5 ms·
Because while that's the top-line for the 18,000 people affected (12,500 today), he'd desperately like that not to be the only thing the other 100,000 people wh
by ath0 12y ago
Because while that's the top-line for the 18,000 people affected (12,500 today), he'd desperately like that not to be the only thing the other 100,000 people who are staying hear. He wants the rest of the people to first hear: "We're changing for the better, and while these layoffs are a bad thing, it's necessary pain we have to go through to be better in the long run." That means wrapping the bad news with as much context and transparency as you can, every time you talk about it.
- sokoloff 12y agoI agree with your overall sentiment that you can't just lay bald facts out there, devoid of context and expect great things to happen. However,if I were famous enough to propose a Sokoloff's Law, it might say "If your goal is to increase transparency, you've failed once the phrase 'realign our workforce' or 'work toward synergies and strategic alignment' creeps into the draft."
- pfitzsimmons 12y ago"He wants the rest of the people to first hear: "We're changing for the better, and while these layoffs are a bad thing, it's necessary pain we have to go through to be better in the long run." Right, but the question remains, why did he not just say exactly what you just said? Why use the business school/managementese style language? Why not use language that is human and expresses empathy?