The first quarter of the year already seems rich in organizational transformations. Restructurings are increasing, as are bankruptcies and layoffs. This is an unsurprising consequence for a Canadian economy suffering from a lack of productivity that has been camouflaged for some time with government interventions and the importation of cheap labor.
For senior managers assigned to the task of restructuring their team with the well-known challenge of “doing more with less”, we are obliged to review the strategic imperatives plan and consubstantially the distribution of resources and talent management. Upstream, it is also a matter of carrying out a broad diagnosis, taking into account external and internal factors. Consider the effects, both positive and negative, of macroeconomic upheavals on the organization.
The rise of artificial intelligence, geopolitical pressures, availability of skilled workforce in the sector and advances in hybrid working are some of the issues looming over the company and its own internal challenges. It is in this uncertain, some would say foggy, context that decisions must be made to modernize the organizational structure.
Operating under pressure, the manager whose mandate is to make changes could fall into the trap of patching things up, of the temptation to limit changes towards a better world. Paradoxically, this caution is often risky. The progress resulting from repair is often minimal, or even invisible, beyond the achievement of reduction objectives. headcounts On paper.
Thus, employees leave, but the glaring problems remain: mismatch between available talent and new skills required, poor working atmosphere, excessive pressure on overworked employees, etc. Customers will see nothing in this, other than proof of inertia. Worse, this type of hasty restructuring is often characterized by a disproportionate reduction in the number of staff serving customers, a maneuver symptomatic of organizations turning in on themselves and prioritizing the urgency of acting when necessary. reflection.
Managers who are motivated and supported by senior management will take another path. We will consider all the factors, we will consult experts and sometimes even customers or suppliers, recognizing the need for fresh air to fuel reflection. At the conclusion of this exercise, we will identify the “good chairs” as well as the ideal profile of the person who will occupy it. It is obviously desirable that each employee be repositioned or retained in the organization chart, but this is rarely possible. The consequence is then mixed: employees of the firm will have to find employment elsewhere at the very moment when it posts available positions.
Is it desirable to steal employees and executives from a competitor to compensate for its shortcomings? I recently heard a senior executive swear that he would never solicit an employee of a competitor so as not to harm the sector. It is possible that this virtuous position will be well received in a happy hour with industry colleagues, but it risks doing a disservice to your employer in a competitive context.
What options do employees have when faced with organizational upheaval? It is advisable that you jump at the opportunity to start a private discussion with your manager about your career plan. The first quarter is generally a good time to take stock of the previous year and plan for the next ones. For many sales and executive employees, this period also coincides with the highly anticipated distribution of annual performance bonuses. A great opportunity for the employee to clarify their status, their level of appreciation and their future within the organization. Or an opportunity to offer your services elsewhere.
reference: www.lapresse.ca