The general business problem was the rise of attrition in the United States, resulting in adverse business impacts ( McCann, 2022 ). The specific business problem was that, without effective leadership strategies, leaders in the U.S. supply chain industry could not reduce attrition rates, resulting in logistics delays and business performance issues related to work quality, staffing, and financials ( Kriewaldt, 2022 ; Straight, 2023 ). The purpose of this qualitative inquiry project was to explore the perspectives of U.S. supply chain leaders regarding effective leadership strategies to reduce employee attrition, which could then further reduce logistics delays and improve business performance. The project question was, what are the perspectives of U.S. supply chain leaders regarding effective leadership strategies to reduce supply chain employee attrition, which can then subsequently reduce logistics delays and improve business performance related to work quality, staffing, and financials?

The gap in practice was that U.S. supply chain leaders lacked effective leadership strategies to reduce attrition rates, resulting in logistics delays and business performance issues related to work quality, staffing, and financials ( McClung, 2023 ). Attrition reduction was critical for leaders, where 68% of executives revealed that staffing issues were a top concern given attrition’s impacts on business performance ( Straight, 2023 ). However, leaders lacked the best practices needed to reduce attrition.

First, there was a lack of awareness of attrition-reducing best practices. Supply chain leaders were unaware of the effective leadership strategies necessary to reduce attrition strongly due to COVID-19’s changes to the work environment ( Childs et al., 2022 ; Dos Santos, 2023 ; McClung, 2023 ). Employees raised their expectations of leaders regarding clear communication, flexibility, support, engagement, respect, and psychological safety ( Charlton, 2021 ; Moss, 2022 ). These increased expectations caused previously used tactics, such as performance reviews, engagement activity, and pay incentives, to have less effect on attrition reduction ( Johnston, 2022 ; Mlakar, 2022 ).

Second, many supply chain leaders did not understand why employees left ( Bartrop-Sackey et al., 2022 ). Some leaders could not recognize the supply chain workforce changes ( Nagle, 2022 ). Others said they did not know what attracted or repelled their employees ( Johnston, 2022 , 2023 ).

Third, formal education about attrition-reducing best practices was insufficient. McClung (2023) confirmed that half of the supply chain leaders they sought input from advised that they received nine hours of leadership training over 10 years. In addition, 57% of leaders in hybrid roles, who were expected to lead the team partially virtually, did not have enough training to lead the workforce well ( McLain & Pendell, 2023 ). During COVID-19, many leaders reported becoming leaders or expanding their scope without effective leadership training ( Rhyne, 2021 ).

Exploring the topic was significant for reducing attrition. Bartrop-Sackey et al. (2022) and Castañeda‐Navarrete et al. (2021) noted that studying attrition reduction was necessary since employee retention strategies were critical for sustainability, stability, and business performance. Reducing attrition was correlated with improving business performance ( Mlakar, 2022 ; Singh et al., 2022 ). Additionally, attrition was noted to cause labor shortages that impacted logistics activities related to sourcing materials for goods production ( Hovnanian et al., 2022 ) as well as transportation of goods ( Hobson, 2022 ), with goods arriving at ports experiencing delays in unloading and distribution ( Austin, 2021 ; Brinkley, 2022 ). Attrition reduction could likely improve logistics delays ( Miller, 2022 ).

Given the importance of the supply chain industry, reducing attrition and its subsequent impacts could benefit consumers by reducing cascading adverse effects on the rest of the economy, which is often seen with supply disruptions and slower logistics transit times ( Austin, 2021 ). Lastly, leaders outside the supply chain industry could benefit from the study by learning about leadership strategies that helped supply chain leaders reduce attrition, which could be replicated.

Most scholars agreed that attrition reduction centered on well-being, transformational leadership, and learning and growth.

Well-being was a powerful theme based on prior research showing it improved retention ( Yakut & Kara, 2022 ), helped with mental health ( Wigert & Agrawal, 2021 ), and contributed to psychological safety ( Sasaki et al., 2020 ; Su et al., 2022 ). Well-being was initially composed of respect ( Covey & Conant, 2016 ; Ibarra, 1999 ; Rogers et al., 2017 ) and fair treatment ( Gilsdorf et al., 2017 ) but more prioritized by millennials and Generation Z ( Fowler, 2021 ; Moore, 2022 ). Employees did not want mundane work ( Nicol, 2022 ) while seeking better work-life balance, flexibility ( Jung & Yoon, 2021 ), and manageable workloads ( Dobroszek et al., 2023 ).

