Why exit interviews don’t work, according to a LinkedIn discussion.
Why exit interviews don’t work, according to a LinkedIn discussion.
A post from a career consultant describes how three senior developers left a company within a month. The HR manager conducted exit interviews with each one and reported «just life circumstances» and «no problems with the team, management, or processes.»
A month later, the consultant coincidentally met one of the departed employees at an event. After a few glasses of wine, the developer revealed the real reasons for leaving:
And yes, during the exit interview, this developer claimed to be moving to another city to live with parents.
The post author contacted the other departed developers and heard the same story. Importantly, «all three had been discussing these problems among themselves for months,» but didn’t say a word to HR.
«The problem with exit interviews is that people leave with the mindset of not burning bridges,» the post author believes. «They don’t want to damage relationships, fear that negative feedback will hurt their reputation, and think they might return someday. So they tell socially acceptable lies instead of the truth. HR records these nice formulations in their report. Management thinks everything is fine—no problems. And the real reasons for resignations remain hidden. Then the next three people leave for the same reasons as the previous ones.»
The author now conducts «stay interviews» every quarter «while people are still working.» «If someone hasn’t made the decision to leave yet, they tell the truth. Once they’ve submitted their resignation, it’s already too late and useless.»
The post sparked a discussion with nearly a hundred comments.
Many write that exit interviews don’t work, but it’s not the employees' fault—typically, they «signal problems» to management, often repeatedly, but aren’t heard, and the problems remain unsolved. And lying is normal—it’s how people minimize their personal risks.
Some commenters note that the decision to leave and the departure process require significant energy—so many are depleted and simply want to «leave peacefully,» without additional stress.
«The level of honesty [from an employee] depends not on the format, but on the degree of trust and sense of safety. Perhaps exit interviews should be conducted not with those who are leaving, but with those who stayed: 'Why do you think your colleague left?' In this format, other colleagues can share both the true reason for the person’s resignation and their own pain points without fearing consequences.»
Other commenters write that exit interviews work, but «not in a vacuum—in combination with other tools.»
We asked readers about their exit interview experiences.
«I only went through it once—at ItechArt in January 2022. They asked why I wanted to leave, what my expectations were and what the reality turned out to be, what were the pros and cons—and I honestly named several reasons for my decision. Then they asked follow-up questions based on my answers.»
«The atmosphere was quite friendly. I don’t know if they were genuinely interested or not, but it didn’t feel like they were just going through the motions.»
«At the end, they asked if, had it not been for this experience, would I have continued working with them and would I recommend the company to other developers I know. I don’t know if it had any effect or if they used my answers in their work, as I no longer worked there afterward and didn’t have acquaintances there.»
«I went through an exit interview a year ago at EPAM Lithuania. I don’t think it was particularly useful for anyone.»
«I left because I hit a glass ceiling, and I wanted to relocate from Lithuania to Poland—but didn’t get a reasonable offer from my employer.»
A company in Poland made me an offer that was 2,5× my salary, so I went to my resource manager with it. But EPAM countered with an offer to transfer me to Poland with a salary of about €1,800 net, even though they were paying me more before. Simply ridiculous!
«The interview was conducted by an HR person I’d never met before. I answered questions directly: I said I hit a ceiling—the project situation was such that advancement was impossible. A promotion, both in title and salary, was only possible with a very lucky project change.»
«At the time, I was in a senior position, and the project needed specifically a senior. There was already a lead—that’s it. If you wanted to become a lead, you had to look for another project. But at that moment, there were three or four available projects, all involving legacy systems, some Salesforce work, and similar things. Basically, I had zero desire to go there.»
«I also said that up to senior level, EPAM has a very good and clear track, but after that it becomes random, or you’re just a senior for 15 years with only ~$100 more per year. That’s sad.»
In the end, the HR person said: «It’s a shame we’re losing people like you because of this.» Maybe she says this to everyone, but it seemed sincere to me. After all, I had worked at EPAM for 6 years.
«I also spoke with my EPAM project manager, who complained that he wasn’t earning much either. He said he barely had enough for rent and basic expenses (and he lives in Wrocław), but that’s the current situation and we need to endure it.»
