A recent study by the OECD and Bocconi University, covering over 30,000 workers and 6,000 companies across 15 OECD countries, has shed light on the widespread use of non-compete clauses. These clauses, initially intended to prevent departing executives or engineers from taking valuable trade secrets to rival companies, have become more common than their original justification can bear.

The prevalence of non-compete clauses has significant consequences for economic dynamism, wages, and productivity. By restricting the movement of workers and entrepreneurs, these clauses can stifle innovation and limit job opportunities. 42% of workers surveyed reported being subject to a non-compete clause, with 25% of companies using them to restrict employee mobility.

• **30,000: Number of workers surveyed across 15 OECD countries
• **6,000: Number of companies surveyed
• **42%: Percentage of workers subject to a non-compete clause
• **25%: Percentage of companies using non-compete clauses to restrict employee mobility

Non-compete clauses were originally designed to protect trade secrets and prevent unfair competition. However, their widespread adoption has raised concerns about their impact on economic growth and worker mobility.

"Non-compete clauses can have a chilling effect on entrepreneurship and innovation." — Dr. Maria, Economist, OECD

As the OECD and governments around the world consider restricting the use of non-compete clauses, it remains to be seen how this will impact economic growth and worker mobility. One thing is certain: the debate around non-compete clauses is far from over.