Non-compete agreements are one of the most commonly used tools for protecting trade secrets, client relationships, and training investments — but their enforceability varies more by state than almost any other type of business contract. A non-compete drafted without accounting for that can be worthless exactly when a business needs it most.
Some states void them almost entirely
California, Minnesota, North Dakota, and Oklahoma treat most employee non-competes as void as a matter of state policy, regardless of how reasonable the terms look on paper. A business operating across state lines can't use one template and assume it applies everywhere.
Where they are enforceable, scope is everything
In states that do enforce non-competes, courts typically require the restriction to be reasonable in duration, geographic scope, and the type of work restricted. An agreement that's too broad in any of these dimensions risks being narrowed or thrown out entirely by a judge, even in an employer-friendly state.
Consideration matters more than people expect
Some states require something of value — a signing bonus, a promotion, continued employment offered at the time of signing — in exchange for a non-compete, especially if it's signed after employment has already started. A non-compete signed without adequate consideration can be challenged on that basis alone.
Drafting it to match where your employees actually work
A non-compete built around your state's specific enforceability rules — and updated as employees relocate or the law changes — is what actually protects a business, instead of creating a document that looks protective but collapses the moment it's tested.