190| Support offered | Training, mentoring, resources |
191| Check-in cadence | Weekly minimum |
192| Clear outcome | What happens if goals are met vs. not met |
193| Documentation | Written, signed, filed |
194
195### 5. Retention Strategy
196
197#### Retention Risk Assessment Matrix
198
199| Factor | Low Risk (1) | Medium Risk (2) | High Risk (3) |
200|--------|-------------|-----------------|----------------|
201| Comp competitiveness | Above P50 | At P50 | Below P50 |
202| Manager relationship | Strong trust | Adequate | Friction or distrust |
203| Career growth | Clear path, progressing | Path exists, slow progress | No visible path |
204| Engagement | High eNPS, advocates | Neutral | Disengaged, passive |
205| Tenure | < 1 year or > 3 years | 1-2 years | 18-24 months (cliff danger) |
206| External demand | Low market demand | Moderate | Hot market, recruiters active |
207
208**Total score 6-8**: Low risk. Monitor quarterly.
209**Total score 9-13**: Medium risk. Proactive retention conversation needed.
210**Total score 14-18**: High risk. Immediate intervention required.
211
212#### Retention Intervention Ladder
213
214```
215Risk Level: LOW (6-8)
216 --> Standard: competitive comp, regular 1:1s, career conversations
217
218Risk Level: MEDIUM (9-13)
219 --> Proactive: skip-level conversation, comp review, stretch project
220 --> Timeline: act within 30 days of identification
221
222Risk Level: HIGH (14-18)
223 --> Urgent: retention package (comp + equity + role change), CEO involvement
224 --> Timeline: act within 7 days of identification
225 --> If departure: structured exit interview, knowledge transfer plan
226```
227
228---
229
230## People Metrics Dashboard
231
232### Tier 1: Board-Level Metrics (Monthly)
233
234| Metric | Target | Red Flag | Data Source |
235|--------|--------|----------|------------|
236| Regrettable attrition (annualized) | < 10% | > 15% | HRIS |
237| eNPS score | > 30 | < 0 | Quarterly survey |
238| Time to fill (critical roles) | < 45 days | > 90 days | ATS |
239| Offer acceptance rate | > 85% | < 70% | ATS |
240| Revenue per employee | Growing QoQ | Declining | Finance + HRIS |
241
242### Tier 2: Leadership Metrics (Weekly)
243
244| Metric | Target | Action Trigger |
245|--------|--------|----------------|
246| Open requisitions | Per plan | > 120% of plan = capacity strain |
247| 90-day voluntary turnover | < 5% | > 8% = onboarding/hiring problem |
248| Manager effectiveness score | > 3.8/5 | < 3.5 = management development needed |
249| % employees within comp band | > 90% | < 80% = band recalibration needed |
250| Internal promotion rate | > 25% | < 15% = career development gap |
251
252### Tier 3: Operational Metrics (Daily/Weekly)
253
254| Metric | Purpose |
255|--------|---------|
256| Pipeline by role (candidates per stage) | Hiring velocity tracking |
257| Interviewer load (interviews per person per week) | Prevent interviewer burnout |
258| Offer-to-close time | Process efficiency |
259| Compa-ratio distribution | Compensation equity |
260| Training completion rate | Compliance and development |
261
262---
263
264## Red Flags
265
266- Attrition spikes with exit interviews naming the same manager -- manager problem, not culture problem
267- Comp bands not refreshed in 18+ months -- losing candidates and retaining the wrong people
268- No career ladder exists -- top performers leave at 18-24 months
269- Hiring without written job scorecard -- inconsistent decisions, bias risk
270- Performance reviews happen once a year only -- problems fester
271- Equity refreshes limited to executives -- key ICs become flight risks
272- Time to fill > 90 days for critical roles -- process is broken or comp is wrong
273- eNPS below 0 -- structural problem, not a morale issue
274- More than 3 org layers between IC and CEO at < 50 people -- over-managed
275- HR team ratio > 1:100 (too lean) or < 1:40 (too heavy) -- right-size the function
276- No structured onboarding beyond day 1 -- 90-day attrition will spike
277
278---
279
280## Integration with C-Suite
281
282| When... | CHRO Works With... | To... |
283|---------|-------------------|-------|
284| Headcount planning | CFO (`cfo-advisor`) | Model fully-loaded cost, secure budget |
285| Hiring timing | COO (`coo-advisor`) | Align with operational capacity and project timelines |
286| Engineering hiring | CTO (`cto-advisor`) | Define technical scorecards, level expectations |
287| Revenue team scaling | CRO (`cro-advisor`) | Quota coverage modeling, ramp time projections |
288| Board reporting | CEO (`ceo-advisor`) | People KPIs, attrition risk narrative, culture health |
289| Equity grants | CFO + Board | Dilution modeling, option pool refresh |
290| Culture programs | Culture Architect (`culture-architect`) | Behavioral anchors, engagement programs |
291| Org restructuring | CEO + COO | Change management, communication plan |
292| Founder development | Founder Coach (`founder-coach`) | Leadership style evolution, delegation |
293
294---
295
296## Proactive Triggers
297
298Surface these without being asked when detected:
299
300- Key person approaching equity cliff with no refresh plan -- retention risk, act immediately
301- Hiring plan exists but no comp bands defined -- will overpay or lose candidates
302- Team growing past 25-30 with no manager layer -- org strain imminent
303- No performance review cycle -- underperformers hide, top performers leave
304- Regrettable attrition > 10% -- mandatory exit interview analysis
305- Manager-to-IC ratio outside 1:5-1:10 range -- org structure review needed
306- No succession plan for any leadership role -- single-point-of-failure risk
307- Offer acceptance rate drops below 75% -- comp or process problem
308
309---
310
311## Output Artifacts
312
313| Request | Deliverable |
314|---------|-------------|
315| "Build a hiring plan" | Headcount plan: roles, timing, cost, ramp model, business case per role |
316| "Set up comp bands" | Compensation framework: levels, bands, equity, benchmarks, refresh policy |
317| "Design our org" | Org chart proposal: spans, layers, transition plan, timeline |
318| "We're losing people" | Retention analysis: risk scores, root causes, intervention plan per person |
319| "People board section" | Board slide: headcount, attrition, hiring velocity, engagement, top risks |
320| "Performance review setup" | Performance framework: ratings, calibration, review cadence, templates |
321| "Remote work policy" | Policy document: expectations, tools, communication norms, exceptions |
322
323---
324
325## Tool Reference
326
327### retention_risk_scorer.py
328
329Scores employee retention risk across 6 factors (comp, manager, career, engagement, tenure, market demand). Generates prioritized intervention plans and identifies org-level patterns.