Transformational leadership was a powerful theme. Researchers saw it improve retention ( Jordan & Troth, 2011 ), especially in the supply chain industry ( Saad & Patel, 2006 ). It helped increase empowerment and the relationship between employee and employer, establishing trust ( Ahuja et al., 2007 ; Alexandrov et al., 2007 ; Lawrence, 2006 ). Additionally, transformational leadership enhances personal and work life ( Cascio, 2019 ). Through transformation leadership, leaders were able to strengthen relationships with employees ( Kaleel et al., 2021 ; Khlystova et al., 2022 ) who felt safer at work, especially during crises like COVID-19 ( Sobaih et al., 2022 ).

Learning and growth was a theme not widely covered in past research that was older than five years, but, when it was, it was mentioned that it sometimes overwhelmed employees ( DeLong, 2015 ). However, more contemporary researchers showed that young generations expected learning opportunities ( Emilisa et al., 2022 ), career growth ( Badrinarayanan et al., 2021 ; Mallin, 2022 ), and a way to be ready for challenging work in the demanding supply chain industry ( Rai et al., 2022 ). Initiatives for learning and growth helped employees stay longer ( Li & Xie, 2022 ; Parker & Horowitz, 2022 ; Saraswati, 2022 ). Transformational leaders, who were found to strengthen employee relationships and improve job satisfaction, often had an easier time lowering attrition ( Jordan & Troth, 2011 ; Kaleel et al., 2021 ). Younger generations also prioritized learning and growth, expecting leaders to provide training and development opportunities ( Olenski, 2015 ; Saraswati, 2022 ).

Researchers disagreed on several topics related to attrition. Lambert et al. (2001) believed that addressing the root causes of attrition, such as job satisfaction, was crucial, while Davies (2001) as well as Lu and Gursoy (2016) considered job satisfaction a symptom rather than a cause. Butler and Waldroop (1999) and Olenski (2015) emphasized the importance of screening candidates to prevent attrition in the first place, while Maloni et al. (2017) believed attrition-reducing strategies should be catered to the situation, not universal.

Remote work was also debated. Jamal et al. (2021) saw it as improving job satisfaction and flexibility, while Wang et al. (2020) along with Bulińska-Stangrecka and Bagieńska (2021) argued that it increased isolation and subsequently exacerbated attrition. Similarly, Law and Koh (2023) noted that remote work reduced face-to-face interactions, while Knardahl and Christensen (2022) highlighted the risk of burnout from constant availability enabled by remote work.

There were also disagreements about pay as a best practice. While Cappelli (2000) viewed it as an outdated motivator, Bersin (2013) and Willyerd (2014) saw it as relevant for retaining high performers. Likewise, Fisman and Luca (2018) maintained that pay remained a strong motivator. In relation to COVID-19, Sull et al. (2022) cited that pay was an attrition-reducing strategy, but Shuster (2022) felt that pay was not a primary motivator after the pandemic.

From the articles analyzed during the research study, while articles focused on attrition impacting the supply chain industry, there were also articles exploring generic impacts of attrition across other industries, such as hospitality, sales, healthcare, and engineering. In the supply chain studies, trucking and warehousing often had limitations. Non-scholarly business practitioner sources offered less research and data analysis process transparency, more opinions, and were more challenging to access if published before 2019. Scholarly peer-reviewed sources were more reliable, but most researchers used self-reported quantitative surveys. Additionally, some frameworks suggesting attrition-reducing strategies offered too many steps or lacked clear guidance for leaders.

