top of page
Search

You're Losing Top Talent...and It's Not Because of Performance

a Black man walks out of his work environment while a white male manager pleads with him to stay.

Years ago, I coached high school and college basketball. In the off-season, I would lead clinics for other coaches around the country, focused on bringing out the best in student-athletes. During these sessions, we’d observe scrimmages and skill challenges. Time after time, a player would execute a smart pass, make the right read, or sink a shot under pressure. But then a coach would voice disappointment, not because the play failed, but because the player’s form didn’t match a textbook shooting style or because they didn’t pass to the preferred teammate. Despite a good decision and a great result, the player's contribution was undervalued because it didn’t look the way their coach expected. As a result, that coach would end up losing top talent as players would transfer to another team where their new coach would appreciate them more fully.


This is a pattern I’ve since seen repeated in the workplace.


In many organizations, the value of an employee’s contribution is interpreted through a lens shaped by cultural expectations instead of actual performance data. Workplace success is often defined not by what gets done but by how comfortably the person doing it "fits in." The idea of professionalism, often assumed to be objective, functions more as a cultural filter than a tool for measuring results. The financial consequences are not abstract. They are real, measurable, and significant.


Hiring and promotion decisions are frequently based on unquantifiable, intangible qualities such as culture fit. A widely cited study published in the American Sociological Review found that employers routinely prioritize shared hobbies, similar communication styles, and subjective impressions of chemistry over clear technical ability or prior success.

Culture fit acts less like a neutral standard and more like a gatekeeper, favoring individuals who align with dominant social and cultural norms. These norms tend to mirror the background and behavior of existing leadership, reproducing sameness rather than encouraging excellence.


This approach excludes employees who do not conform, regardless of their output. A 2020 McKinsey report estimated that companies in the U.S. lose approximately one trillion dollars annually due to voluntary turnover. A significant portion of this turnover stems from non-inclusive workplace environments. Many high-performing employees report leaving organizations not because they lack talent or drive, but because they feel undervalued when they do not assimilate to unspoken expectations. These expectations often involve aspects of identity such as hair texture, language fluency, clothing style, gender expression, or religious observance.


Research featured in the Harvard Business Review reveals that many employees engage in "covering," a behavior where individuals suppress or hide aspects of their identity to avoid standing out. These behaviors lead to decreased engagement, lower innovation, and weaker collaboration. The burden of covering is especially prevalent among women, Black, brown, and Indigenous people, LGBTQ+ individuals, and employees with disabilities. When individuals cannot fully show up as themselves, they are not in a position to take creative risks, ask hard questions, or contribute new perspectives. The result is diminished innovation and weaker team performance.


This pattern is not just harmful to individual well-being. It is financially damaging to organizations. Deloitte research shows that inclusive teams outperform their counterparts by up to 80 percent on team-based assessments. Yet, the same organizations that benefit from diversity often penalize employees for how that diversity manifests. A high-performing woman who wears her hair naturally, an immigrant employee who speaks with an accent, or a neurodivergent team member with a unique communication style may find their contributions overlooked, not because they are unproductive, but because they don’t fit into a mold that was never designed with them in mind.


A study by the Boston Consulting Group found that companies with above-average diversity in leadership generated innovation revenue that was 45 percent higher than those with below-average diversity. These gains occur when diverse teams are allowed to operate with psychological safety. This means people are free to express their ideas, offer criticism, and take creative risks without fear of reprisal. However, psychological safety cannot exist in an environment where assimilation is rewarded more than authenticity.

Conscious leadership means learning to see value in unfamiliar expressions of talent. Just like a basketball coach must learn to appreciate a player who succeeds in unconventional ways, workplace leaders must recognize productivity and contribution even when it doesn’t look familiar. Organizations that equate comfort with performance are not just missing opportunities. They are actively incurring losses.


If you're ready to deepen your journey in conscious leadership and learn how to retain and empower valuable talent in your organization, visit www.eddypaulthomas.com to explore resources and training opportunities.


References

 
 
 
  • YouTube

© 2026 Eddy Paul Thomas, LLC

bottom of page