_1788250453471.jpg&w=3840&q=75)
Imagine an employee who has been working at the same company for five years. During that time, they have taken on greater responsibilities, trained new colleagues, assumed some of the duties of employees who left, and successfully completed several projects that were important to the company.
Over the past two years, they have brought up the topic of a salary increase several times. The answer has always been similar: there is currently no room in the budget, the timing is not ideal, we will discuss it again in a few months.
And they kept working…
At some point, they receive an offer from another company. A better salary, a new position, and an opportunity for professional growth. They accept the offer and inform their employer that they are leaving.
The next day, they are invited to a meeting.
Suddenly, there is room in the budget!
The company offers them a 20% raise, a new position, and the option to work from home for part of the week. In practice, within 24 hours, all the things that had supposedly been impossible for the previous two years suddenly become possible.
At that moment, the employee is no longer facing only a financial decision. A much more important question arises: If the company believed I was worth this much, why did I have to resign for them to recognize it?
This is exactly where the problem with counteroffers begins.
From the employer's perspective, the reaction is perfectly logical. An experienced employee is leaving, and with them go valuable knowledge, client relationships, an understanding of internal processes, and years of experience. A new employee needs to be found and trained, and it will take time before they can fully take over the role.
Suddenly, a salary increase seems much cheaper than replacing the employee.
From the employee's perspective, however, the situation looks different. They do not hear only: “We want you to stay.” They may also hear something else: “We could have offered you this before, but we chose not to.”
And that is exactly why salary is often not the real reason someone decides to leave. Sometimes, it is simply the final confirmation that their contribution has gone unrecognized for too long.
An even bigger problem arises when other employees witness this situation. A colleague who has performed well for years receives significantly better conditions only after announcing their intention to leave. The message this can send to the rest of the team is dangerous: if you want the company to truly listen to you, you need to have an offer from somewhere else.
At that point, resignation stops being the final step and becomes a negotiation tool.
The company then enters a cycle in which the most attention is given to people who are prepared to leave, rather than to those who create value every day and simply have not reached that point yet.
A good reward and compensation system should work before an employee reaches the point of resignation. This does not mean that every employee should receive a raise every time they ask for one. It means that a company should recognize in time when a role has grown, when responsibilities have changed significantly, and when the value an employee creates is no longer reflected in the conditions they are offered.