There is always uncertainty, because change is the only constant and we aren't very good at predicting, or dealing with change. Of course with practice we can improve, but getting better at something doesn't necessarily mean that it becomes easier, but it can be accepted. Over the last few weeks, there has been a lot going on.
Like much of the world, Finland is going through economic changes and as a result, a lot of the companies are adjusting for the conditions, with increasing layoffs and furloughs, as they look to save money. However, these changes aren't always about saving money directly, it can also be about structural change to shift an organization to better meet market conditions.
And often, these events align with a struggling economy, because essentially, need is the mother of invention and in hard times, a lot of companies will pivot. This means that an organization look to change direction, but find that they don't have the right people in place to make the changes or support them once made. So, they have to either internally shift people to new roles, or get rid of unsuitable people and fill new positions.
The challenge with internal transfers is that if it is for an all-new position, there might not be the in-house skillset required, so even if they want to shift people, they can't. Then, it is possible that the people who are in defunct roles don't necessarily have the skillset to move anywhere else internally, so they find themselves without a role at all and will be removed from the organization. In many cases, it isn't a direct statement on whether the person is good or bad at their job, just that due to the changes in the direction, they don't have a seat.
I sound impersonal.
It is very personal. It always is for those affected by changes in the organization where they lose their job, and for those affected that keep their job. While a corporation doesn't care since it is soulless, the people making the decisions, and those who are forced into conditions they didn't choose, do feel it. But, the fact of the matter is that if there is no need for a job to be done, there is no point paying for someone to do nothing.
Just think about taking your car that runs perfectly and has no issues at all, to the garage. And then paying the mechanic to stand there next to it, doing nothing, just so that you can keep them employed. Would you pay?
But, business can be hard, so decisions are made that don't always work, or something that was going well, suddenly changes because the market conditions have somehow shifted, or a new technology has been introduced. People can find themselves no longer able to add value, and when that happens, they don't last long - at least in private business.
Over the last few weeks, the company I work for, along with hundreds of other companies, have been going through labor negotiations globally, getting rid of some people who were underperforming, some who were no longer required, and shifting as many as they could into changed roles. It has been a hard time for many people, especially those who have reason to be worried for their position.
Today I found out that I am currently safe, as is my team, because we are a high-performing unit that delivers value. But again, this isn't about money. The reason that the team is safe is that we enable people to be better at what they do and help facilitate change through the organization. Change has been a constant in the technology sector and becoming comfortable with it is necessary to be there long term. However, not everyone is comfortable, so even if they do their job well, they can't cope with the constant disruption.
We all want stability.
But we are never truly going to have it in our lifetime. This means that whenever we feel safe, we are running on borrowed time, because it won't be long until the conditions change again, and that feeling rapidly evaporates and we are disrupted once more. Nothing is stable, even when we think it is. And even though I had a rational sense that I was going to be okay and keep my position, especially considering the cuts weren't that severe, there was still that emotional side saying, "bad things happen to you".
It speaks from experience.
Putting the emotional pain aside, I think that these cuts at all the companies are a good sign for the economy in about a year from now. In general, many of the companies that are making the cuts aren't in overly dire financial positions, which means that that they are setting themselves up for what is to come in the marketplace. If you look back at the GFC in 2008, it was soon followed by the longest bull markets in history. The previous longest was in the 1990s, which came after another difficult period of high inflation and interest rates.
As I said, there are alignment factors in play.
Right now seems to be the time that businesses are setting themselves up for that run on the markets and it will be no surprise if through the back half of 2024, there are going to be quite a few IPOs happening, as well as VC investment opportunities. I think a lot of 2024 is going to be dominated by an expansion of the AI-powered business models, and support networks. It is going to be a bit like the dotcom boom in the mid to late 90s.
Are you ready?
I am not. I am still in the frame of mind that I am glad to have a job I can add value to still. A lot of people might find in the not too distant future that this isn't the case, as a generative AI does 50% of their role, meaning that 2 seats, becomes one seat, like a game of musical chairs, at a mass scale across industries and the world. Like it or not though,
We are all on borrowed time.
Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]
