Its always the lowest in heirarchy who get beaten. Never does Layoff affect non-performing Leads and Managers. Ppl who have no support often get laid off in name of poor performance. Most of it is personal bias :( Hope things improve
By
Dinesh , System Engineer, IBM
| 09 17 2010 11:56:52 +0000
Check the link http://indiatoday.intoday.in/site/Story/111570/World/american-ceos-pocket-hefty-payouts-amid-massive-layoffs-study.html (American CEOs pocket hefty payouts amid massive layoffs: Study) The top 20% in the company need support of the rest 80% to accomplish for the company. Especially during a recession layoff it is particularly harsh. With recessions coming in such quick succession i.e in 2001 / 2002 and now again in 2008-2010 companies need to have built in cost efficiency into the system already in terms of hiring , spending etc. Have they all forgotten the lessons of the bubble burst? The entire layoff exercise is so candlestine especially in India unlike in the US/ UK. I have seen the communication to employess in a very reputed company US from one reputed company saying that the business drivers are the primary reason that we are letting go of the person. There is so much help provided. Incontrast in India, typically an employee is on bench or for some other reason is forced to resign citing performance reason. In the performance appraisal process every one has to be fitted on to a "bell curve" and the criteria for mapping an employee on the curve is never entirely objective. It goes on a lot of subjective inputs. After all the people who give the input also need to save his/her job. In anycase if anyone argues that the performance parameters are strickter during a recession, the business drivers are making it so. So why cite performance and not business drivers? The study in the article as in the link above clearly indicates the apathy of the people making decsions. Leadership is just not about achieving targets. It is also about how you take every one along to reach those targets. It is not that layoff should not be done. When it is used during a recession as a tool and as witnessed it is often misused. Otherwise why do the number of resignations increase during the recession if it is a normal annual exercise as quoted by IT bigwigs. If a study is done to see the number of people (asked to) resign during normal years and during a recession it will be very clear. Layoff is such a potent tool which is being used in such a reckless manner for such shortsighted gains that truly questions the ingenuity of the business leaders. Proper shock absorbs should be built into the system by the companies. Layoffs, right sizing, cost control, cost efficiency should be an ongoing process. Recession is not a period to start making "hay when the sunshines". Employees need to spend wisely and save for the rainy days. There is nothing like loyalty. In this economy be prepared for anything.
By
Kishor , Senior Analyst, Convergys Information Management (India)
| 09 15 2010 13:12:36 +0000
We all know that the employee are the stake holders of company if the company laid off their employees it means that the company do not want to hamper its revenue. Instead of sending their employee on lay of why they don't use the other strategy like minimizing salaries, integration etc So as per me the company which send their employee on lay off is not competitive or the decision has taken by wrong person.
By
Manmath Patil, Marketing executive
| 06 01 2010 18:31:44 +0000
It does if it is done only in recession. Cause recession or not, you got to separate the wheat from the chaff consistently all the time. Not only during recession.If done,only in recession it shows the 'chalta hai' attitude during the good times...n lack of vision and foresight.
By
Saud Rehman, Senior Embedded Software Engineer
| 05 16 2009 11:28:52 +0000
Yes, I do think that layoffs reflects the incompetence of the companies to beat recession. Take in case of Infosys, N R Narayana Murthy, chief mentor and chairman, Infosys Technologies, says that they can avoid layoff. Why only Infosys can avoid lay off, why not other companies ?? Whats wrong ?? Do other companies have employees who are incompetent ?? If yes then that company is incompetent...
References :
By
Amit Madhav, Senior Consultant, GKC
| 04 22 2009 12:23:54 +0000
I feel companies doesn't have a plan & they are going for an obvious way rather than planning it properly. Certainly there are other alternatives like 1. Send non billable managers
back to offshore 2. Cut high level incentives 3. Pay cuts 4. Other Cost cutting measures.....
