Involuntary career events, corporate outplacing, rightsizing – the corporate world is certainly not short of euphemisms when it comes to laying off employees. In January 2024, thousands of people lost their jobs, with the tech industry alone making up 32,000 of these job cuts. The manner in which this bad news is communicated is vital in the current climate, where social media backlash is a real concern for businesses. But are these softer terms really any better? According to Harvard Business School professor Sandra Sucher, this is a form of “moral disengagement”, where the individuals responsible for letting employees go try to rationalize and soften their actions.
The Impact of Euphemistic Language
Sucher explains, “The fact that you’re calling it downsizing or an org change — which it very well probably is — doesn’t mean that workers are not going to feel something as a result of what you’re doing.” These euphemisms became popular in the late 1980s and 1990s as job cuts became more commonplace. Prior to this, layoffs were less frequent and usually associated with a specific manufacturing plant closing down.
Examples of this kind of language are not hard to find. Spotify Technology SA, for instance, used the term “right-sized” when it announced job cuts. Citigroup Inc. spoke of a “simplified operating model” when announcing plans to cut 20,000 jobs. Mark Zuckerberg of Meta Platforms Inc. made reference to “org changes” in a memo discussing personnel shifts, including job losses.
Does Euphemistic Language Really Help?
Robert Sutton, a professor at Stanford, has dubbed this vague language “jargon monoxide.” He points out that executives who use this language believe it will be less upsetting to employees. But in his view, the effect is quite the opposite. The shift away from the word “firing” could be due to the stigma associated with it, suggests Wayne Cascio, a professor at CU Denver Business School.
However, these synonyms are not just corporate double-speak. They can have specific implications that help a company plan its next steps. For instance, “simplification” could mean job cuts, or it could denote a reduction in meetings. “Restructuring” could just mean an employee is moving departments. “Furlough” implies employees will return after an unpaid absence. The term “rightsizing” is intentionally vague, allowing the company flexibility in its plans.
A Better Way to Announce Layoffs
According to Sucher, phrasing can vary by region. For example, “reduction in force” is more commonly used in Europe. But regardless of the terminology, there is a better way to announce layoffs. Company leaders need to take responsibility for the loss of jobs, especially given that many of these layoffs are due to over-hiring in the post-pandemic period.
“You have to acknowledge the fact that you have done something that you understand has hurt their life in a very direct way,” says Sucher. So, while euphemisms might soften the blow for the executives, clear, honest communication is what employees really need in these difficult times.
To keep up with the changing needs of the workplace, subscribe to CHRO Daily, our newsletter designed to support HR executives.
