Walmart executives seem to claim that the pay raise led to those outcomes; specifically, they talked to employees and realized that in order to get those outcomes they had to stop paying people the least they possibly could because why would anyone stay?
From the article:
> Rissa Pittman, then a store manager in Ponca City, Okla., said it was easier to staff her store after 2015 as wages improved and it became easier to train workers for promotions.
Walmart has been building a fairly robust EX program in the last few years, increasing associate engagement to drive CX and hence business outcomes.
It's likely not just pay, but a concerted effort across the board that drives results, but the pay increase is the one that calls WallStreet's attention.
I'd say it's higher, because it makes a lot of sense that if you pay your employees more they are more likely to stay around, put in more effort, not steal merchandise, etc. Not to mention it probably increases the pool of prospective employees you can choose from.
They raised worker pay which, unsurprisingly, did not make Wall Street happy in the short term.
However, over the next couple years there were multiple benefits:
- lower turnover
- less employee theft
- cleaner stores
- more same store sales
etc