WHY THE FAMOUS "RESTRUCTURING" SHOULD BE TREATED WITH SENSITIVITY AND NOT AS AN ACT OF PUBLIC SHAMING

The current financial global crisis has had an impact for the workforce, of course. Throughout this year, major international companies ?here in Switzerland and abroad, had to let people go due to restructuring and budget reasons, despite Switzerland having a very low unemployment rate (What lies ahead for Switzerland: the economic outlook for 2024 - SWI swissinfo.ch) . Acknowledging the emotional toll of job loss, it's disheartening to learn about individuals facing this challenge, and I know because many years ago I went through it myself. I have been wondering why sometimes it is called “restructuring”. The term "restructuring" feels a bit clinical and impersonal, considering the profound impact it has on individuals. A recent exploration into its origin reveals that the term has been in use since the 90s, often synonymous with "layoffs." Yet, there is no euphemism that can soften the impact of job loss, a challenging experience no matter how it's phrased..

It has saddened me to hear from acquaintances and friends alike, that the processes of restructuring are not always done with the care the employees deserve. I have heard of a lot of people being put together in a conference room and told that a downsizing is happening, but nobody knows exactly where, which triggers anxiety in the average person, imagine for somebody who is already anxious by nature or going through a rough time. Another concern is the act of assembling all soon-to-be-affected individuals in one room, potentially fostering a sense of public shaming, damaging relationships among colleagues who haven’t been selected to leave the company.

Somebody could argue that there is no “nice way” to fire somebody, and that no matter how you do it, people are going to be sad/enraged/surprised/ in denial/even relieved and going through all grief stages. While this might be true, I believe there are compassionate ways to do that. Where we show care for the people who we are letting go, and we show them a path to rebuild themselves and not give up meanwhile. I wonder whether the reason lies in the fact that there is a lack of clear guidelines on how companies are supposed to carry this out currently. So why not considering it as a transition to be treated with compassion, a moment in which a person needs to be absolutely taken care of, mentally and physically (employer duty of care)? Don’t we spend time onboarding? What about more care on the “outboarding”?

As I mentioned before, being fired is no fun, I’m saying this because I have experienced it myself, and it has such an impact on self-esteem and on the ability of remembering who you truly are and your achievements, which all of a sudden appear all as a fruit of a coincidence (aka imposter syndrome or imposterism). Also, especially when you have been with the company for a while, it literally feels like a breakup. I remember my first job in Switzerland: I was 27 years old, and my colleagues were basically a family to me. So, when I was fired 7 years later, I felt lost, and I could also feel they did not know how to talk to me. There is a sense of loss, and all the uncertainty and frustration that comes with it.

So, what can we do, to make sure we support the people who need to leave the company because of restructuring or are actually waiting for the restructuring to take place and know in which boat they are navigating?

Drawing on my experience and work with clients during career transitions and mental well-being trainings for companies, here are some suggestions:

-???????? When possible, avoid to surprise people would be best, as also outlined in this HBR article How to Fire Someone With Compassion (hbr.org), where the author talks about the importance of clarity throughout the process of evaluation and assessment and also of downsizing.

-???????? Whenever possible, don’t make people who are fired train other people. While the usual is that the tasks of the person who is leaving are divided amongst other remaining colleagues, the person might not be in the right mood to teach other with enthusiasm of course, or might be already preoccupied with job search and interviews. Consider alternatives like having them organize files for an efficient handover or creating documents outlining crucial tasks/projects

-???????? Communicate personally to each individual, even if there is a mass change: every person is unique and deserves attention and care.

-???????? Think of a plan for the people who stay: what could they need, and how to make sure they also grieve?

-???????? Ongoing support from the date of announcing the restructuring to the last day of work. Not all companies will have enough resources to do that. This is why the use of first aiders for mental health as one of the main support elements (HR personnel as first aiders is also something ideal in these circumstances): training people in first aid in organizations is important: they will know what to react if somebody is not feeling well and will know where to signpost them for further help, such as employees assistance programs or important support numbers. Anyone in the organization can be a mental health first aider.

-???????? Offering outplacement is a great way to stimulate people who are leaving to be able to think of their career and establishing a new routine.

-???????? Avoid firing people over a virtual platform. Not only is impersonal, but it could also come with a risk of having a camera off situation and a lot of discomfort.

And to finish up this January Awareness Generator article, perhaps an important self-coaching question for companies on this topic could be: How can our company proactively implement these elements to support employees during times of change?