Why High Performers Leave: Alec Rickard on Limitations, Not Salary

In a recent LinkedIn post, Alec Rickard explores a common misconception among leaders regarding employee retention, particularly concerning high performers. Rickard challenges the notion that salary is the primary driver for resignations, drawing from his own early leadership experiences where he initially attributed departures to compensation, only to find the reasons were far more nuanced.

Rickard highlights three instances from his first leadership role where talented individuals resigned within a six-month period. He reveals that in each case, the assumption that money was the issue proved incorrect. Instead, he identifies systemic limitations as the root cause.

“The first person left because every decision had to go through three approval layers; even minor ones.”

This example, as Rickard details, illustrates how bureaucratic hurdles and a lack of autonomy can stifle even the most capable employees. He further elaborates on the other two departures, noting one employee left after two years of unfulfilled promises regarding growth opportunities, and another departed due to a manager who consistently undermined their decisions.

The True Drivers of Departure: Limitations Over Compensation

Rickard argues that high performers are not typically driven away by a lack of money, but rather by the constraints placed upon them. He posits that these individuals are often seeking opportunities that match their capabilities and aspirations, and when these are blocked, they seek environments where they can thrive.

According to Rickard, high performers leave when they encounter specific limitations:

• They are ready for greater responsibility but are kept in junior roles.
• They are expected to achieve results but are not empowered to influence the decision-making process.
• They observe less capable colleagues advancing because they are perceived as safer or more patient.

Rickard emphasizes that effective retention strategies require leaders to look beyond stated desires and instead identify the invisible barriers that impede progress.

“If you want to retain high performers, don’t ask what they say they want. Look at what they’re blocked from doing.”

He urges leaders to investigate the recurring points of friction, the decisions their top talent cannot make, the ownership they lack, and the clarity of their future prospects within the organization.

The Silent Departure of High Performers

A critical insight Rickard shares is the tendency for high performers to avoid overt complaints. He notes that these individuals often adapt, exceed expectations, and buy time, rather than immediately voicing dissatisfaction.

“High performers rarely complain. They adapt. They overdeliver. They buy time. Until they stop waiting.”

This silent endurance, Rickard suggests, can mask underlying issues until it’s too late. The departure of such employees, he argues, is often a consequence of their scope and ownership being too restricted, signaling a lack of genuine growth. Rickard poses a pointed question to leaders:

Are Your Best People Growing or Just Being Contained?

Rickard concludes by stressing the importance of providing adequate scope and ownership, which are clear indicators of growth potential. He warns that if a high-performing employee is already operating beyond their current role’s limitations and the organization does not expand their responsibilities, another company inevitably will.

The core message from Rickard’s analysis is that fostering an environment where growth feels tangible and progress is not capped is essential for retaining top talent. Leaders must actively identify and remove limitations to ensure their best people continue to develop and contribute effectively.