Ir para o conteúdo
ZTHEX View on the site →
INSIGHTS · LAYOFFS TERRITORY

Why would 9 in 10 HR leaders rethink AI-linked layoffs?

Because the payroll saving is immediate and visible, and the cost of lost knowledge is deferred and invisible. The first lands in the quarter; the second shows up when a process stalls and nobody knows why.

Was the mistake automating too early?

Not always. The recurring mistake is treating the person as a task executor, when part of their value was holding context — and context is exactly what the tool that replaced them doesn’t retain.

How does that cost show up in practice?

As rework with no apparent cause: a deadline blown, a supplier that didn’t respond, an exception nobody knew how to authorise. Each looks like an isolated incident until someone adds them up.

What can be done before deciding?

Measure what exists only in those heads, before the decision is made. Once it’s announced, the incentive to go into detail disappears.

Nobody records “we lost the knowledge” as the reason for a problem. What gets recorded is a process failure — and the process gets fixed instead of the cause.

On the difference in damage between explicit and tacit knowledge: Systematic review, Emerald. On the claim that 42% of a role’s expertise is known only by whoever holds it: original Panopto publication // vendor evidence, not a universal benchmark.

// relacionado: what leaves with the person · does the exit interview work? · what a cycle costs

ESTIMATE THE CYCLE SIZE ALL READS
← PREVIOUS NEXT →