Is 2.9% and 6.8% acceptable or even 'good' levels, even for the tech industry? I'm not quite sure. A 6.8% performance-related quit/termination seems pretty high from my limited anecdotal experience.
Edit: now that I'm thinking about it, I don't think I worked at a tech company where people were fired/asked to resign more than 2.5x than those that resigned on their own.
2.9% would be excellent if sustained. It would correspond to keeping a significant majority of the employees you want to keep for more than 10 years. That's generally quite rare.
I'm less clear on how to assess the 6.8%. It seems somewhat significant, though if you're hiring many people, that's a period where you might expect churn, as some of them don't work out.
Of course, you can't extrapolate any of this, as 2023 was a year when employees would be very averse to moving, and it was also a year when many companies were coming off of previous hiring sprees. So expect the 2.9% to eventually increase.
> Is 2.9% and 6.8% acceptable or even 'good' levels, even for the tech industry?
I would put 2.9% at the very good to low level. It suggests 100% turnover every 33 years, which is fine, especially for the tech industry.
6.8% for performance strikes me as an indicator of very bad hiring and/or onboarding. A charitable view would be that many years of bad hiring got dumped in one year (so each year only had a small % of bad hires), but I wonder if that was the actual case.
"Non-regrettable" just means the company wasn't too sad to see them go, not that they were necessarily forced out. They could've been a poor performer that found another job on their own, and they wouldn't want to rehire them.
Edit: now that I'm thinking about it, I don't think I worked at a tech company where people were fired/asked to resign more than 2.5x than those that resigned on their own.