Both ends are cross-functional processes that fail at the handoffs. The failures are predictable,\nwhich means they are preventable by design rather than by diligence.
\nEverything procurable in advance should be ready: accounts, hardware, access, a first assignment, and\na named person responsible for the human side. A first day spent waiting for a laptop is a permanent\nfirst impression, and it is entirely a coordination failure.
\nThe identity and equipment steps are executed by\nit-operations:identity-lifecycle-administration and it-operations:endpoint-management; access\npolicy — what a role should be entitled to — belongs to security:access-and-identity. This skill\nowns the sequence and whether it actually completed.
Separate the three things a new person is learning, because they need different support:
\nThe third is the one nobody plans and the one that most determines how quickly someone becomes\nuseful. Make introductions explicit assignments rather than leaving them to chance and extroversion.
\nGive real work early, scoped to succeed. A meaningful contribution in the first fortnight does more\nfor confidence and belonging than any amount of orientation material.
\nCheck in at deliberate intervals — a week, a month, a quarter — with the question phrased so problems\ncan surface. \"What has been more confusing than it should be?\" gets an answer; \"how's it going?\" does\nnot.
\nKnowledge capture has to precede the access cutoff, which means starting on the day notice is given,\nnot the day before departure.
\nPrioritize what is genuinely undocumented and only in one head: the systems they alone maintain, the\nrelationships they hold, the decisions whose reasoning exists nowhere. Ask directly — \"what will\nbreak, and who will not know why?\" — because they know and will usually say.
\nThen run the mechanical steps as a checklist with an owner: access revoked across every system\nincluding those outside single sign-on, assets returned, delegations and approvals reassigned, and\nhandover confirmed by the person receiving it rather than by the person leaving.
\nExit conversations produce candid information that is unavailable any other way, and it is routinely\ncollected and never used. Aggregate themes over time and look by manager and by team; a single exit\nis an anecdote, a pattern across four is a finding for people:chief-human-resources-officer.