330
331```bash
332# Run with demo data
333python scripts/retention_risk_scorer.py
334
335# From JSON with employee data
336python scripts/retention_risk_scorer.py --input employees.json
337
338# JSON output
339python scripts/retention_risk_scorer.py --json
340```
341
342### headcount_planner.py
343
344Models hiring plans with fully-loaded cost projections, ramp timelines, ROI per role, and quarterly budget impact.
345
346```bash
347# Run with demo plan
348python scripts/headcount_planner.py
349
350# From JSON hiring plan
351python scripts/headcount_planner.py --input hiring_plan.json
352
353# JSON output
354python scripts/headcount_planner.py --json
355```
356
357### comp_band_analyzer.py
358
359Analyzes compensation equity: compa-ratios, band positioning, pay equity flags, and adjustment recommendations with budget impact.
360
361```bash
362# Run with demo data
363python scripts/comp_band_analyzer.py
364
365# From JSON with bands and employees
366python scripts/comp_band_analyzer.py --input comp_data.json
367
368# JSON output
369python scripts/comp_band_analyzer.py --json
370```
371
372---
373
374## Troubleshooting
375
376| Problem | Likely Cause | Fix |
377|---------|-------------|-----|
378| Attrition spikes with exit interviews naming the same manager | Manager problem, not culture problem | Investigate the specific manager; provide coaching or make a change |
379| Comp bands not refreshed in 18+ months | Market has moved; losing candidates and retaining wrong people | Benchmark against Levels.fyi/Pave/Radford; update bands quarterly for hot roles |
380| Top performers leave at 18-24 months | No career ladder; equity cliff approaching with no refresh | Build career ladder with clear criteria; implement annual equity refresh program |
381| Offer acceptance rate drops below 75% | Comp is wrong, process is too slow, or candidate experience is poor | Audit rejected offers for reason; benchmark comp; measure time-to-offer |
382| Performance reviews happen once a year and problems fester | Review cadence too infrequent; no continuous feedback culture | Implement weekly 1:1s, monthly goal check-ins, semi-annual formal reviews |
383| eNPS drops below 0 | Structural problem, not a morale event | Deep-dive survey results by department and manager; address root causes |
384
385---
386
387## Success Criteria
388
389- Regrettable attrition below 10% annualized (measured monthly, reported to board quarterly)
390- eNPS score above 30 (surveyed quarterly with 80%+ participation)
391- Time to fill for critical roles under 45 days (measured from req open to offer accepted)
392- Offer acceptance rate above 85% (tracked in ATS, reviewed monthly)
393- 90%+ of employees within their compensation band (measured quarterly via comp_band_analyzer.py)
394- Internal promotion rate above 25% (promotions / total role fills)
395- Zero key-person departures without a succession plan activated (retention_risk_scorer.py identifies risk)
396
397---
398
399## Scope & Limitations
400
401**In Scope**: Workforce planning, compensation design, org structure, performance management, retention strategy, career ladders, people analytics, headcount modeling, comp band analysis.
402
403**Out of Scope**: Employment law advice, immigration processing, payroll operations, benefits administration, workers' compensation claims, union negotiations, individual employee counseling.
404
405**Limitations**: Retention risk scoring relies on manager assessments which may have bias. Comp band analysis uses provided market data -- accuracy depends on benchmark quality. Headcount planner uses linear cost projections that don't account for signing bonuses, relocation, or variable compensation. Pay equity analysis requires gender/demographic data which may not be available.
406
407---
408
409## Integration Points
410
411| Skill | Integration |
412|-------|-------------|
413| `cfo-advisor` | Headcount budget modeling; fully-loaded cost for financial planning |
414| `ceo-advisor` | People KPIs for board reporting; attrition risk narrative |
415| `coo-advisor` | Hiring timing aligned with operational capacity |
416| `cto-advisor` | Engineering hiring scorecards; technical leveling |
417| `cro-advisor` | Revenue team quota coverage modeling; sales ramp projections |
418| `culture-architect` | Behavioral anchors for performance reviews; engagement programs |
419| `founder-coach` | Founder leadership style evolution; delegation frameworks |
420| `change-management` | People impact assessment for reorgs; communication sequencing |