Maybe I'm just not a world class manager, but I feel like even if there were that kind of mismatch in priorities, it's hard to see getting rid of 30% of people

Maybe I'm just not a world class manager, but I feel like even if there were that kind of mismatch in priorities, it's hard to see getting rid of 30% of people at once being intended. Unless these people were all net negative contributors . . . although that hardly seems likely since they weren't selected on any performance-based metric, and the list seems to include some fairly high up people. It seems like a real stretch to read this as anything other than a bit of a self-own. Even if you wanted to get rid of all these people eventually you'd probably want to do that more gradually.