When you provide your employees with professional development opportunities, you want to try to hold onto them afterwards, rather than having them run off to your competitors with skills and training for which you have paid. This makes sense.

But try not to overdo it.

When I was in the military, they paid for all of my education. All of it. Whether taking classes at night or going full time, every degree was paid for. Of course, I would like to think they got their money’s worth. After my bachelor’s degree, I had a 4-year commitment; following my master’s, I was required to stay in for 2-years; and after my PhD, they expected 5 years. Various professional education opportunities incurred additional commitments. All of that made perfect sense, given that they had invested money in me and expected a return.

When you provide professional education and training for your staff (and you should) you are perfectly within your rights to require them to stay with you for a period of time afterwards (and you should). We will leave the specifics to people who went to law school, but in general, it is useful to have them sign an agreement in advance that says what they are getting in terms of development, how long they need to stay with you afterwards, and what the penalty is if they choose to quit (e.g., repayment of the cost of the program). They need to know in advance what the commitment is so they make the decision with full information about the cost of that decision.

But…

While this is useful for people attending training classes or getting certifications or tuition reimbursement for a degree, it is not a good idea for people who are just doing their job. A case in point:

A friend of mine was recently planning on attending an international conference on behalf of his NGO. He would make presentations, distribute literature, meet people from similar groups, and perhaps chat up potential donors. He was told that, upon returning from the conference, he would be “bonded” to the organization for 6 months as a “repayment” for going to the conference.

Now, he was not going to a training program, but instead, he was going off to support the mission of his NGO. This is not something provided as a benefit for him; this is part of his job. The organization may be thinking, “we are paying for the plane ticket, and we want a return from that,” but the return should be what comes out of the conference, not simply six more months of this fellow’s employment. If the conference isn’t expected to provide a plane ticket’s worth of value, then the answer is simple: don’t send him.

With all the emphasis on professional development that is emerging in Asia, companies are justifiably concerned about holding onto their employees rather than having them develop skills at a company’s expense and then run off to a competitor. As you try to manage that concern, however, do not go overboard and take it so far that you are requiring employees to stay with you longer because they are doing exactly what you hired them to do. Also, do not view every benefit you provide as requiring some type of commitment; if you offer mass transit subsidies to your employees, for instance, that is simply part of the benefits package, not something worthy of a 6-month obligation every time they pick up a bus pass from you.

Look carefully at what you are offering your employees and what expectations you have. Find the appropriate ways to ensure a return on your investment in their development, without being unreasonable in the amount of time you require them to stay with you for receiving training. Don’t take that so far that they are signing on for obligations every time they turn around. If you ask for too much, you will find that no one volunteers for anything, and they are liable to leave you before they get roped into a commitment from which they cannot easily escape.