This is a horrific strategy. Not only is it dishonest attrition, but it's the wrong kind. You should cut complexity/failed projects and then cut people. If you

This is a horrific strategy. Not only is it dishonest attrition, but it's the wrong kind. You should cut complexity/failed projects and then cut people. If you cut people but don't cut workload/complexity, then the survivors just have to work harder. That's not sustainable, and with the underlying problems of the company (complexity overload) unfixed, it only becomes a worse operation. Sure, complexity-reductions need to happen and often those involve cutting jobs-- either through a layoff or attrition dynamics-- but just cutting jobs is a short-term remedy and won't work if the company itself isn't truly streamlined.