Great Resignation in Italy: What Companies Can Do in 2026

Voluntary resignations in Italy have not stopped. After the 2022 peak, many observers declared the Great Resignation an American and temporary phenomenon. The data tells a different story: the trend has transformed, not disappeared. In 2025, Italian workers are no longer leaving en masse to "change their lives" — they're leaving more selectively, more consciously, and for reasons increasingly tied to wellbeing rather than salary alone. For companies looking to retain talent in 2026, understanding this evolution isn't optional — it's a strategic priority.

The Numbers: Voluntary Resignations in Italy from 2022 to 2026

To understand the phenomenon, look at the data in context, not newspaper headlines.

The trajectory

2022: The peak year. 2.2 million voluntary resignations in Italy, +13.8% over 2021 (source: Ministry of Labour, Mandatory Communications 2023). The phenomenon made front pages, with talk of a "Great Escape"
2023: A slight decline to 2.07 million (-6% vs. 2022), interpreted by many as the "end of the Great Resignation." In reality, the dip was due to the economic slowdown and fewer alternative offers, not improved working conditions (source: ISTAT, Labour Market Report 2024)
2024: Stabilization at 2.1 million. The most significant figure isn't the total number but the composition: resignations grew in the 25-40 age bracket and in highly specialized roles (source: Labour Market Observatory, INPS 2025)
2025: An estimated 2.15 million voluntary resignations, with an important qualitative shift. 44% of those who left cited "quality of work life" as the primary reason, compared to 31% in 2022 who primarily cited "better salary opportunity" (source: Randstad Employer Brand Research 2025)
2026 (projection): The trend points to stabilization around 2-2.2 million per year, with a growing shift toward resignations motivated by wellbeing, professional growth, and flexibility rather than purely financial factors

What these numbers mean

The key figure isn't resignation volume. It's motivation. Italy is undergoing a structural transformation in the relationship between workers and companies: people are no longer just seeking a better salary — they're seeking a comprehensively better work experience. Those who reduce the Great Resignation to a pay problem are reading the phenomenon through the wrong lens.

Why People Leave: The Real Causes

Aggregate data hides individual reasons. To intervene effectively, you need to understand what concretely drives an employee to seek alternatives.

The hierarchy of motivations (2025 data)

According to research by AIDP on a sample of 8,500 Italian workers who changed jobs in 2024-2025, the main motivations in order of frequency are:

Inadequate compensation and benefits (52%): Still the most cited reason, but its relative weight is declining compared to 2022 (when it was 67%). Workers want fair pay, but salary alone no longer retains them
Lack of wellbeing and quality of life (44%): The second most important reason, growing fast (+13 points since 2022). Includes: excessive stress, burnout, lack of mental health support, hustle culture, unsustainable hours
No professional growth (41%): No development prospects, nonexistent training, static roles. Particularly strong in the 25-35 age group
Relationship with management (37%): The direct manager as the cause of resignation. Micromanagement, lack of feedback, no trust, toxic communication
Lack of flexibility (33%): Rigid schedules, mandatory office presence with no operational reason, inability to handle personal emergencies
Toxic company culture (28%): Internal politics, favoritism, lack of transparency, perceived discrimination
Lack of purpose (19%): Not finding meaning in one's work. A growing motivation especially among Gen Z

Wellbeing as a multiplier

The most relevant insight for companies is that wellbeing doesn't act in isolation — it amplifies or attenuates all other motivations. An underpaid employee in a healthy environment actively searches for months before leaving (and often accepts a compromise). An underpaid employee in a toxic environment leaves at the first offer, even at the same salary.

Gallup's research (State of the Global Workplace 2025) confirms this multiplier effect: employees who rate their workplace wellbeing positively have a 51% lower likelihood of resigning than those who rate it negatively, at equal compensation.

Generational Differences: Not Everyone Leaves for the Same Reasons

The Great Resignation is not a monolithic phenomenon. Each generation has different motivations, expectations, and tolerance thresholds. Treating them all the same is a strategic mistake.

