Staying power: factors influencing knowledge worker retention Open Access

A significant challenge faced by global organizations is the recruitment and retention of proficient knowledge workers who apply theoretical and analytical expertise acquired through formal education to attain their objectives. Employees with reduced job satisfaction and weak commitment to the organization often leave, especially when coupled with inadequate human resource (HR) policies and practices (De Vos & Meganck, 2009; Narayanan, Rajithakumar, & Menon, 2019). The strategic value of intellectual capital and the substantial costs associated with replacing such employees underscore the heightened importance of retaining knowledge workers for organizational success (Das & Baruah, 2013).

HR practices play a pivotal role in the attraction, motivation, and retention of talented personnel, consequently yielding a sustainable competitive advantage over the long term (Joo & McLean, 2006). Indicators such as job autonomy, equitable reward systems, and enhanced developmental prospects significantly contribute to employee retention. The alignment between an individual and the organization positively affects employee attitudes, encompassing job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Rice, Near, & Hunt, 1980), culminating in their intention to remain with the organization (Lauver & Kristof-Brown, 2001; Cable & DeRue, 2002). Additionally, inadequate leadership can drive employees to exit an organization. Many companies have embraced corporate social responsibility as a relevant managerial ideology, denoting an ongoing commitment to ethical conduct, economic progress, improved employee well-being and societal advancement. In this context, virtuous leadership, an emerging leadership theory, can address the limitations of a solely meritocratic approach.

Recognizing the expenses incurred due to talent attrition, most of the existing research has explored the determinants influencing employee turnover. However, research on retention often neglects the fact that the factors keeping employees engaged may not mirror those prompting them to leave. Furthermore, the existing literature lacks consistent exploration of how organizational factors influence the retention of knowledge workers (Griffeth, Hom, & Gartner, 2000; Mowday, Porter, & Steers, 2013). For instance, high-tech firms depend on retaining engineers, scientists and professionals for success. Scholars such as De Vos and Meganck (2009) concur that the domain of retention management remains incompletely comprehended due to studies often concentrating on specific subsets of retention factors, hindering the assessment of their overall integration into retention practices.

To address this gap, this study proposes distributive fairness, growth opportunity, job complexity, person-organization (P-O) fit and virtuous leadership as organizational factors, aiming to assess their impact on employee intent to stay (ITS). This research centers on ITS and investigates the potential moderating roles of P-O fit and virtuous leadership. Theoretical contributions encompass the amalgamation of leadership, organizational justice, learning and development, job design and P-O fit theories.

Employee retention traces their origins to classic turnover research, with a rich history in management and organizational psychology. Amidst numerous turnover and retention frameworks, this study is grounded in two key theories: Social Exchange Theory (SET) and the Resource-Based View (RBV) of the firm. While the former theory considers both employer and employee sides, the latter primarily tackles employee retention from an employer’s viewpoint.

Social exchange theory (SET): At the core of SET lies the idea that actions of one party reinforce those of the other, fostering a mutually beneficial relationship (Allen & Shanock, 2013). This theory, increasingly influential in organizational studies, frames employees and employers as participants in a social exchange. This relationship hinges on reciprocity and mutual exchange norms (Tzafrir, Baruch, & Dolan, 2004), where employees expect support and fairness in exchange for positive outcomes. This norm underscores employees exchanging positive outcomes for equitable treatment. This aligns with March and Simon (1958) theory of organizational equilibrium, emphasizing the need for a balance between employee contributions and inducements to retain them.

Resource-based view (RBV):RBV contends that organizations forge competitive advantages by effectively harnessing their tangible and intangible resources, rendering it arduous for rivals to replicate their distinct value (Barney, 2001). Much of RBV’s rationale centers on human capital and organizational resources, which emerge from complex social structures (Colbert, 2004). RBV advocates prioritizing the attraction, cultivation and retention of key talents, especially knowledge workers, to leverage their core skills and expertise (Joo & McLean, 2006). Hence, strategic HR management plays a crucial role in fostering, cultivating and preserving pivotal talents, often classified as knowledge workers. This pursuit is facilitated through enhanced HR practices, including work–life initiatives, performance management systems, employee career development programs, job enrichment initiatives and pathways for progression.

