Rightsizing, Downsizing, Normalizing…
I do hate it when business use phrases to hide actions in order to reduce the potential impact and effects and one that I find increasingly annoying is “Rightsizing”. This is partly because it’s so often used to replace more accurate descriptions such as Redundancy.
It was used in Management Today “UBS is far from being the only bank which has announced
job cuts recently – everyone from HSBC to Credit Suisse has been busy
‘rightsizing’ their workforces…The job cuts at UBS amount to over 5% of its total workforce “.
Now, I know that “Rightsizing” has been used for some years but surely it’s poor management to have “Wrongsized” in the first place (see Tony Miller descriptions below) but I doubt that it’s the management jobs that are about to be rightsized! You can imagine the press release from UBS HR was at pains to seem to be “normalizing” the situation but is the term “Rightsizing” the correct one.
Thanks to Tony Miller for giving a reasonable explanation so that we can all make up our own mind!:
Downsizing
Is simply reducing the number of reporting layers in the business to produce a better line of communication and efficiency…Downsizing is a stressful and risky business and should not be carried out by anyone who has not experienced this technique.
Rightsizing
Involves reducing the organisation by a small percentage. By doing this you can keep the organisation trim and in better condition. It can be achieved by a number of painless means such as:
Freezing recruitment
Releasing the long-term sick
Releasing poor performers
Poor profits fuelled by unemployment
It’s inevitable that as companies such as Barclays, Lloyds TSB, Marks & Spencer and even Tesco suffer reduced profits they are developing a strategy that reduces costs by reducing staff.
Such companies then create smaller working teams or integrate the remaining staff into other departments together with their responsibilities.
There is a hidden downside with this strategy.That is that often there isn’t enough time, or motivation due to a sense of emergency, to integrate the new team properly so that they are capable of being as productive as they might be.
Our research, over nine years, into individual and team productivity following the integration of new people shows that only 60% of such changes deliver the results that were anticipated.
Poor communication, lack of understanding of team results and changes in management style all contribute to the potential failure. The result is that costs rise, goals and opportunities are not met and this results in further downsizing.
Companies that are changing their teams need to consider that they are in effect changing the make up of the team dynamic and need to consider a integration period in exactly the same way as if they were to be introducing a new members of staff