Why they leave in the first year. And what to do about it

A CTO called me, voice tired. 'Anastasia, this is the third time this year we are closing the same role. The first one left after four months, the second after six.' From what I see, about a third of recent senior hires change jobs within their first year. The market is the same for everyone — some companies just lose people and some don't.

A few months ago a CTO called me. Fintech, about 200 people in the company. The voice tired. "Anastasia, this is the third time this year we are closing the same role. The first one left after four months, the second after six. What is going on?"

This isn't rare. From what I observe, roughly a third of developers hired in the last two years across Russian-speaking tech companies change jobs within their first year. Calling that "the market is like this" is convenient but wrong. The market is the same for everyone. It's just that some companies lose people and some don't.

The problem almost always starts at the interview

With that fintech we figured it out quickly. At interviews candidates were told about the modern stack, an autonomous team, the opportunity to influence architecture. In reality — a legacy monolith on PHP 5.6, tasks coming from a manager with no technical background, architectural decisions made "from above."

The first developer wrote in his goodbye message on Slack: "The work doesn't match what was described to me." The second wrote nothing — just left quietly. But the reason was the same: technical debt nobody had warned him about, and that he was shovelling alone.

I don't blame the company. The wish to present yourself in the best light is human. But it gets expensive later.

Job reality preview — a practice that works

I recommend one thing to every client. I call it the "honest preview of the work." Before the final interview — or during it — the candidate sees the real picture: examples of tasks, fragments of the codebase, an honest conversation about what is currently hard.

Yes, some people will decline after that. That's fine — better now than in four months.

A systems integrator I'll call "InfraStack" had lost three DevOps engineers in a row. On the fourth attempt they tried differently: showed the real CI/CD pipeline, talked openly about infrastructure problems, said honestly — the first three months will be hard. The person accepted the offer with eyes open. Has been there a year and a half. Recently got promoted.

The first 90 days are not a formality

I have seen very different onboarding processes. In the worst version it looks like this: the person signed the papers, got a laptop, was told "here's the repo, figure it out." Three weeks in he's sitting confused, a month and a half in he starts looking around.

In the good version — like at a startup I'll call "FinSpot" — the first week has no code at all: meeting the team, the product, how decisions get made. On day 30 — a first small result that can be shown. On day 90 — a retrospective with the team lead: what was unclear, what could improve in the adaptation process. Their churn is among the lowest of any client I work with.

The difference isn't budget. It's attitude.

What happens in year two

If the first year went normally — the next crisis usually comes around 18 to 24 months. The developer is settled, feels confident — and starts asking himself: what next? Where do I grow? What changes?

If there is no answer — he will find one at another company. And he will be right.

Do you have a transparent grading system? A person should know what to do in order to grow.

Is there a learning budget? €500 a year per developer is nothing compared to the cost of replacing him.

Can engineers influence technical decisions — or only execute?

A company I'll call "MarketTech" lost three strong people in a single quarter. The reason turned out to be simple: there was no growth system at all. Everyone was just a "developer." Once they introduced grades and a small learning budget — the situation changed. Not immediately, but it changed.

A short checklist

• Tell the truth about the company at interviews — including what is hard.
• Show real tasks before the offer, not just talk about them.
• Structure the first 90 days: goals, a mentor, checkpoints.
• Introduce transparent grades — this is not bureaucracy, this is respect.
• Run exit interviews without offence: the person leaving will tell you things nobody inside is saying.
• Every six months ask the people who are staying: "What's keeping you? What could keep you stronger?"

Retention starts at the interview. Not at onboarding, not at review — in the conversation where you decide what to tell and what to leave out.