Intent to stay (ITS): This study explores employee persistence. Determinants of turnover intention include traits (Allen, Weeks, & Moffitt, 2005), job contentment (Tett & Meyer, 1993), commitment (Joo, 2010) and performance (Salamin & Hom, 2005). Varied turnover forms underline retention strategy need (Allen et al., 2010). This research highlights divergence between turnover and retention; staying isn’t always leaving’s opposite (Mitchell, Holtom, Lee, Sablynski, & Erez, 2001). Retention strategies include recruitment, work milieu, leadership trust, role enhancement, flexibility, training, promotion, fairness systems, coaching, rewards and family-friendly policies (Taplin & Winterton, 2007). This study investigates organizational factors, including HR practices such as autonomy, learning, performance management and rewards, alongside P-O fit and leadership. Employers emphasize HR philosophies and policies, while perceptions of training, career advancement, rewards, recognition and work–life balance significantly influence employee decisions.

Distributive fairness: Organizational justice has three dimensions:

1. distributive justice;

2. procedural justice; and

3. interactional justice (Greenberg & Colquitt, 2013).

Distributive justice, a core of organizational fairness, centers on equity in outcomes like pay, incentives and promotions (Colquitt et al., 2005). Perceived distributive fairness relies on aligning inputs and outcomes, shaped by social comparisons. Unfairness breeds deprivation (Smith & Pettigrew, 2011). For instance, equitable reward protocols, inclusive of fair performance systems and constructive feedback, cultivate support, reinforce performance and boost retention (Boswell & Boudreau, 2000). In particular, equitable pay perception notably impacts staying. Compensation and acknowledgment matter in the employer–employee implicit contract (Chew & Chan, 2008):

Growth opportunity: In organizations, growth opportunities are perceived by employees through training, career advancement and promotions, nurturing individual potential and collective progress. Training enhances attitudes, expertise and knowledge for better job performance, addressing organizational needs (Hofaidhllaoui & Chhinzer, 2014). Training interventions augment skills to align with objectives (Lee & Bruvold, 2003). Career development aligns personal growth with the organization’s progress, facilitated by training opportunities (Taplin & Winterton, 2007). In a SET framework, investing in employee development influences attitudes and organizational efficacy. Offering growth signifies valuing contributions and prioritizing future prospects. Talent management strategies with training motivate and instill self-worth and stability (Tharenou, Saks, & Moore, 2007). Leading employers tend to foster talent attraction and retention through ample learning avenues (Joo & McLean, 2006):

Job complexity: Complex and stimulating tasks drive enthusiasm, with autonomy fostering motivation (Oldham & Cummings, 1996). Among the five dimensions of the Job Characteristic Model (Hackman & Oldham, 1980), complex jobs require a high level of task significance, autonomy and feedback (Joo & Lim, 2009). Complex jobs are mentally challenging and require using several complex skills (Chung-Yan, 2010), and thereby stimulating excitement and interest (Oldham & Cummings, 1996). Humphrey, Hollenbeck, Meyer, & Ilgen (2007) found that job complexity correlates with motivation, commitment, satisfaction, involvement and performance. As job satisfaction’s association with retention is crucial, task complexity predicts ITS:

Person-organizational (P-O) fit: P-O fit, from Chatman’s (1989) definition, aligns individual values with organizational norms. Rooted in person-environment fit theory, P-O fit interweaves personal and organizational values, influencing outcomes (Kristof-Brown & Jansen, 2007). P-O fit shapes attitudes – job satisfaction, commitment – impacting ITS (Cable & DeRue, 2002; Chatman, 1989). Its role emerges in turnover and job choices (Kristof-Brown & Jansen, 2007), guided by the attraction-selection-attrition model (Schneider, Smith, & Paul, 2001).