Historically, managing attrition has always been challenging for leaders. There was minimal guidance on best practices during crises and changing work environments ( Carucci, 2022 ; Collinson et al., 2018 ), in which leaders often misdiagnosed the root causes of attrition and lacked the necessary frameworks to reduce it ( Gardner et al., 2020 ). Some researchers highlighted difficulties in addressing attrition due to shifting employee motivations ( Bartrop-Sackey et al., 2022 ). A ManpowerGroup survey found that 69% of U.S. companies struggle with retention, driven by factors like COVID-19, correlated health concerns, and changing expectations of new generations entering the workforce ( McFall, 2022 ; Segal, 2022 ). Leaders continued to be unprepared for these challenges ( Kelly, 2021 ).

Some leaders blamed COVID-19, mentioning that traditional strategies, such as pay increases, were ineffective in reducing attrition because employees changed their priorities ( Hertelendy et al., 2022 ; Johnston, 2022 ). Balancing these new work-life expectations became challenging for many leaders ( Laker, 2022 ). They were having difficulties upskilling and adapting, which caused relationship and trust issues between leaders and employees ( Jacobs, 2020 ; Langabeer, 2023 ; Račaitė-Samušienė et al., 2021 ).

Some leaders struggled to abandon outdated practices, such as micromanagement, which further fueled attrition ( Forbes Expert Panel, 2023 ; Robinson, 2022 ), while others resisted adapting to new strategies that included prioritizing employee well-being and leadership education ( Dennison, 2022 ). Some conservative leaders found it difficult to become more agile by altering tactics to satisfy employees ( Mann, 2022 ).

Some leaders were unclear on priorities, struggling to balance investing in employees that could prevent attrition versus cutting costs ( River, 2022 ). Many prioritized financial metrics over employee well-being, which risked attrition and, ironically, financial impacts ( Langabeer, 2023 ; Vet, 2021 ).

Some researchers found that fear contributed to poor attrition-reducing best practices, as some leaders feared unintended consequences from trying strategies ( Althouse et al., 2020 ; Nardone, 2022 ). The supply chain industry was especially challenging ( Ellinger & Ellinger, 2014 ; Gómez-Cedeño et al., 2015 ), with leaders lacking strategies to improve employee commitment, well-being, and subsequent retention.

Leaders faced challenges with multiple generations in the workforce, given that up to five generations could work simultaneously, each with different preferences ( Koolhaas, 2023 ; Lee, 2023 ). Younger generations, especially Generation Z, wanted workplace culture changes, but leaders lacked experience and guidance in making that happen ( Kislik, 2022 ; Staglin, 2022 ).

The shift toward hybrid work introduced the concept of e-leadership, which some leaders struggled to navigate effectively ( Gutu & Medeleanu, 2023 ; Rotoli, 2022 ). Leaders faced challenges managing hybrid employees, with 57% of U.S. hybrid leaders reporting they lacked training in virtual leadership ( McLain & Pendell, 2023 ). Leaders also did not provide employees with clear hybrid work guidelines ( Tsipursky, 2023 ).

Many leaders lacked sufficient leadership training. Over the past decade, half of surveyed U.S. supply chain leaders have received less than nine hours of training ( McClung, 2023 ). Some leaders felt unable to address attrition due to obstacles like excessive direct reports, while others believed that addressing attrition was impossible ( Carucci, 2022 ). Confident leaders misjudged the root causes, viewing attrition as simply a temporary generational issue or the responsibility of human resource departments ( Carucci, 2022 ).

The target population was U.S.-based supply chain leaders. Ten participants were recruited using a combination of purposive and third-party sampling through the researcher’s LinkedIn network and User Interviews. Candidates ranged in organizational level from team leader to senior director. All candidates were screened against inclusion and exclusion criteria. Inclusive criteria entailed participants being U.S. supply chain industry leaders currently employed in the industry, having direct reports, having managed direct reports for at least three years, having at least three years of experience in developing and implementing strategies to reduce employee attrition, and having experience and success in lowering attrition. Exclusion criteria included any participant who worked directly with or personally knew the researcher. Participants received study details, including benefits, risks, and confidentiality information, and were required to sign a participation consent form.

The research method was a generic qualitative inquiry. Semi-structured virtual interviews, ranging from 45 to 60 minutes, were conducted via Zoom. Interview audio was recorded, and automatic text transcripts were generated.

