Who remembers the Great Resignation? I do. If only we'd realised back then what a glorious time it was. Employees were firmly in the driving seat and employers were doing everything they could – including sharpening their employer brand – to retain their best people and attract over those who had itchy feet.
Those truly were great times. Now, alas, we have the Big Stay. Happy, risk-taking employees have been replaced by skittish job huggers, and the balance of power has been firmly wrestled back by the corporate overloads – lent on hard by their shareholders and empowered by their AI agents.
Your employees know the truth. Does your EVP? At Fathom we measure the "Credibility Gap" between your promise and their reality.
I remember well, back then, all the conversations about attrition and retention. Employers were decrying the lack of loyalty and the difficulties that they had persuading top talent to stick with them. A lot of those conversations drifted to a place of making conditions better, offering more, and increasing freedom and flexibility. Turns out, those things didn’t exactly work. Someone else could always offer more and the grass, as it were, always looked greener on the other side.
Turns out the best way to keep your people isn’t to shower them with love, it’s to shower them with fear! Not only is the grass not greener on the other side, it’s scorched earth.
(Most) Employees aren’t stupid. They know how brutal the recruitment market is out there today. They know it could be suicide to leave a safe role - no matter how much they dislike it - without having something else lined up. And, since hiring is way down – partly because people aren’t leaving their roles – landing a job before leaving your current one has become a tough trick to pull off.
That's why pay and work/life balance are not the kings anymore... it’s job security. And this big shift - from resigning at the drop of a hat to hugging your job like your life depended on it - has significant implications for employer branding.
A market defined by caution, not opportunity
If you speak to most talent teams right now, the symptoms all start to sound very familiar. Hiring processes are taking longer. Candidates are hesitating, usure, asking more questions, or dropping out late. Offers that would have been straightforward a year or two ago now feel like sticking it all on black.
It’s easy to interpret this as a pipeline problem, to assume the attraction strategy isn’t working like it used to. And that 'could' still be true. But it wouldn't be the full story. The biggest factor throwing a spanner in the works right now is candidate mindset. The appetite talent recently had for risk has evaporated. Replaced, and understandably so, with fear, scepticism and a self-preservation.
Top talent still exists. People still want progression (which often requires jumping ship). And people still get fed up in their roles and want change. What’s different now is that people don’t feel secure. They see yesterday’s most stable employers letting wave after wave of talent go. They feel that they could be subject to “last in first out” mentality if they move. The decision to leave one employer and join another is no longer about whether a new opportunity is better, it's about whether it is safe enough to justify the potential upside.
That is a very different calculation, and it creates a market that behaves very differently.
The usual incentives have dried up
Not only has the risk increased, so has the reward of a move decreased. Back in April of 2022, during the Great Resignation and not all that long ago, moving to another company came with an average salary increase of 8.4 percentage points. Today, that average increase is just 1.9. (source: ADP Research). Not exactly the windfall you’d risk your mortgage payments for. Also, another telltale sign of where the power balance current sits.
Helping HR, talent acquisition, employer branding, and company culture professionals find careers worth smiling about.
So, where does employer brand feature in all this?
Most employer branding strategies are built around a fairly simple premise: if you create a compelling and differentiated story, and tell it well, you can attract better talent more efficiently. The approach itself works well... when candidates are open to moving. The problem we face today is that this old premise assumes a degree of baseline mobility, that people are at least somewhat receptive to new opportunities.
The Big Stay urinates unashamedly over this assumption.
This is why employer branding, if still done the old way, isn’t the answer. Simply put, if most of your target audience is not actively looking then attraction on its own becomes a weaker lever. You can build awareness, generate interest, and even create admiration, but still struggle to convert that into action. Not because the branding is ineffective – people would still like to join your company - but because the perceived risk of change outweighs the perceived benefits.
This is where employer branding starts to feel like it is underperforming. However, it’s being asked to operate in a context it was not originally designed for.
Competing with inertia
The nature of competition has shifted, too. Employers are no longer just competing with each other for talent; they are competing with the candidate’s current situation.
In many cases, that situation is not exceptional. It's simply a case of better the devil you know. A familiar role, a known manager, an understood environment -these things, even if not enjoyed, aren’t threatening. Particularly when the external environment feels uncertain. Even a more attractive opportunity can struggle to compete if it introduces too many unknowns.