We propose to test whether P-O fit will moderate the relationships between the three predictors of ITS. According to Hertzberg’s (1966) two-factor theory, reward is a typical hygiene factor whereas growth opportunity and job complexity are motivators. It is likely that distributive fairness and P-O fit will have a complementary effect on ITS for retaining knowledge workers. In certain cases, despite a modest P-O fit, employees might choose to stay in an organization offering substantial growth opportunities or intricate job roles. P-O fit, combined with growth opportunity and job complexity, are likely to have a supplementary effect on ITS:

Virtuous leadership: In organizational and behavioral sciences, research into leadership incorporating virtue ethics is gaining momentum (Riggio, Zhu, Reina, & Maroosis, 2010; Sosik, Gentry, & Chun, 2012). Virtue ethics integrates into business ethics frameworks (Flynn, 2008). Hendriks, Burger, Rijsenbilt, Pleeging, and Commandeur (2020) defined virtuous leadership as consistent alignment with virtues such as prudence, courage and justice. Wang & Hackett (2016) root it in Aristotelian and Confucian philosophies. Western ideals, exemplified by Plato’s Republic, advocate virtues for leaders including prudence, courage, temperance, justice (Bragues, 2006), which impact Western and Judeo-Christian traditions (Hendriks et al., 2020). Wang and Hackett (2016) draw parallels with Confucian virtues.

Virtuous leadership aligns with contemporary paradigms: transformational, authentic, ethical/moral, empowering, spiritual, inclusive, paternalistic leadership (Brown, 2011; Cameron, 2011). While scarce, some empirical studies explore its impact on employee outcomes like commitment, satisfaction and well-being (Cameron, Bright, & Caza, 2004). Virtuous leaders uphold values and legacy. No empirical investigation delves into virtuous leadership’s potential role on ITS. This study suggests virtuous leadership could moderate relationships between the three predictors and ITS:

Data was collected from a prominent South Korean telecom company through paper surveys distributed by the HR director to 350 employees. With a response rate of 67%, 235 completed surveys were gathered. The study included demographics such as gender, age, education and hierarchy. Males constituted 72% of respondents, which aligns with prevalent gender distribution in South Korean managerial roles. Education-wise, 69% held four-year degrees, while 28% possessed graduate degrees, reflecting a majority of knowledge workers. The majority of respondents fell within their 30 s (44%) and 40 s (50%) age groups, with 5% in their 20 s and 1% over 50. In summary, the respondent pool comprised highly educated knowledge workers in their 30 and 40 s.

All the constructs were assessed using multi-item scales. For this study, appropriate translation-back-translation processes were used to adapt the instruments for use in South Korea. The survey questionnaire used a six-point Likert-type scale, spanning from 0 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

ITS: The ITS construct was gauged using a three-item scale formulated by Zigarmi, Nimon, Houson, Witt, and Diehl (2012). The three items were distinct from each other as evidenced by their factor analysis. The scale exhibited a reliability coefficient of 0.87 in this study. A sample item is, “I intend to continue working here because I perceive it as the most suitable workplace for me.”

Distributive fairness: To measure the perception of distributive fairness, three items were drawn from the Work Cognition Inventory (WCI) developed by Nimon, Zigarmi, Houson, Witt, and Diehl (2011). A sample item includes, “This organization takes active steps to equitably and suitably distribute my workload.” The internal consistency of this measure was 0.86.

Growth opportunity: Similarly, three items from the WCI (Nimon et al., 2011) were used to evaluate employees’ positive perceptions of learning, development and career advancement opportunities within their organization. The internal consistency reliability of this measure stood at 0.88. A sample item includes, “I am presented with occasions to cultivate new skills for my current role.”

Job complexity: The Job Diagnostic Survey (Hackman & Oldham, 1980) contributed nine items to assess the level of challenge and complexity associated with employees’ job roles. We retained three items, focusing on task significance, feedback and autonomy. The internal consistency reliability was 0.91. A sample item includes, “The job affords me significant opportunities for autonomy and liberty in my work approach.”

Person-organization fit (P-O fit): The assessment of perceived P-O fit among employees used a three-item measure developed by Cable and Judge (1996). This measure demonstrated an internal reliability of 0.90. A sample item reads: “The values I hold are consistent or align well with the values upheld by this organization.”

Virtuous leadership: We adopted ten items from the Kunja (Junzi) Leadership scale developed and validated by Ryu (2015). Sample items include: “My manager exhibits self-control over personal interests”; “My manager supports members in cultivating mutual trust.” The internal consistency reliability for this study was 0.94.

