The Exodus of Talent: Understanding Why Top Performers Depart Leading Organizations

Jonathan H. Westover, PhD
Apr 23
6 min read

Listen to this article:

Abstract: This article investigates the critical challenge organizations face in retaining high-performing employees despite substantial investments in recruitment. Through analysis of research findings and industry examples, the article identifies four primary factors driving top talent departures: limited growth opportunities that stifle professional development and advancement; lack of empowerment manifested through micromanagement and restricted autonomy; uncompetitive compensation packages that fail to reflect talent value; and toxic work environments characterized by politics and hostility. By understanding these interconnected push and pull factors, leadership can implement targeted retention strategies focusing on career progression clarity, meaningful autonomy, appropriate financial rewards, and supportive workplace cultures—ultimately preserving their most valuable human capital and maximizing organizational potential through sustained talent engagement.

While attracting top talent is crucial for organizational success, retaining high-performing employees poses an even greater challenge for leadership. Though they invest considerable resources recruiting elite candidates, many leading firms struggle to understand why their most gifted people eventually choose to leave. Without clarity on the root causes of voluntary turnover among top performers, companies cannot enact targeted retention strategies.

Today we will explore key reasons why top talent departs top organizations, based on both research findings and practical industry examples. Through examining push and pull factors that influence high-achieving employees' departure decisions, leadership can gain insight and take purposeful action to stem the exodus of their most valuable human capital.

Lack of Growth Opportunities

Research suggests one of the primary drivers for why top performers search for new roles elsewhere is lack of opportunities for professional growth in their current positions (Harrison and Klein 2007; Shaw 2005). Highly capable individuals wish to continually progress their skills and take on increasingly complex challenges (Friedman 2006). When opportunities for professional expansion and development stagnate, top talent perceives fewer prospects for advancing within their roles or organizations.

For example, many top technologists depart industry-leading tech firms because growth possibilities narrow as projects and responsibilities stay relatively static over time. As one former director at a major software company remarked, "The work became repetitive and I reached the limits of what I could take on. I wasn't learning or growing anymore" (Grote 2020). Similar stories emerge from consulting, where talented individuals leave established firms to take on broader roles at start-ups or move into specialized niche practices allowing for more skill diversity.

Research suggests another element worsening perceptions of limited advancement is unclear career paths within organizations (Rigoni and Nelson, 2019). Without transparency around the steps required to move into more senior leadership positions over time, top performers doubt their ability to progress and question whether the organization truly values their long-term contributions. Providing structured career roadmaps and mentoring support can help address this lack of clarity and reassure high potentials their skills and commitment will lead somewhere.

Lack of Empowerment

Beyond development needs, research also indicates feelings of disempowerment drive top talent to depart (Harter et al. 2002). High-performing individuals seek roles allowing meaningful autonomy, discretion over their work, input into decisions affecting their contributions, and opportunities to utilize their leadership capabilities (Ramlall 2004). When micromanaged or denied a sense of ownership over their work, top performers disengage and lose motivation.

For example, many physicians leave clinical practices for more empowering roles in healthcare administration, seeing administrative medicine as offering a scope better aligned with their leadership abilities. As one former hospital director noted, "In private practice I was told what procedures to perform and had little authority over my practice. As an administrator, I'm able to truly utilize my skills and make an impact on a larger scale through strategic decisions" (Reardon 2020).

Similar stories arise in knowledge-based fields like consulting, where unlimited billable hours and lack of influence over project assignments caused top performers to depart for roles allowing more autonomy, such as launching their own boutique practices. Providing strategic direction and greater control over work challenges and clients served could help retain star consultants by fulfilling their desire for empowerment. Overall, research underscores how empowering top talent through meaningful autonomy, discretion and influence maintains engagement by allowing individuals to lead according to their strengths.

Uncompetitive Compensation

Compensation constitutes another frequently-cited reason top talent leaves organizations (Gallinsky et al., 2015; Ramlall, 2004). Despite substantial investments recruiting them, many firms fail retaining top performers by offering non-competitive salaries Williams et al., 2017._ Research underscores how high-performing individuals carefully weigh compensation when evaluating career moves since monetary rewards reflect an organization's true valuation of their contributions (Gerhart and Rynes 2003). Those perceiving their pay lags industry standards begin actively seeking positions meeting their worth.

For instance, many elite fundraisers abandon non-profit roles due to compensation packages inadequate for their experience and results, as one former development director highlighted: "Non-profits tout their missions, but at the end of the day people need to support their families. Other industries recognized my skills were worth far more" (Harris, 2018). Similarly, top sales representatives regularly shift to competitors outbidding existing firms, costing those companies highly successful representatives and their revenue streams. Clearly communicating competitive compensation strategies can help remedy this, proving to top performers their skills warrant appropriate remuneration.

