From an employee's or an employer's point of view? A non-compete makes complete sense from an employer's point of view for an employee filling a critical functi

From an employee's or an employer's point of view? A non-compete makes complete sense from an employer's point of view for an employee filling a critical function. If you're running a business and hire a CTO, having them sign a non-compete makes sense, since it limits their options and makes it harder to jump ship. A confidentiality agreement does not provide the same limitations -- it doesn't prevent the employee from quitting and getting a new job. Note: I'm purposefully NOT discussing whether or not it is ethically correct, or if it's the right thing to do, or if it will create a more motivated employee, or anything of the sort. Also, I understand that employers can't give that justification or the agreement would be ruled invalid. But as you said, what other point is there that's not served equally well by other means?