Exploratory factor analysis (EFA), descriptive statistics, correlations, reliability analyses and hierarchical multiple regression analyses were conducted with IBM SPSS Statistics 20. LISREL 8.80 was used for confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) based on the covariance matrix and maximum likelihood estimation.

In evaluating the common method variance, an EFA was initially conducted. The EFA, using a maximum likelihood estimation, identified six factors with eigenvalues surpassing 1. These factors collectively accounted for 73% of the total variance, with the foremost factor explaining 45% of the variance. Moreover, an analysis using the variance inflation factor (VIF) was executed. In this study, the highest VIF was 2.8, and the average VIFs averaged at 2.0 (<4.0), thus affirming the absence of severe multicollinearity (Hair, Black, Babin, & Anderson, 2010).

An overall CFA was used to evaluate the convergent and discriminant validity of indicators for the six constructs. The assessment of goodness-of-fit incorporated several indices: chi-square (χ²), the Root mean square error of Approximation (RMSEA), the Non-Normed Fit Index (NNFI) and the Comparative Fit Index (CFI). The results indicate the best fit of the six-factor model to the data (χ² = 1,291; df = 419; χ²/df = 3.08; RMSEA = 0.094; CFI = 0.96; NNFI = 0.95; RMR = 0.06), compared to the one-factor model.

Table 1 displays the correlations among the six constructs and their reliabilities. Regarding demographic variables, older employees exhibited higher values across most variables including intention to stay in the organization. Education level turned out to be nonsignificant, as most respondents were college and graduate degrees. Ranging from 0.38 to 0.67, all correlation coefficients between the six variables were statistically significant. H1–H3 were supported. Furthermore, each measure demonstrated satisfactory levels of reliability, ranging from 0.86 to 0.94.

The investigation into the moderating roles of P-O fit and virtuous leadership is outlined in Table 2. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses were performed on the ITS construct. The analytical process unfolded in Model 1 through 4, where control variables were introduced in Model 1, main effects (distributive fairness, growth opportunity and job complexity) in Model 2, moderators in Models 3 and 5 and interactions in Models 4 and 6. The results demonstrated that demographic variables and the three predictors collectively explained 46% of the variance in ITS (Model 2). Figure 1 illustrates the moderation effects of both P-O fit and virtuous leadership on the relationships between the antecedents and ITS.

Moderation effects of P-O fit: The incorporation of P-O fit in Model 3 elevated the variance explained to 51% (ΔR² = 0.11). Subsequent inclusion of P-O fit interactions in Model 4 further accounted for 54% of the variance in ITS (ΔR² = 0.03), supporting H4a and H4b. Particularly, P-O fit exhibited a significant moderating role in the association between distributive fairness and ITS (H4a). Notably, a greater inclination to remain within the organization was observed when employees felt equitably rewarded and identified well with the organizational values. This effect was more pronounced among those with higher P-O fit. Concerning the interaction between growth opportunity and P-O fit, the impact was amplified among employees with lower P-O fit (H4b). This indicated a higher ITS even when employees perceived less alignment with the organization, given the presence of ample growth opportunity. Thus, growth opportunity and P-O fit turned out to have supplementary effect on ITS. However, P-O fit did not significantly moderate the relationship between job complexity and ITS (H4c).

Moderation effects of virtuous leadership: Inclusion of virtuous leadership and its interactions in Models 5 and 6 yielded a marginal change in R-squared (ΔR² = 0.01) yet supported H5b. Virtuous leadership exhibited a significant moderating effect on the relationship between growth opportunity and ITS. While the direct impact on ITS was modest, the moderating role of virtuous leadership proved influential. The data implied that, irrespective of growth opportunity levels, there was little variance in low ITS among the low virtuous leadership group. Importantly, the effect of growth opportunity was more pronounced within the highly virtuous leadership group.

This study aimed to explore factors affecting employees’ ITS in a sample of 235 knowledge workers at a South Korean telecom company. Theoretical contributions, practical implications and limitations and future research recommendations are discussed.

