this post was submitted on 04 Jun 2025
59 points (98.4% liked)
PC Gaming
11629 readers
375 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I've never understood how reducing your staff can make a company more agile. Surely that's putting a greater workload on the people that are left. Also more agile while focusing on what matters most?
It's bullshit doublespeak that really means "we're cutting costs (in the short term, the only term that matters)". Reducing headcount doesn't reduce the workload, it just means each remaining person has to do more work.
to record profits to investors.
For a little while.
I guess you can have people who do things that deliver little tangible business value and you scrap those projects, that would lead to focus on areas that are most valuable (from an exec POV) and then you scramble the teams some and let them adjust to needs in the process, aka agile.
Sure they're trying to sell a bad thing as a good thing but that doesn't mean that's it's not the right thing for them (execs).
Disclaimer: did not read article
They are called middle managers.