By
Surendra Sinha, Senior Consultant, Tata Administration Services (TAS)
| 03 17 2009 13:52:24 +0000
|
Its a strategy to avoid a future problem Ex: for long term survival company, company should take these decisions and emotional feelings has no place in corporate life it does not show any incompetence of company
By
Manmath Patil, Marketing executive
| 09 16 2010 18:33:44 +0000
Layoffs infact gives the company to shed excess weight it gained through the good years.A smart company will resort to layoffs so that it could squeese through the difficult phase..moreover, the organisation gets to look into itself and take further corrective measures which would always show in the financial and competitive advantage the company enjoys in the industry
By
Kiran Sethumadhavan, Partner, Sunrise Associates
| 09 15 2010 13:07:20 +0000
Dear Navneet, I agree that the layoff's does not mean the incompetent of the companies. I believe the companies have got a golden opportunity to effectively plan and use the resources. In the past the companies used to spend 2 rupees when the expenditure of 1 Re was required as things were looking good.. But in the recent times, when things are not going good the companies have realized the worth of things. It is the best way to get rid of the non performing employees. Rather some companies have used it as a tool of cost cutting, but the term is not cost cutting but cost efficiency. The companies are becoming more competent by laying off the non performers, also the firms can hire good talent at a low cost.
By
Japan Shah, Assistant Professor, Oxford School of Management
| 05 14 2009 10:35:34 +0000
No I would not say that layoffs reflect the incompetence of companies to cope up with recession rather they do it to get rid of people who are not an asset to the company.As Mr.Dushyant rightly said it should be without any bias & they should not layoff employees just for the sake of it...there should be genuine and valid reasons behind it so that the employee doesn't feel that he has been ill-treated.
By
Jyoti Rath, Sr. Associate, Barclays
| 05 14 2009 07:05:07 +0000
Never, its provide a tool to mgt. to infuse new ideas and smart people into organisation which are scarce in booming economy and it alos provide chance clean off excersise of average and below average employee. But it must be genuine and without any bias.
By
Dushyant Hada, Territory Manager
| 05 14 2009 04:53:01 +0000
I would not call layoff as in-competency to the company; rather it’s a move to become competent for tomorrow. The primary objective of the company in recession is to reduce the operations overheads to sustain for tomorrow that includes not only resources but other services or facilities as well but we tend to see only those which we feel can impact us too and generally neglect the reduction in services like, reduced bonus, restricted cost for facilities etc... I feel that even we too does the same thing in our general life like saving for tomorrow and in strict environment reduce your daily cost to manage unexpected surprises. Thanks, Shreepal
By
Shreepal Shah, Asst. Vice President, Metaminds Global Solutions Inc
| 05 04 2009 12:30:19 +0000
This is a very pertinent and interesting question. The general tendency
of the person facing/fearing a lay off is that he is facing the brunt
of an organizations inability to handle the situation at hand. This is
quite a natural "cause and effect" reaction.
In all those times where I find myself in the unenviable position where I am having to make a lay off decision, I have found myself wondering exactly this - is it my incompetence that has lead to the situation? Could there have been anything that I might have done to avoid this predicament? Are there no other alternatives? Are things really that bad?
There never is an answer to these questions. It is just that somebody has to make a choice.
It is like the situation on the Titanic when the captain had to decide who to save and who he cannot after he realizes that the life rafts on board were not enough to save everybody!! The situation determines the action and the captain is the one having to make a very difficult choice.
The action often represents the initiative by the management to protect the overall interest of the organization. In that respect, this action is reflective of the management's willingness to take difficult decisions keeping the larger interest of the organization.
By
SANJEEV ARCOT, Partner/Principal/VP PROSOFT CYBERWORLD
| 04 20 2009 08:16:05 +0000
yes both Mr. Navneet and Mr.Shaju are right here, layoffs are just happening to get rid of the average and non-performers, and to get New people with average salaries for them and citing recession as the sole cause for the less salary, by which company is benefitting a lot by reducing the cost...doing 2 things at once..
By
Jithesh Ramesh, Actuary Manager, Tata Aig Insurance Solutions
| 04 16 2009 11:17:06 +0000
|