Gen Z (born 1997-2012): non-negotiable wellbeing

Gen Z is the generation that has most radically redefined the relationship with work:

72% consider mental health support a decisive factor when choosing an employer (source: Deloitte, Gen Z and Millennial Survey 2025)
They don't accept hustle culture ("I don't live to work")
They look for alignment between the company's stated values and actual practices
They have low tolerance thresholds for toxic environments: they leave quickly, often within the first year
They're digital natives: they expect support tools accessible from a smartphone, not appointment-based counseling

Millennials (born 1981-1996): the deliberate trade-off

Millennials are the "sandwich" generation of the Great Resignation:

They have family and financial responsibilities that make resignation more carefully considered
They seek a balance between adequate pay, professional growth, and quality of life
They're most sensitive to lack of growth: 48% of Millennials who resign cite "stalled career" as the main reason
They view flexibility as a hygiene factor: not a benefit, but a prerequisite
They are the primary users of corporate welfare programs and understand the tax advantages

Gen X (born 1965-1980): the silent breaking point

Gen X is the least visible generation in the Great Resignation debate, but no less affected:

They often hold managerial roles and are exposed to burnout from multiple responsibilities
They resign less frequently, but when they do, the cost to the company is very high (loss of experience, know-how, relationships)
Main motivation: "I can't take it anymore." Chronic exhaustion exceeds the tolerance threshold after years of accumulation
They are less likely to independently seek wellbeing support — they need to be reached through tools integrated into the workflow

Baby Boomers (born 1946-1964): the early Great Retirement

For Boomers still in the workforce, the decision isn't "I'll change companies" but "I'll stop earlier than planned":

29% of Italian Boomers still working say they want to retire earlier than originally planned (source: CENSIS 2025)
The dominant motivation is fatigue: physical and cognitive, amplified by digital transformation
When a Boomer leaves, an often undocumented wealth of knowledge goes with them

The Real Cost of Turnover: Why Wellbeing Is an Investment

Retention isn't a "soft" issue. It's an economic problem with quantifiable and growing costs.

Direct costs

Component	Estimated cost
Recruiting (posting, screening, interviews, agency)	3,000-15,000 EUR per position
Onboarding and training the replacement	5,000-20,000 EUR (depends on role complexity)
Lost productivity during vacancy (average 3-4 months)	15,000-40,000 EUR
Reduced productivity of the new hire (6-12 months to full capacity)	10,000-30,000 EUR
Average total cost per turnover	33,000-105,000 EUR per person

Source: Analysis based on SHRM (2025) and HR Innovation Practice Observatory, Politecnico di Milano (2025), adapted to the Italian market.

Hidden costs

Hidden costs are often higher than direct ones:

Domino effect: When a respected colleague leaves, others ask themselves "should I leave too?" One person's resignation can trigger 2-3 more within the following 6 months
Team morale decline: The remaining team must absorb the additional workload, risking cascading burnout
Loss of client and stakeholder relationships: The departing employee's personal relationships aren't transferable
Opportunity cost: The time HR and management spend managing turnover isn't spent on strategic projects

The calculation for the CFO

For an Italian company with 200 employees and a 15% turnover rate (industry average), the annual cost of turnover is estimated at:

200 employees x 15% = 30 resignations/year x 50,000 EUR average cost = 1,500,000 EUR/year

A structured wellbeing program that reduces turnover by 20% (a conservative target, supported by Deloitte Italy 2025 data showing 18-25% reductions) generates savings of 300,000 EUR/year. The cost of a comprehensive wellbeing program for 200 employees is in the range of 40,000-80,000 EUR/year. The ROI is clear.

What Actually Retains Talent: The 5 Retention Levers in 2026

The data converges on five factors that, combined, create an environment where people choose to stay.

1. Fair compensation (not necessarily the highest)

Employees aren't looking for the highest salary on the market. They're looking for fairness: being paid consistently with the value they generate, with transparent criteria. Pay opacity breeds distrust and fuels turnover more than a slightly below-market salary perceived as fair.

Action: Conduct an annual salary review based on market benchmarks. Communicate the criteria. If you can't increase pay, explain why and when it will be possible.

2. Real wellbeing (not wellbeing-washing)

Wellbeing support must be substantive, not performative. A yoga room nobody uses because they don't have time, a mindfulness webinar during lunch while managers send emails, a meditation app that was never communicated: all of this is wellbeing-washing and produces cynicism, not engagement.

Action: Invest in organizational wellbeing tools that are integrated into the workflow, accessible anonymously, personalized, and measurable. Corporate wellbeing strategies must start by listening to employees, not following trends.

