I'd argue that telling someone "their new job was to look for a new job" is similar emotionally to a proper firing. Then what time contraint to you give this person? Someone will abuse the system.
I worked at a company who had an effective "no fire" policy, while it wasn't official, they just never fired to my knowledge. It was very frustrating being a competent employee there because the staff knew they wouldn't be fired and did very poor work--like the one person doing all the work in the school group.
Policies like this, while sounding pretty and caring, actually create poor workplace culture and punish your best employees.
It sounds like maybe that company didn't do the upfront work required to make sure - or at least increase the likelihood - that they were making a good hire in the first place. Or maybe they didn't have good employee development in place once the employees are hired. Having said that though, my knee-jerk reaction is to be skeptical of no-hire policies. For the company in the article it seems to work. I'm just skeptical that most companies would have the will/capability to truly make it work.
Even a perfect hiring process won't completely eliminate bad employees. Just because someone was good when you hired them doesn't mean they'll continue to be. Maybe your needs change and they are unwilling to cope effectively. Maybe they develop a drug problem. Maybe they burn out. Maybe they just stop caring. Sadly, a good employee is not necessarily good forever.
I worked at a company who had an effective "no fire" policy, while it wasn't official, they just never fired to my knowledge. It was very frustrating being a competent employee there because the staff knew they wouldn't be fired and did very poor work--like the one person doing all the work in the school group.
Policies like this, while sounding pretty and caring, actually create poor workplace culture and punish your best employees.