I think it's two fold for major corporations.

• Companies want some turnover. Employees aren't all equal and retention efforts are targeted at top performers. This means the majority of workers simply don't see it. If you land in the bottom 15% of performers (this number is arbitrary), they likely want you to job hop for your raise.

• Employees typically have a number that acts as a catalyst to change jobs. Companies don't need to pay the same to retain employees as to attract employees. To attract new talent, you have to pay 10-20% more than their current role. This same approach is used by insurance agencies and paid services; they dont need to beat other offers, just be close enough to avoid the catalyst number.

My personal experience is that I stayed at my first big job for a decade. I would have made more in the short term hopping, but the experience and training I got from constant promotion and training was more valuable IMO. I did finally leave when I became unhappy because of leadership changes after my salary was tripled (35k - $125k) in my tenure. Finding a new job was easy and in two years with new jos I've seen another 90% growth. This wouldn't have been achievable without the opportunities offered through my long tenure (building new teams, managing practices, unreasonably expensive certifications). IMO you should seek active professional growth and then expect compensation. There is some delay between growth and comp, but it all works out in the end.