A valued employee hands in their resignation. They’ve been offered more money, a better title or a stronger opportunity elsewhere. In that moment, many employers make the same calculation: keeping an experienced person must be cheaper than replacing them.
So, they make a counteroffer. That response is common in New Zealand. The 2026 Robert Half Salary Guide found that 95% of employers extended a counteroffer to staff who received an external job offer in the past year. Only 1% said they never do, while another 4% simply hadn’t needed to.
On the surface, it makes sense. Recruiting is expensive, onboarding takes time and losing institutional knowledge hurts. For roles in finance, accounting and IT especially, retaining a proven performer can seem like the obvious choice.
But the numbers reveal a catch. Of the employees who received a counteroffer, half stayed with their employer. Yet 37% left within 12 months anyway, and another 8% rejected the counteroffer and left immediately. In other words, nearly half of counteroffers failed to deliver lasting retention.
That pattern isn’t unique to New Zealand. Research by the UK’s Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) found counteroffers had become widespread there too, yet only about 45 percent of employers believed they kept staff for a year or more.
By the time someone updates their CV, takes interviews and accepts another offer, the decision to leave is often about more than salary.
“Counteroffers can be effective in the short term, but they are rarely a complete solution,” says Megan Alexander, Managing Director at Robert Half.
“Compensation may influence an employee’s decision to stay initially, but long-term retention is usually driven by broader factors, such as career development, workplace culture and overall engagement.”
Employers themselves appear unconvinced. In the Robert Half survey, 43 percent viewed counteroffers as a valuable retention tool, 30 percent saw them as a short-term fix that rarely addresses deeper issues, and 24 percent considered them a necessary response to wage competition.
Many businesses are now trying to move the conversation earlier, before a resignation lands on the desk.
According to Robert Half, 48% of employers say they prioritise proactive retention strategies, while 28% still rely mainly on reactive counteroffers and 20% use a combination of both.
“Leading organisations are taking a longer-term approach by investing in career pathways, reviewing pay regularly, and maintaining clear communication to strengthen loyalty before employees are tempted to leave,” Alexander says.
For employees, the lesson is just as relevant. If the only thing that changes after resigning is the number on the payslip, the reasons for looking elsewhere may still be there.
For employers, the more useful question may not be “What will it take to keep this person today?” but “What would have made them want to stay in the first place?”
Because the evidence suggests many counteroffers don’t solve the problem, they simply postpone the goodbye.