Why organisations should let people leave so they can return stronger

A friend of mine, a top performer, decided to move to a new organisation for better pay and a higher position. After submitting his resignation, several senior leaders tried to persuade him to stay. When their efforts failed, the CEO himself pressured him. 

He agreed out of fear, but this decision hurt both his performance and reputation with the company's leadership. Ultimately, he was asked to leave a few months later.

Many organisations still see employee departures as a personal failure. Resignations often bring disappointment, apprehension, or silent resentment. While departures may appear polite on the surface, relationships often fade and connections are lost.

This mindset belongs to another era. Careers are rarely linear these days. Employees develop new skills, industries evolve, and ambition leads people in different directions. Leaving a job often reflects a desire for growth that the current organisation cannot yet offer, rather than a lack of loyalty. 

Organisations should move beyond the idea that loyalty is measured only by how long someone stays. Genuine commitment comes from supporting employees as they explore opportunities elsewhere and from hoping they return with valuable experience. Employers must understand that allowing people to leave with respect shows confidence, not weakness.

There is a famous quote by Richard Branson, "Train people well enough so they can leave; treat them well enough so they do not want to."

Employees who leave on good terms often become ambassadors, clients, collaborators, or may return as stronger leaders. They bring back knowledge and new skills that external hires often struggle to match. Forward-thinking organisations recognise this and build relationships that extend beyond the employment contract.

On the other hand, organisations that penalise employees for leaving send the message that growth only happens by staying. This creates a culture of control and fear, where employees may stay but lose motivation and engagement. As a result, innovation declines and trust erodes. Instead, organisations should foster a culture based on shared goals and values, encouraging employees to stay because they are genuinely invested in the mission.

Reputation is also at risk. Professional networks are more connected than ever, especially among senior leaders. How a company handles departing employees is often discussed in interviews and among peers. Organisations known for respectful departures attract talent, while those with negative reputations repel candidates. Tools such as Glassdoor ratings and referral rates can reveal how exit experiences affect reputation and future hiring. Tracking these metrics helps leaders manage and enhance their organisational standing.

This does not mean that organisations should celebrate departures or neglect future planning. Instead, they should manage resignations professionally by ensuring smooth handovers, communicating respectfully, and preserving goodwill.

The common advice, "never burn bridges with your previous employer," tells only part of the story. The other, less comfortable truth is that employers should not burn bridges with their people either.

Today's employee who resigns could be tomorrow's regulator. A junior executive who leaves might return as a business leader. And a colleague who departs now may later decide whether your organisation deserves a partnership or trust.

Strong organisations do not just ask, "Why are they leaving?" They also ask, "How can we ensure they remember us positively?"

Sometimes, the smartest talent decision is knowing when to let go gracefully.