Aligned with prior research (Boswell & Boudreau, 2000; Chew & Chan, 2008; Greenberg, 1990; Tharenou et al., 2007), our findings confirm that employees’ perceptions of distributive fairness, growth opportunity and job complexity are key retention factors. Our findings indicate that distributive fairness, growth opportunities and job complexity positively influence ITS. Moreover, P-O fit moderates the relationship between these predictors and ITS, enhancing the retention effect. Virtuous leadership also plays a modest but significant moderating role, particularly in the relationship between growth opportunities and ITS.

Our findings reinforce the logic of SET, which posits that employees reciprocate fair and supportive treatment with stronger commitment and retention. The significant role of distributive fairness and growth opportunities in shaping intent to stay reflects these reciprocity norms. Similarly, the moderating influence of P-O fit demonstrates that value congruence intensifies the exchange relationship: when employees perceive alignment with organizational values, fairness and developmental practices are more likely to translate into retention.

This study contributes to retention theory by showing that even modest moderating effects provide meaningful insights into boundary conditions under which HR practices succeed or falter. While effect sizes are not large, they underscore that retention is influenced by a constellation of factors, where small but significant dynamics can accumulate to shape employee decisions over time. Our integration of P-O fit and virtuous leadership into retention research extends prior studies by identifying novel moderators that refine theoretical understanding of how fairness, growth opportunities and job design function in practice. Importantly, this combination of organizational justice, P-O fit, and virtue ethics has rarely been empirically tested together, thereby broadening the theoretical scope of retention research. Finally, by situating virtuous leadership in an East Asian context informed by Confucian and Aristotelian traditions, our study introduces a culturally embedded perspective that expands leadership and retention theory beyond Western paradigms and opens pathways for comparative cross-cultural research.

From a talent management perspective, retention strategies hinge on understanding what drives employees to stay or leave. Retention management empowers talents for the long term, emphasizing dynamics and causes to strategically impact success. Retention demands a comprehensive HR approach (Mitchell et al., 2001). HR’s role in retention is crucial through equitable rewards, relevant development and reshaped roles. As for distributional fairness, fair pay, both base and performance-based, enhances retention. Transparent performance systems and feedback boost retention. Growth opportunities solidify commitment and stability (Govaerts, Kyndt, Dochy, & Baert, 2011). Job redesign, like rotation, fuels motivation for knowledge workers. HR aids manager transitions to mentors and coaches via training. In addition, hiring employees with a strong P-O fit can enhance organizational commitment and retention. Finally, leadership development fosters virtuous leadership qualities that embody value creation, ethical obligations and trustworthy behaviors, thereby fostering high-trust organizational cultures (Cameron, 2011).

Although our study offers new insights, several limitations merit attention. First, data were drawn from a single South Korean telecom company, which restricts generalizability. Nevertheless, the context provides a compelling case: the telecom sector exemplifies knowledge-intensive industries where retention challenges are acute, and the demographic profile of highly educated professionals in their 30 and 40 s closely resembles global knowledge worker populations. Thus, while bounded, the findings are relevant to organizations facing similar pressures to retain specialized talent. Future research could build on this by testing our framework in multi-industry or multicountry samples, comparing contexts where cultural norms and leadership traditions differ. Longitudinal studies would further help assess how the observed relationships evolve over time. In addition, multisource data collection (e.g. combining employee surveys with supervisor ratings or HR records) would reduce reliance on self-report measures and enrich construct validity. Together, these steps will help test the generalizability and robustness of the model across diverse organizational settings.

The results also extend the RBV by demonstrating how human capital – specifically knowledge workers – remains a critical, inimitable resource for sustained organizational advantage. Retention is not simply about preventing turnover but about cultivating the conditions that allow organizations to preserve and leverage their most valuable assets. By showing that even subtle leadership effects (virtuous leadership) can strengthen the retention value of growth opportunities, our study illustrates how leadership practices serve as enabling mechanisms for maximizing the strategic potential of human capital. In this way, our findings bridge SET’s relational logic with RBV’s strategic emphasis, providing a more integrative theoretical account of why employees choose to stay.

To conclude, our study enriches retention discourse by synthesizing perspectives and unveiling insights into retention dynamics of knowledge workers. We encourage future investigations into the interplay of human capital, leadership styles and cultural values in shaping employees’ intentions to stay.