The interviews included ten open-ended questions to explore participants’ attrition-reduction experiences. The questions focused on challenges seen with attrition, employee well-being, learning and growth, attrition-reducing best practices, support needed from senior leaders, and perspectives on the resulting impacts of attrition, specifically logistic delays, financial issues, and staffing challenges.

Transcripts were shared with participants for review.

Quotes from all participant transcripts were analyzed via thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke’s (2012) inductive approach, involving familiarization, coding, theme identification, and synthesis across participants. This included familiarization with the data, creating codes from each quote that then were grouped into categories, creating themes, reviewing themes across the dataset, defining and naming the themes, creating a final version of the themes, and visually presenting the information to show data interconnections as well as a final matrix of quotes, codes, categories, and themes ( Byrne, 2022 ; Creswell & Creswell, 2018 ; Percy et al., 2015 ).

The researcher adhered to established principles and practices to ensure the rigor of qualitative research. Reliability was maintained by aligning the study with the qualitative inquiry steps outlined by Creswell and Creswell (2018) . Credibility was enhanced through participant transcript reviews, as Rowlands (2021) recommended. Transferability was supported by providing detailed, thick data descriptions to facilitate contextual understanding. Dependability was ensured through peer debriefing, following the guidance of Stahl and King (2020) . Lastly, conformability was achieved by openly acknowledging potential researcher biases, consistent with the approach suggested by Gill et al. (2018) .

The first theme emphasizes the importance of providing employees with work-life. Leaders saw that best practices in this theme helped reduce attrition and the associated effects of logistical delays, quality of work problems, and staffing challenges. Leaders provided work-life balance to their teams through schedule flexibility and telecommuting options. They also supported them with boundaries so employees could take time off and disconnect. Empowering employees to take the initiative, allowing them to make decisions, and including them in the decision-making process were also critical best practices. Leaders found that giving employees the freedom to perform their duties without excessive oversight, such as micromanagement, allowed them to attain a better-balanced approach to work. Helping employees prioritize workloads was an additional best practice used to ensure employees felt supported.

The second theme highlights the value of effective communication between leaders and employees in lowering attrition and improving its subsequent effects on work quality and financials. Leaders found it essential to regularly check in with employees, actively listen to their concerns, and provide feedback. Building personal and professional connections motivated employees to stay longer and contributed to a supportive and open environment. Sharing work-related and personal information helped establish trust and foster transparency between employees and leaders. Leaders who communicated their plans to support employees effectively, such as by offering additional staff to alleviate capacity issues, further reduced attrition.

The third theme centers on fostering employee teamwork and a sense of belonging to decrease attrition and associated logistics delays. Leaders encouraged team cohesion by organizing team-building activities both within and outside the workplace. Additionally, they enabled employees to work together, which further strengthened teamwork. Showing recognition and gratitude, such as acknowledging individual contributions in front of the team or providing small tokens of appreciation, further strengthened bonds.

The fourth theme focuses on supporting employees’ growth and development, which leaders saw as helping reduce attrition and its associated impacts on work quality issues and staffing challenges. Leaders focused on a three-part lifecycle. First, they emphasized the importance of providing the necessary tools and training for employees to succeed in their roles, which helped prevent frustrations that could lead to turnover. Second, leaders learned about employee aspirations through career-oriented conversations. Third, to enable employees to achieve their aspirations, leaders supported them through cross-training, educational reimbursement, and allocating time at work for training.

This theme helped extend Boundary Theory by demonstrating the importance of leaders helping employees maintain work-life balance through strategies like flexible schedules, telecommuting, and boundary-setting. Researchers such as Piszczek and Berg (2014) and Farivar and Richardson (2021) noted that leadership support for maintaining work-life boundaries can increase employees’ organizational commitment. Flexible schedules can help employees become emotionally attached to the organization ( Piszczek & Berg, 2014 ), similar to telecommuting being seen as enhancing employees’ commitment thanks to generating feelings of being supported by the leader ( Farivar & Richardson, 2021 ). Leaders who help employees maintain boundaries show respect for personal time, increasing employee loyalty ( Piszczek & Berg, 2014 ).

