Downsizing: Is less still more?

Impacts of Downsizing

Introduction

            In a broad spectrum, managers and organization leaders should center their attention on ensuring human dignity and justices while faced by downsizing needs. The process of selecting the employees to cut off should be ethical and legal. Otherwise, this can cause adverse implications to the employees and the organization at large (Cooper, Pandey & Quick, 2012). With respect to the case study provided, Teresa believes that the company’s decision in regard to downsizing is illegal and unethical. Consequently, Teresa has not only the right or rather mandate to object but also the ethical duty to object. In addition, she should not be prepared to loss her job at the expense of moral grounds.

            With respect to her initiating a discussion of the same on a local internet discussion board can be termed as illegal. This is because legal mechanisms such as litigation have been put in place to allow employees who feel the process of downsizing was not ethical and legal sue the company in a court of law (Cooper, Pandey & Quick, 2012). Evidently, venting her frustration on a local internet is absolutely illegal as this could have adverse impacts to the company and the employees left behind. This is simply because Teresa might give some inaccurate or rather misleading information about the company. The information she provides to the local internet discussion matters a lot as it can invoke diverse reactions by the employees who are left behind hence implicating to malfunctioning of the company. This can result to declining employee’s performance as they may feel that the company is not ensuring human dignity and justice and they may also think they are next to be selected for cut off.

Reference

Cooper, C. L., Pandey, A., & Quick, J. C. (2012). Downsizing: Is less still more?. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.