The leadership crisis within Revenue Operations at Gusto is not a temporary setback—it is the logical outcome of a culture that prioritizes internal alliances over operational integrity, endurance over well-being, and personal relationships over measurable contributions.
In the past few weeks alone, multiple managers have resigned, leaving an already strained leadership team to absorb untenable workloads with no strategic investment in long-term sustainability. Rather than interrogating why so many key employees are leaving, leadership deflects responsibility, placing the burden of adaptation on individuals rather than acknowledging deeply embedded structural failures.
A key contributor to this dysfunction is the People Team (HR), which actively prevents managers from maintaining effective teams. Rather than empowering leadership to make necessary decisions impacting productivity, HR enforces policies that protect underperformance at the expense of the company’s success. Managers are repeatedly denied the ability to course-correct dysfunctional team dynamics, leaving ineffective employees in roles where they actively hinder progress. This refusal to allow managers to take decisive action forces middle management to absorb the burden of enforcement without the authority to make meaningful changes. Meanwhile, senior leadership allows chaos to persist, shifting accountability downward while remaining detached from the operational consequences. The result is a workplace where leaders are set up to fail, high performers are left to pick up the slack, and employee engagement deteriorates under the weight of unresolved dysfunction.
Beyond the issues of talent exploitation, another underlying factor continues to shape internal decision-making: after-hours alliances and blurred professional boundaries influencing promotions and career opportunities. Within Revenue Operations, it is clear that leadership selections are often dictated by personal affiliations rather than objective performance. This creates an exclusionary environment where opportunity is gated by social access rather than professional merit. Rather than fostering a culture of accountability, ethical leadership, and equitable career growth, Revenue Operations leadership frequently advances individuals based on informal personal networks rather than demonstrated expertise. Employees who are unwilling (or unable) to engage in these dynamics find themselves at a systemic disadvantage, regardless of their measurable contributions to the organization.
The company does not suffer from an inability to retain talent; it suffers from an unwillingness to value it. Until Revenue Operations leadership and the People Team acknowledge that exclusionary promotion practices and talent exploitation are not sustainable business models, this pattern of high turnover, managerial burnout, and workplace inequity will persist. For professionals seeking an environment that prioritizes merit-based advancement, operational integrity, and ethical leadership, this is not the place.