From a scholarly literature perspective, the study confirmed findings on the positive effects of empowerment, flexibility, and telecommuting on retention, as Kim and Park (2020) and Awan et al. (2021) postulated. It also addressed conflicting views on telecommuting, where some research, such as from Knardahl and Christensen (2022) , identified potential risks of isolation. This study provided specific, actionable practices for supporting work-life balance, including task prioritization and boundary support.

In terms of practitioner literature, the study helped show the practical benefits of work-life balance initiatives, such as reducing attrition and improving business outcomes. Specific recommendations include offering telecommuting options, empowering employees to make decisions, and involving them in organizational changes, aligning with findings from Saad and Patel (2006) .

This theme expanded Relational Leadership Theory and underscored the role of communication, including personal conversations, feedback, and check-ins, in building trust and reducing turnover intentions. This aligns with Jian (2022) , who emphasized empathy and ethical leadership as critical for reducing attrition, and Ji et al. (2023) , who found that leader-employee interactions were vital for retention. Personal conversations have been seen as a trust-building tactic that demonstrates empathy by the leader, which has also been seen as essential for turnover reduction ( Jian, 2022 ). Such interactions create a stronger leader-employee relationship. Similarly, providing consistent and constructive feedback through check-ins fosters trust by showing ethical leadership behavior ( Ji et al., 2023 ).

The research addressed gaps in the scholarly literature regarding specific communication strategies. While research from Marchalina and Ahmad (2017) linked effective communication to organizational commitment, this study emphasized the importance of personal and ongoing conversations, which were less explored in prior studies.

The study highlighted regular check-ins, personal conversations, and feedback as essential practices for building trust and reducing attrition. Leaders who listen to employees and engage in meaningful dialogue create supportive environments that enhance loyalty and satisfaction. These findings align with practitioner literature from Charlton (2021) and Mortensen and Edmondson (2023) , who emphasized the critical role of clear communication and meaningful leader-employee relationships in improving retention.

This theme supported Social Identity Theory by showing how team-building activities and recognition foster a sense of belonging among employees, reducing attrition. Arshad et al. (2022) and Shaikh et al. (2022) highlighted that group identity and belonging motivate employees to remain with their teams. Team building and teamwork strengthen the group’s bonds, creating a sense of unity among employees ( Arshad et al., 2022 ). Similarly, recognition establishes a sense of belonging, strengthening the desire for employees to remain within the team ( Shaikh et al., 2022 ).

While prior scholarly research, such as Kaleel et al. (2021) , touched on employee relationships, this study provided a deeper understanding of how team building and recognition activities strengthen employee retention. The findings extended the literature by detailing the role of non-work activities and leader-driven gratitude in fostering team cohesion.

Practitioners can reduce turnover by creating a strong team environment. This includes organizing team-building activities, both in and outside of work, and recognizing contributions through public acknowledgment or small gestures like providing coffee or snacks. Primary research participants highlighted these practices as effective.

Social Exchange Theory was extended based on this theme to illustrate how leadership support for employee development, through training, cross-training, and educational reimbursement, builds loyalty and reduces turnover. This finding aligns with Narayanan et al. (2019) , who noted that talent management practices minimize attrition, and Wei et al. (2022) , who emphasized the role of social relationships in retention. Employees with training opportunities see that the organization values them, fostering loyalty and creating a reciprocation of benefits with employees wanting to stay longer ( Narayanan et al., 2019 ). Cross-training provides collaboration opportunities, social relationship building, and trust based on employees similarly seeing the organization invest in them ( Wei et al., 2022 ). Educational reimbursement programs show long-term commitment by the leader, boosting employee loyalty ( Narayanan et al., 2019 ).

This study confirmed the critical role of tools and training, as discussed by scholars like Biro (2018) and Fletcher et al. (2018) . It also contributed new insights on cross-training and diverse work exposure as retention strategies, less commonly addressed in prior literature.

The study highlighted that offering training, cross-training, and educational reimbursement effectively reduces attrition and fosters loyalty. Similarly, business practitioners like Schawbel (2016) emphasized the rising expectation for development opportunities, particularly among younger workers, while Goler et al. (2018) noted that clear growth pathways and mentoring strengthen retention. These findings encourage practitioners to prioritize development initiatives that demonstrate a commitment to employees’ long-term growth and career advancement.