When rivals come fishing: What keeps talent from taking the bait

Corporate rivalry today doesn’t just play out in boardrooms or on trading screens. Increasingly, it unfolds in HR departments as companies raid one another for top performers. The practice of poaching is not new, but in recent years it has become sharper, more visible, and in some industries, relentless.

Technology and financial services have long battled over scarce skills, but the phenomenon has widened. Legal services, e-commerce, and even quick commerce are seeing rising instances of star performers being lured away. The motivations vary—sometimes it is about pay, sometimes about growth, and sometimes about prestige—but the effect on organisations left behind is always disruptive.

Sachin Alug, CEO of NLB Services, calls it a natural consequence of a hyper-competitive landscape. “Business rivalry, cut-throat competition, and the demand for incessant progress may result in competing firms scrambling for top performers,” he told People Matters. While companies often reach for legal shields such as non-compete clauses, Alug is clear that these are not enough on their own. In his words, “in the long term, the strategies ought to go beyond paperwork.”

Organisations can and do protect themselves with contracts—non-compete agreements, non-solicitation rules, confidentiality policies. They matter because they protect sensitive knowledge and prevent rivals from taking shortcuts. But they are not the same as retention. An employee with ambition, if disengaged, will eventually walk.

Alug is blunt about the limits of paperwork. He argues that what truly makes the difference is the everyday fabric of work: loyalty, trust, transparency, opportunities for growth, and a strong learning and development culture. Without that, contracts become little more than a delaying tactic.

Why People Leave

If money were the sole reason employees left, the problem would be simpler. Counter-offers would solve it, at least temporarily. But every HR leader knows the story: a high performer accepts a lucrative counter-offer, only to resign again six months later. The issue lies elsewhere—career stagnation, lack of recognition, weak culture, or a disconnect with leadership.

Prerna Upadhyay, Vice-President at Oxford International India, puts it plainly: “Talent movement is part of today’s competitive job market, often driven by compensation or growth opportunities.” Yet she insists organisations have room to respond constructively.

Her emphasis is on resilience. By giving people exposure across functions and encouraging continuous learning, teams become less dependent on a single star while individuals gain a broader sense of growth. Recognition, too, plays its part. As she noted, “when employees feel supported in their growth, they tend to stay invested and often become the strongest ambassadors in the wider talent community.”

When a star resigns, the reflex for many organisations is to throw money at the problem. Promotions are rushed through, pay packages are inflated, new titles created overnight. But this often masks, rather than addresses, the reasons someone wanted to leave in the first place.

Bhavna R. Tiwari, Executive Vice President and Head of Human Resources at UTI AMC, warns against this temptation. “When key talent is poached, organisations should avoid knee-jerk counter-offers and instead focus on the root causes of attrition,” she told People Matters.

She argues that retention cannot be about last-minute firefighting. What works instead is open dialogue, competitive but fair rewards, and most importantly, visible career pathways. Employees, she stresses, need to feel that their organisation is invested in their long-term development, not just scrambling to keep them for another year.

Tiwari also highlights something companies often neglect: succession planning. By identifying and nurturing future leaders early, organisations create continuity and reduce the shock when someone does leave. Alongside this, clear policies and awareness about confidentiality ensure that intellectual property remains protected even in times of churn.

The recent frenzy of AI talent raids among global tech giants is an extreme example of this battle. Companies have offered staggering sums to lure researchers away from rivals, sometimes with sign-on bonuses that dwarf annual salaries in other industries. Yet even in that space, money has not proven the only driver. Some who left for higher packages quickly returned to their old employers, citing alignment with mission and culture as the deciding factor.

So what should organisations actually do when faced with poaching? The leaders’ insights, combined with industry lessons, suggest a playbook built on seven pillars:

1. Anticipate vulnerability. Identify the individuals and teams most exposed to external offers—those in high-demand roles or on mission-critical projects.
   
   

2. Invest in leadership. Ensure managers not only set goals but also live behaviours employees value—recognition, fairness, and open communication.
   
   

3. Make growth visible. Career pathways and development opportunities should be transparent, not hidden behind annual reviews.
   
   

4. Celebrate contributions. Recognition should be authentic and regular, reinforcing that people matter as much as outcomes.
   
   

5. Encourage flexibility. Work environments that support balance and autonomy are harder for rivals to replicate.
   
   

6. Plan succession. Grooming future leaders prevents over-dependence on any single star and reassures employees about organisational stability.
   
   

7. Protect knowledge wisely. Policies on confidentiality and intellectual property are essential, but they should coexist with knowledge-sharing cultures that make expertise collective, not individual.
   
   

Poaching will not disappear. In fact, as industries evolve and new technologies create demand for specialised skills, the competition will intensify. But organisations can choose how they respond. They can rely on contracts and counter-offers, hoping to patch the cracks, or they can build cultures and careers so compelling that leaving feels like a step backwards.

As Tiwari summed up, it is ultimately about “giving people compelling reasons to stay.”