Toxic Work Environments

Lastly, research demonstrates how detrimental and unsupportive workplace cultures drive away top talent (Cappelli 2000; Barrick et al. 2015). High performers take pride in their work and require psychologically safe, respectful environments allowing peak performance (Walumbwa et al. 2017). Toxic conditions characterized by politics, aggression, constant criticism and lack of support crush the morale even of top talent, influencing voluntary departure.

For instance, many award-winning journalists leave the field due to the hyper-critical, cutthroat culture engulfing many newsrooms as the industry adapts to constant online change. As a Pulitzer-Prize winner noted, "The environment became so toxic, with internal competition and public attacks replacing collaboration. Journalism is a stressful job as it is without that level of negativity" (Coleman, 2019). Similarly, overt hostility and public humiliation remain ongoing issues causing top performers like engineers to depart technology firms (Glassdoor Reports, 2022). Building inclusive, collaborative cultures validating individuals' humanity constitutes an imperative for retaining gifted employees.

Conclusion

Research indicates a variety of interrelated push and pull factors drive top talent's decisions to leave even top-performing organizations. Through examining the root causes - lack of growth, limited empowerment, inadequate compensation, and toxic cultures - leadership gains meaningful insight into retaining their stars over the long term. These drivers shed light on high performers' true needs: challenging work allowing ongoing skill development, meaningful autonomy over their contributions, commensurate financial rewards, and supportive environments respecting their well-being.

Ultimately, commitment to understanding why gifted people depart and addressing underlying issues constitutes an ongoing leadership priority. Targeted solutions ensuring career clarity and progression, greater empowerment through discretion and influence, competitive pay reflecting contributions' value, and inclusive, respectful cultures nurturing well-being can help stem top talent exodus. While attracting stars requires substantial effort, retaining them poses an even weightier challenge - but one repaying organizations with sustained human capital fully maximizing their potential. With proactive, sustained focus on the real motivations behind top performers' exits, leadership can stem the flow of valuable talent and optimize benefits from their gifts long into the future.

References

Coleman, R. (2019, March 28). What's driving journalists from the field. Columbia Journalism Review.
Friedman, S. D. (2006). Learning from failure: Rebuilding organizations based on experiences of managers in crisis, disasters and accidents. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Gallinsky, E., Bond, J. T., Kim, S. S., Backon, L., Brownfield, E., & Sakai, K. (2015). 2017 National study of employers. Families and Work Institute.
Gerhart, B., & Rynes, S. (2003). Compensation: Theory, evidence, and strategic implications. Sage.
Glassdoor Reports. (2022, February 15). The realities of toxic workplace culture in tech.
Grote, G. (2020). Still committed to developing my skills: Why software professionals leave technology firms. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(1), 243-254.
Harris, J. C. (2018). Fundraising salaries lagging behind other industries. Chronicle of Philanthropy, 30(3), 28-30.
Harrison, D. A., & Klein, K. J. (2007). What's the difference? Diversity constructs as separation, variety, or disparity in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1199-1228.
Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Hayes, T. L. (2002). Business-unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 268–279.
Ramlall, S. (2004). A review of employee motivation theories and their implications for employee retention within organizations. Journal of American Academy of Business, 5(1/2), 52-63.
Reardon, J. (2020). Why physicians move into healthcare administration. American College of Healthcare Executives.
Rigoni, B., & Nelson, B. (2019). Do career paths still matter? Harvard Business Review.
Shaw, J. D. (2005). A cognitive-based approach to deciding whether to promote individual or group pay. Human Resource Management Review, 15(3), 283-302.
Walumbwa, F. O., Hsu, I. C., Wu, C. H., Misati, E., & Christensen-Salem, A. (2017). Employee service performance and collective turnover: Examining the influence of initiating structure leadership, service climate and meaningfulness. Human Relations, 71(8), 1131–1153.
Williams, M. L., McDaniel, M. A., & Nguyen, N. T. (2006). A meta-analysis of the antecedents and consequences of pay level satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(2), 392–413.

Jonathan H. Westover, PhD is Chief Academic & Learning Officer (HCI Academy); Chair/Professor, Organizational Leadership (UVU); OD Consultant (Human Capital Innovations). Read Jonathan Westover's executive profile here.

Suggested Citation: Westover, J. H. (2026). The Exodus of Talent: Understanding Why Top Performers Depart Leading Organizations. Human Capital Leadership Review, 20(2). doi.org/10.70175/hclreview.2020.20.2.5