The author states there is no upside to giving honest feedback of a company in an exit interview, and the one comment I see at the moment which argues perhaps there could be an upside is making the case that the upside is when you personally benefit from stock prices increasing.
Why is it difficult to see that an upside would be that the company makes a positive change and people other than yourself are benefitted? Why is something only beneficial when it happens to me?
Well usually a company knows the situation and has made the rational decision to follow down that path. So talking rationally e.g. to HR is pointless and can only be used against you down the road. (Any legal case, and these arise we like it or not.) If you are buddies with the CxO (x \in {E,T,F,O,M,..}), you probably should have talked to them a long time ago.
> Why is it difficult to see that an upside would be that the company makes a positive change and people other than yourself are benefitted?
This upside is dutifully noted in the beginning. It's just that the author considers it highly improbable, therefore greatly diminishing its averaged value, especially when compared with the possible downsides.
>The author states there is no upside to giving honest feedback of a company in an exit interview, and the one comment I see at the moment which argues perhaps there could be an upside is making the case that the upside is when you personally benefit from stock prices increasing.
The main one I can think of is companies altering their return to work posture after having an exodus of employees who did not want to return under stated terms. This sort of thing is rare though as it needs to be simultaneous, consistent feedback that is actionable.
Why is it difficult to see that an upside would be that the company makes a positive change and people other than yourself are benefitted? Why is something only beneficial when it happens to me?