3. Visible professional growth

Employees need to see their future in the company. If they don't see it, they'll look for it elsewhere.

Action: Every employee should have a development plan updated every six months, an individual training budget, and at least one quarterly conversation dedicated to growth with their manager.

4. Genuine flexibility

In 2026, flexibility is no longer a differentiating benefit — it's a baseline expectation. But it must be genuine: not "you can work from home on Fridays" while on Tuesday at 6 PM you need to be in the office for an unnecessary meeting.

Action: Define flexibility policies based on outcomes, not presence. Measure output, not hours. Trust people. Those who don't deserve trust aren't a policy problem — they're an individual management problem.

5. Competent management

As research documents, the direct manager is the most influential factor in the decision to stay or leave. Management training isn't a cost — it's the most effective retention lever that exists.

Action: Train managers on active listening, feedback, conflict management, and recognizing stress signals. Not with an annual course — with continuous practice, supervision, and accountability.

Wellbeing as a Retention Strategy: An Operational Framework

Wellbeing isn't just another HR initiative. It's the glue that holds all retention levers together. Here's a 4-phase framework for building a retention strategy grounded in wellbeing.

Phase 1: Diagnosis (months 1-2)

Structured exit interviews: Analyze the last 20-30 resignations. Look for patterns: which roles, which teams, which recurring reasons
Stay interviews: Ask high-potential employees why they stay and what would make them leave. Stay interviews are more useful than exit interviews because they provide information while you can still act
Wellbeing survey: Measure the current level of perceived wellbeing, segmented by team, age group, and tenure
Data analysis: Correlate wellbeing data with turnover, absenteeism, and performance. Identify the highest-risk teams and profiles

Phase 2: Targeted intervention (months 3-6)

Quick wins: Act immediately on low-cost, high-impact factors (e.g., eliminating unnecessary meetings, introducing flexible hours, providing digital coaching tools)
Manager training: Launch a training program for managers on behaviors that protect team wellbeing
Pilot program: Introduce a structured wellbeing program on 1-2 at-risk teams as a pilot

Phase 3: Scale (months 6-12)

Extend the program to remaining teams based on pilot results
Integrate wellbeing into HR processes: Onboarding, performance reviews, promotions, exits
Communicate results: Pilot data becomes the tool for convincing management and the CFO to invest further

Phase 4: Consolidation (year 2+)

Measure ROI: Compare turnover, absenteeism, eNPS, and productivity before and after the program
Iterate: Use data to refine the program, eliminate what doesn't work, strengthen what does
Make wellbeing part of the company's identity: Not an HR project — a way of operating

Frequently Asked Questions

Is the Great Resignation really an Italian phenomenon, or just an imported American trend?

It's a real phenomenon documented by Italian data. The 2.2 million voluntary resignations in 2022, confirmed by the Ministry of Labour through Mandatory Communications, are not a media fabrication. The difference from the United States lies in intensity (in Italy the phenomenon is more gradual) and motivations (in Italy, compensation carries relatively more weight, but wellbeing is rapidly growing as a decisive factor). The Italian phenomenon is also amplified by labor market structure: fixed-term contracts, stagnant wages, and a fabric of SMEs that struggle to offer competitive growth paths.

How much should a company invest to turn wellbeing into a retention strategy?

The budget varies based on size and starting point. As a ballpark: a comprehensive program (survey, manager training, digital coaching tools, counseling services) costs between 150 and 400 euros per employee per year. For a company with 200 employees, that's 30,000-80,000 euros. Considering that the average cost of a single turnover is 50,000 euros, preventing just 1-2 resignations covers the investment. Industry data shows that structured programs reduce turnover by 18-25%, which for a 200-employee company translates to 5-8 avoided resignations and savings of 250,000-400,000 euros per year.

Can small businesses afford a retention strategy based on wellbeing?

Yes, and for small businesses wellbeing is even more critical because each resignation has a proportionally greater impact. The starting point requires no budget: eliminating unnecessary meetings, offering flexible hours, listening to employees with structured 1-on-1s, and training managers on feedback all cost zero. Digital coaching and wellbeing tools are now accessible even for companies with 10-50 employees, with per-user pricing starting at just a few euros per month. Corporate welfare with tax advantages also provides tools for making the investment tax-efficient, even for SMEs.