CLIAMS:
1) A method for employee attrition risk prediction and assessment, the method comprising:
operating at least one programmed processor to carry out steps of:
maintaining in at least one repository a data set categorizing plurality of predetermined attrition triggering parameters;
retrieving from the data set, quantitative information indexed for at least one attrition triggering parameter of the employee;
computing a weighted trigger score for each retrieved quantitative information, based at least in part on numeric value colligated with employee-organization association information and at least in part on a weight percentage accorded to said quantitative information, and assigning a corresponding risk flag thereto;
calculating a cumulative weighted trigger score by aggregating each weighted trigger score and assigning a cumulative flag to the corresponding quantitative information, said cumulative flag deduced from each of a priori assigned risk flag; and
outputting, based at least on the calculated cumulative weighted trigger score in combination with the cumulative risk flag, a prediction on likelihood of employee attrition.

2) The method of claim 1, wherein the attrition triggering parameters are selected from a group comprising “star attrition triggers parameters” or “non-star attrition triggers parameters.

3) The method of claim 2, wherein the star attrition trigger parameters and the non-star attrition trigger parameters comprise a non- exhaustive set of satisfaction and dissatisfaction factors including but not limited to current and prior annual rating combinations, employee rating disagreements, promotion status, salary variations, grievances and redressal, project allocation history, skill set, working hours, shift timings, commuting distance and time of travel, location, reward and compensation, recognition history, growth curve, previous employment history, learning initiative levels, transfer request, academic history, roles and responsibilities, designation or alignment with organization objectives.

4) The method of claim 1, wherein the data set maintained in the repository comprises an annotation in a plurality of tables indicative of employee attributes pertaining to the attrition triggering parameters along with the associated quantitative information with each employee being uniquely associated with a primary key.

5) The method of claim 1, wherein the weighted trigger score is computed for corresponding quantitative information associated with employee attrition trigger based at least in part on the numeric value colligated with employee-organization association information including but not limited to employee employment history, employee grade and designation, employee performance history or any combination thereof.

6) The method of claim 1, wherein the weight percentage is optionally accorded a predetermined default value, or are allowed to be manually adjusted by a user using a user interface thereby overriding said predetermined default values assigned to the weight percentage.

7) The method of claim 1, wherein the numeric value colligated with employee organization association information is multiplied with weight percentage to obtain the weighted trigger score.

8) The method of claim 1, wherein the risk flag is set red representative of high risk of attrition for a quantitative information associated with the star attrition trigger; set amber representative of less likely risk of attrition for a quantitative information corresponding to the star attrition trigger or the non-star attrition trigger; and set green representative of least likely risk of attrition for a quantitative information corresponding to the non-star attrition trigger.

9) The method of claim 1, wherein the cumulative risk flag is assigned based on each of the priori assigned risk flags, and is characterized in that for a set of risk flags comprising red, amber and green flags or a selective combination thereof, the cumulative risk flag is selected in a predetermined order of precedence with red being highest in order, followed by amber and then green.

10) A system for predicting likelihood of employee attrition, comprising:

at least one system processor;
at least one repository containing a data set categorizing plurality of predetermined attrition triggering parameters;
a communication interface coupled to the system processor, capable of connecting the system processor to the repository and a plurality of input units and display units to establish a communication link;
and a memory coupled to the system processor, the memory storing a portal logic executable by the processor causes the system to perform steps of:
retrieving from the data set, quantitative information indexed for at least one attrition triggering parameter of the employee;
computing a weighted trigger score for each retrieved quantitative information, based at least in part on numeric value colligated with employee-organization association information and at least in part on a weight percentage accorded to said quantitative information, and assigning a corresponding risk flag thereto;
calculating a cumulative weighted trigger score by aggregating each weighted trigger score and assigning a cumulative flag to the corresponding quantitative information, said cumulative flag deduced from each of a priori assigned risk flag; and
outputting on any of a plurality of display units, based on calculated cumulative weighted trigger score in combination with the cumulative risk flag, a prediction on likelihood of employee attrition.

11) The system of claim 10, wherein the attrition triggering parameters are selected from a group comprising of “star attrition triggers” and “non-star attrition triggers”, wherein “the star attrition triggers” and “the non-star attrition triggers” comprise a non- exhaustive set of satisfaction and dissatisfaction factors including but not limited to current and prior annual rating combinations, employee rating disagreements, promotion status, salary variations, grievances and redressal, project allocation history, skill set, working hours, shift timings, commuting distance and time of travel, location, reward and compensation, recognition history, growth curve, previous employment history, learning initiative levels, transfer request, academic history, roles and responsibilities, designation or alignment with organization objectives.

12) The system of claim 10, wherein repository comprises an annotation in a plurality of tables indicative of employee attributes pertaining to the attrition triggering parameters along with the associated quantitative information with each employee being uniquely associated with a primary key.

13) The system of claim 10, wherein the system computes the weighted trigger score for corresponding quantitative information associated with employee attrition trigger based at least in part on the numeric value colligated with employee-organization association information including but not limited to employee employment history, employee grade and designation, employee performance history or any combination thereof.

14) The system of claim 10, wherein the system optionally accords predetermined default value to the weight percentage, or allow user to manually adjust the weight percentage using the input unit thereby overriding said predetermined default values assigned to the weight percentage.

15) The system of claim 10, wherein the system sets the risk flag to red representative of high risk of attrition for a quantitative information associated with the star attrition trigger; to amber representative of less likely risk of attrition for a quantitative information corresponding to the star attrition trigger or the non-star attrition trigger; and to green representative of least likely risk of attrition for a quantitative information corresponding to the non-star attrition trigger.

16) The system of claim 10, wherein the cumulative risk flag is assigned based on each of the priori assigned risk flags, and is characterized in that for a set of risk flags comprising red, amber and green flags or a selective combination thereof, the cumulative risk flag is selected in a predetermined order of precedence with red being highest in order, followed by amber and then green.
,TagSPECI:As Attached