Reduction in force: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 7: Line 7:
We have a view that an organisation which needs a periodic [[reduction in force]] is not properly managing its human resources month-by-month.
We have a view that an organisation which needs a periodic [[reduction in force]] is not properly managing its human resources month-by-month.


the JC has a view that redundancy in a complex organisation is, at some level, quite a good thing; a [[reduction in force]] is an ''elimination'' of redundancy, and is therefore more fraught than it should be. Elimination of ''superfluous'' redundancy is one thing, but over what period should we measure superfluity? If [[Credit Suisse]] is any guide, it is [[Archegos|something like ''250 years'']].
the JC has a view that [[system redundancy|systemic redundancy]] in a [[complex]] organisation is, at some level, quite a good thing; a [[reduction in force]] is an ''elimination'' of redundancy, and is therefore more fraught than it should be. Elimination of ''superfluous'' redundancy is one thing, but over what period should we measure superfluity? If [[Credit Suisse]] is any guide, it is [[Archegos|something like ''250 years'']].


{{sa}}
{{sa}}