Reduction in force: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 8: Line 8:


{{sa}}
{{sa}}
*[[Lateral quitter]]
*[[Mediocrity drift]]
*[[Mediocrity drift]]
*[[Performative governance]]
*[[Performative governance]]
*[[La Vittoria della Forma sulla Sostanza]]
*[[La Vittoria della Forma sulla Sostanza]]
{{ref}}
{{ref}}

Revision as of 14:20, 12 December 2022

The Human Resources military-industrial complex
The instrument (the “telescreen”, it was called) could be dimmed, but there was no way of shutting it off completely.
Index: Click to expand:
Tell me more
Sign up for our newsletter — or just get in touch: for ½ a weekly 🍺 you get to consult JC. Ask about it here.

Reduction in force
rɪˈdʌkʃən ɪn fɔːs (n.)
(Also “RIF”)

The permanent removal of headcount — mass redundancy — usually targeted at that sweet spot in the organisation whose own reports aren’t so useless they can’t get by without meaningful supervision, and who aren’t so senior that they get to make decisions about who should be subject to a RIF.

Usually, therefore, it is a means of taking out a swathe of mid-ranking subject matter experts. We of the guild of mid-ranking subject matter experts find this fact rather chafing, to say the least.

We have a view that an organisation which needs a periodic reduction in force is one that is not properly managing its human resources month-by-month.

See also

References