Tech giants have been in the spotlight during the past few weeks, though it might not be for the reasons we were expecting two years ago. We’ve all read about the massive layoffs in companies that had considerable advantage until just months ago. These companies were competing for the position of the best place to work due to their employee experience, privileged salaries, maximum flexibility, top-quality major equipment for every sector, stocks as form of payment, tempting incentive programs, career plans, and other models of compensation that made it difficult to compete against them when attracting talent—characteristics that made them worthy of Disney’s Cinderella fairytale.
Though we may have thought it wouldn’t be quick to spread, countries leading in Fintech, EdTech and other technologies soon began to recreate similar movements on a smaller scale.
Today, they generally make the mistake of over-hiring, not meeting their expectations, or fearing the recession that’s slowly appearing in the United States due to increased rates, combined with the war and other issues that are now considered the new normality.
From the standpoint of organizational culture, which proved to be a challenge to build (agile working environments, horizontal cultures, high levels of engagement), the aspect we need to analyze is the cultural impact that these decisions will have. They’re made under circumstances where they could possibly be taken prematurely, incorrectly or simply be responding to the whims of the stock market. Due to the inability to analyze their motives, I suggest analyzing the consequences they might bring about—particularly the cultural consequences.
-Firstly, they will suffer the temporary performance paralysis of their workforce. Quarterly reductions create a state of panic within the workforce, and a decrease in their performance and accomplishments, regardless of short-term improvements resulting from intimidation. Fear has never been the preferred motor for performance.
-Secondly, the possibility of entering a process of disengagement where the loss of a sense of security could potentially break the emotional ties of talent with their organization. An employee could lose 10% of their colleagues in the blink of an eye.
-Lastly, the ability to make difficult decisions that affect such a large group of people simultaneously makes way for the organization’s purpose and the cultural principals (behavior) regarding how they execute their downsizing.
Because every action has a reaction, we’ll most likely find ourselves among skeptical collaborators who are upset with the brands they represent and aware of their lack of control over their future, leaving room for potential entrepreneurs to search for a future outside the businesses that represent technology giants.
The key to generate damage control or strengthen the relationship between the organization and collaborators in this context, or to rescue at least some of the organization’s cultural essence, lies in the capacity of humanizing the process. This means accompanying those who leave as well as those who remain in ways that go beyond payment.
This accompaniment can be achieved through the way the news is communicated, emotional guidance for those who are leaving (such as outplacement assistance), and the speed of its execution (the faster, the better; with a clear start and finish). Vulnerable sectors should be especially looked after, and the process must include a diverse, inclusive mentality, and integrally care for the employee experience, basing the exit process on the organization’s values.
Because the risk is that, like a Disney fairytale, the carriage turns into a pumpkin.
By Ezequiel Kieczkier, Founding Partner at Olivia
Read original articule from Forbes here