Another day, another restructure announcement from a major corporation. Thousands of jobs slashed. Contractors shown the door. And for some unlucky employees, the first hint that their career is over comes not from their manager, but from an impersonal IT email requesting their laptop back.
If this script sounds familiar, that’s because it is. We’ve heard it before, we’ll hear it again, and each time it lands with the same hollow thud of corporate jargon masquerading as leadership.
The predictable playbook
The messaging is almost paint-by-numbers at this point. A new CEO arrives, or an existing one needs to make their mark, and out comes the well-worn playbook of corporate transformation:
“We need to put our house in order.”
“We must get back to basics.”
“This restructure will create a leaner, more competitive business that drives profitability.”
But what makes these announcements so jarring? They inadvertently reveal more than they intend to.
When a CEO declares they need to “put the house in order,” the implication is clear. Someone wasn’t doing their job properly before. Presumably, that someone was the previous leadership team. Yet these same leaders were celebrated, well-compensated, and presumably competent enough to run a multi-billion-dollar organization. So, which is it?
The evolution that wasn’t
Then there’s the classic line about customers evolving and industries changing. Of course they are. That’s not news. It’s Tuesday.
Wasn’t monitoring customer needs and industry trends always part of the job description? Did the previous leadership team somehow miss the memo that markets were evolving? Or is this just convenient shorthand for “we’re making cuts and need a narrative that sounds strategic”?
The real head-scratcher comes with phrases like “we need to do our basics right.” This suggests that a major corporation, one trusted by customers, investors, and employees somehow wasn’t doing the basics right. If that’s genuinely true, that’s a damning indictment that deserves far more explanation. If it’s not true, then why say it?
The legacy project
What drives these restructures? I believe it is executive legacy-building.
Every leader wants something they can point to. A transformation. A turnaround. A “bold vision” that looks good in shareholder presentations and, eventually, in their LinkedIn profile when they move on to the next role.
There’s nothing inherently wrong with ambition, but when that ambition manifests as thousands of job losses delivered via impersonal channels, we must question whether this is leadership or just career management dressed up in strategic clothing.
The profit paradox
Here’s where the cognitive dissonance really kicks in: the insistence that “this is about positioning for growth and profitability” as if profit wasn’t always the goal.
These companies aren’t charities. They’re profit-driven enterprises. Everyone knows this. So, when leadership acts as if focusing on profitability is some revolutionary new approach, it rings false. The business was presumably focused on profit yesterday, last quarter, and last year too.
What’s changed? And if something fundamental has shifted such as a new competitive threat, a regulatory challenge, a genuine strategic pivot, then say so clearly. Employees and the public can handle nuance. What they can’t stomach is being told the obvious as if it’s profound.
What about the people?
And this brings us to the most glaring omission in these corporate announcements: what’s in it for the employees who remain?
“We’ll be leaner and more profitable” is music to shareholders’ ears, but what about the people who’ll be expected to pick up the slack? Who’ll manage the increased workload? Who’ll maintain service standards with fewer hands-on deck?
The unspoken answer is often: everyone else, with more pressure, less support, and the lingering anxiety of wondering if they’re next.
A different kind of courage
There’s a better way to handle this, and it starts with treating employees like adults who can handle the truth.
If market conditions have genuinely changed, explain how and why.
If the previous strategy wasn’t working, acknowledge it honestly rather than through veiled criticisms.
If this is about cutting costs to boost short-term profitability, say so, don’t dress it up as customer-centric transformation.
And for the love of all that’s decent, if you’re letting people go, have the courage to tell them directly, not via an IT email about returning equipment.
Leadership isn’t about delivering perfect news. It’s about delivering difficult news with honesty, clarity, and respect. It’s about taking responsibility rather than hiding behind buzzwords.
Employees might not like the decisions, but they’ll respect leaders who communicate them with authenticity. The current approach of corporate speak that disrespects everyone’s intelligence and achieves neither understanding nor respect.
It just leaves everyone wondering why the script never changes, even when the characters do.
#IC #internalcomms #leadership #narrative #change #EX