«Overall, I don’t understand this policy: the company declares huge revenues every year but keeps its workers on below-market salaries. Any initiative to advance beyond senior level runs into a skills matrix and 200 mandatory internal trainings that together would take about 15 years to complete. I was really disappointed with the company, to be honest.»
«Was my interview useful? Well, I think excerpts from the report were probably mentioned on some HR call. And that’s it. I’m sure they already knew everything I told them. But… that’s the policy.»
«In the end, two factors were decisive for me: the feeling of hitting a ceiling within EPAM Lithuania, and the laughable relocation offer to Poland.»
«I’ve gone through exit interviews twice at different companies (I don’t want to name them, but both were well-known at the time).»
«The first time was strange: an HR person invited me to talk. I told her why I was leaving—I was offered twice the salary at another place. But I also didn’t hide my thoughts about some problems in the company; she thanked me, and we parted ways.»
«The strange part was that the next day, a different HR person asked me to come to the meeting room. I was surprised: wow, they want to learn more. But no, it was supposed to be exactly the same conversation—starting from scratch. It turned out that the first woman’s last day was yesterday—and she left without submitting a report with my answers.»
«I told them again about the 2x offer at another company, but my enthusiasm had faded, and I didn’t want to talk about the problems anymore. They were obvious anyway. I asked if the previous HR person had gone through an exit interview herself and learned that she hadn’t. 'We know our department’s problems.' Yeah, sure! I wished them luck.»
«The second company is the one I left for. I was invited there through connections and was promised a great team where everyone was equal, and management wasn’t really management but colleagues like everyone else. Democracy, basically! And yes, there was democracy, but as the company grew, the form of governance gradually changed—leaders began showing more often that they were the bosses.»
Then I decided to leave. And in my interview, I honestly talked about the problems (honesty was valued in our team). Former colleagues later told me that my words didn’t please our bosses, and they shut down the exit interview practice.
«Since then, I’m convinced it’s more of a game than a tool: polite niceties and then everyone goes their separate ways, no one needs anything more. Everyone stays with their own perspective anyway.»
We also asked Marina Khomich—an HR director, ex-Viber and EPAM, and founder of the Recrucial recruiting agency—to share her thoughts on whether exit interviews are useful and how to apply them correctly.
Marina created an extensive piece for the devby blog. In short, for Belarus, exit interviews aren’t the norm but rather an exception. However, in companies that conduct them deliberately, they’re a very effective tool.
«It helps the company see itself through the eyes of a person who is already leaving and honestly call things by their proper names. And also—to end the relationship normally, not in an 'out of sight, out of mind' style.»
Here are a few more quotes:
«I worked at a company where such interviews were conducted using a structured template. For me, it was both a questionnaire and a conversation with a very professional colleague. I felt safe and understood that my answers wouldn’t just be filed away. Then they actually used this data: they reviewed processes, management approaches, conditions.»
«At other companies, it was more of an informal interview with a manager. No forms or systems, but with respect and normal dialogue. And that, at a minimum, left a pleasant impression—and sometimes that’s already a big result.»
«As an HR professional, I also conducted exit interviews and then reviewed them with management. In one case, after a series of complaints about a specific manager, leadership changed the team structure. In another, mass transitions to a competitor for higher salaries triggered the purchase of a salary survey and a review of compensation in teams that hadn’t been 'touched' for a long time.»
«In all these cases, the interviews worked not because 'we had a conversation,' but because the data went further up the chain.»
Marina advocates for such interviews because they provide valuable material that allows companies to:
She notes that it’s important to consider not only the number of departures but also who is leaving. If strong, in-demand employees are leaving the company, and the reasons in their stories are similar—this is a reason to look not at «loyalty» but at the management structure.
Sometimes data from exit interviews helps set the course for subsequent one-on-ones—to check whether this was one person’s view or if similar thoughts exist throughout the team.
According to our expert, the tool not only helps improve HR processes and management but also strengthens the employer brand. For more on how to do this and what mistakes companies make, read Marina Khomich’s upcoming blog on devby.
Share your opinions in the comments!