Sometimes the answer to a problem is so obvious that it makes a mockery of the problem itself. This is the case with a company I've come to know that's having a serious problem keeping its programming staff. Although the story and the scenario are old, hackneyed tales by now, I find it hard to understand how these seemingly intelligent, mature managers can be so reluctant to acknowledge the real source (and therefore the obvious solution) of their problem.

The information technology industry has become somewhat schizophrenic over the last year. The overwhelming growth of internet-related applications has spawned a complete culture in the business world that's almost in direct opposition to the older "legacy" technologies. Without discussing whether it's attributible to the nineties, to Generation-X, or whatever, this culture is marked by youth, creativity, a relaxed and laidback mindset, and a very noticible absence of the stodginess that is the calling card of its older counterpart.

Here we have a company that deals in a business that has not changed significantly in twenty years, and that probably won't see much change for the next twenty. The systems that are the heart of its operation were developed primarily during the first major wave of mainframe data processing in the seventies. These systems work, and the company makes a profit. Upper management sees this and is probably quite pleased, as they should be. But down in the lower echelons of the company's data processing departments, the programmers are jumping in droves from a ship that's not afire, not sinking, and looks like it will stay afloat for decades to come. The managers at that level are facing a growing crisis with what I believe is a significant misunderstanding of the cause.

When Lou Gerstner, CEO of IBM, changed his company's policy regarding dress codes to allow those employees "behind the scenes" to dress down on a daily basis, he was able to realize a tangible increase in productivity and company morale without spending a penny. Programmers at a very large oil company were all issued new workstations with internet access and encouraged to use it as a resource for problem solving. Again, productivity and morale increased signifantly. A communications company was moving to a new site and had to decide on workstation architecture for its programming staff. Using modular cubicles was the low cost option, and would have made the office set up quick and easy. But instead, they chose the more expensive option of building real offices, with doors and walls to the ceiling, with the sensitive and humane knowledge that cubicles are demeaning, repressive, and make people feel like cattle. Once again, their productivity rose, and employee turnaround plummeted.

At the company that's losing its employees, I'm sure you can guess what the environment's like: a strict suit-and-tie dress code, a nine-to-six (yes, six!) workday, and endless rows of tiny, impersonal cubicles. Only managers are allowed to use the internet - those least likely to profit from it. There's no music coming from anyone's desk because it would possibly intrude on others who are only a yard or so away. In every sense, this is an office of drones. Combine this atmosphere with the nature of the work and it's astonishing that anyone stays at all.

The managers believe that their staff is being lured away by the appeal of the worldwide web, new technology, and more interesting applications. I believe that they're correct in some cases. Old mainframe systems can be very boring, especially when the only thing going on is maintenance. But I assure you, this is not the only reason people are leaving; they're also leaving because the boredom of the applications is compounded by the stodginess and repressiveness of the environment. And this is what these managers seem to totally ignoring.

Until they acknowledge and address the fact that their workplace is counterproductive, repressive, dull, old-fashioned and antithetical, people will continue to depart. Will allowing people to dress down, use the worldwide web, work from home when reasonable, and have private offices keep everyone? No, I don't think so, but it will certainly keep many who might otherwise be on the fence.

The simple fact is that they must balance the boring nature of the work with an "exciting" environment in which to work. If they don't, sooner or later, the high turnover rate will become critical, and its effect will bubble up to the point where it impacts bottom line productivity and profits.

Consider this a prophesy.

Thanks for stopping by. I update this column once or twice each month to discuss various issues ranging from software development to the meaning of life. Please check back soon.