This is where employer branders face a more complex challenge. It is not enough to present an organisation as exciting or progressive. It also needs to address the unspoken concerns candidates have about stability, leadership, and what happens if things do not work out. And this is way less easy to do... or get internal buy in for.
Historically, these kind of trust building activities and campaigns have not been a core focus of employer branding. Most content leans towards aspiration rather than reassurance. In the current climate, that balance needs to shift.
The other frustrating contradiction in the talent market
At the same time, there is a contradiction playing out in hiring that annoys the hell out of me. And I can see I’m not alone here.
Despite ongoing conversations about talent shortages, there is actually a substantial amount of capable talent available in the market. A significant number of redundancies over the past couple of years have created a pool of experienced professionals who are actively available. Not the dregs, but top quality and experienced talent from top companies.
EBN
And yet, many organisations and many recruiters remain absolutely allergic to them - like they’re all carrying the plague.
We all know it; there is a persistent and irrational bias towards candidates who are already employed. Being in a role is often interpreted as a sign of quality or relevance, while being available raises questions - whether justified or not. It is rarely acknowledged directly, but it’s a massive barrier to those out of work. And an act of self-sabotage to any employer crying about a talent shortage (yes, some particular skills remain scarce).
A byproduct of this bizarre belief is that it reinforces the broader dynamic of the Big Stay, where both candidates and employers' default towards perceived safety. Surely there’s a better way?
What needs to change
My believe is that if employer branding continues to focus primarily on attraction it will struggle to deliver in this current environment. Talent attraction still matters; there is no shortage of companies hiring and struggling at it. But the playing field and opposition have changed and so must the tactics.
Employers who still need to hire right now need to switch the (at least some of the) emphasis towards building confidence. Much of what I’m seeing go out from employers right now is landing somewhere between gaudy and tone-deaf in the current climate.
Getting this right starts with greater transparency. Candidates want to know that an organisation is stable, well-led, and clear in its direction. Vague messaging and overly polished narratives are don't work well if the decision to join feels high risk.
It also requires more tangible proof. Employee stories need to reflect real experiences, including the complexities of career progression. Ideally from the employees themselves. Leadership visibility becomes extra important, as candidates look for reassurance in how organisations are run and decisions are communicated.
Perhaps most importantly, employer branding needs to acknowledge the concerns candidates have, even if they are not explicitly voiced. Questions around job security, team stability, layoffs, and long-term prospects are shaping decisions. Ignoring them does not make them disappear.
A more honest phase for employer branding
The Big Stay will not last forever. Markets will shift again, and confidence will return. But in the meantime, it is forcing a level of realism into employer branding that has often been missing.
When candidates are actively looking, it is relatively easy to capture attention. When they are not, attention is not enough. What matters now is whether people believe what they see.
Real belief is built over time, through consistency, clarity, and evidence. So, yes, it’s harder to achieve, and it cannot be manufactured quickly. But it is also more durable and should always be the goal – through the good times and the bad.
In that sense, the Big Stay is not breaking employer branding. But it is exposing its limitations. Hopefully, in doing so, it’s pushing employer branders towards something more credible, more real, and more believable.
This dovetails back into my biggest talking point of 2025, and one that isn’t going away in 2026... trust. For most employers, employer branding needs to become the trust engine within an organisation. Not some Orwellian Ministry of Truth, an authentic, transparent, inspiring, window into the best bits of an employer's culture, purpose, work, and employment experience. We can all do better, and must.
The Trust Recession is here. Edelman shows employer trust falling. This guide gives you the playbook to rebuild it.
Takeaways
The market hasn’t dried up... it’s frozen
Candidate behaviour today is driven by risk aversion, not satisfaction. The best talent is still there, but far less willing to move.n no longer assume that good grades and qualifications alone will guarantee long-term security in an AI-shaped economy.
Attraction alone is no longer enough
Traditional employer branding was built for an active market. When people aren’t looking, visibility and awareness don’t translate into action.
You’re competing with inertia, not just competitors
A “good enough” job with known variables will often beat a better opportunity that carries uncertainty.
There is talent available but it’s being ignored
Bias against unemployed candidates is distorting hiring decisions, while employers continue to complain about talent shortages.
Employer branding needs to shift to reassurance
The focus now should be on building confidence and reducing perceived risk, not just selling opportunity.
Proof matters more than messaging
Candidates want evidence - real stories, visible leadership, and tangible signals of stability - not polished narratives.
Trust is now the core objective
In a risk-averse market, trust isn’t a byproduct of employer branding. It’s the primary goal.
