主要观点总结
本文围绕网友对于裁员话题的讨论展开，涉及多个观点和经验分享。包括网友关于如何在裁员中幸存的建议、裁员的实际操作过程、以及对于裁员依据的讨论等。
关键观点总结
关键观点1: 网友经验分享
多位网友分享了自身或身边人在裁员中的经历，包括如何幸存、裁员的实际操作过程等。
关键观点2: 裁员决策因素
讨论中提到裁员决策并非完全基于业绩或绩效，更多受到办公室政治、个人关系、团队配合度等因素的影响。
关键观点3: 职位风险
网友指出带有“高级”字样的职位在裁员中风险更高，公司为了增加利润可能更愿意安排高端员工在高级职位上。
关键观点4: 工作表现与裁员
讨论中提到工作表现是裁员考虑的重要因素之一，但也强调除了工作表现外，其他因素如团队协作、出勤率、工作时间记录等也会被考虑。
关键观点5: 职场圈子小程序推荐
推荐职场圈子小程序，可以了解四大圈职场的最新资讯、专业知识经验、政策解读等，并与其他职场人士互动解决疑惑。
正文
近日，有不少外网的网友
讨论如何在裁员中“幸存”下来这一话题，四大君觉得很有启发。我们整理了一些网友的评论，一起围观一下！
有一位网友分享自己的亲身经历如下：我曾经对某合伙人说"去死吧"我得去见管理合伙人。
我不仅躲过了裁员，那年还拿到了一大笔奖金。这就是我在裁员中生存下来的策略。
那时我是一名Senior。我和合伙人一直在争论他承诺给客户的时间，而我无法通过电子邮件与他见面。邮件措辞越来越激烈，我对他说:“如果你认为你能让我在这些时间工作，你可以去死吧，你这个愚蠢的混蛋。”
最后在Senior 1结束时我拿到了1.2万美元的奖金，并在Senior 2末我提前晋升为经理。这发生在大约十年前。
另一位网友分享道：对于
在私营企业
裁员中幸存下来的人，
我能给你的最好建议就是让自己变得难以被取代。
每个人都是可替代的，但有些人比其他人更不容易被替代。
也许有必要对你的上级隐瞒如何完成某些任务和流程的知识。
作为管理者，我不喜欢我的员工那样做。但这就是重点，对吧?在做出裁员决定时，替换员工所带来的痛苦绝对是一个考虑因素。
在公共会计行业，避免被解雇的最好办法就是努力工作，比所有同行都做得更好。
他们不会解雇表现最好的员工。
如果你不想努力工作，不想成为一名优秀的员工，或者你不够聪明，那么你就必须接受这样一个事实:每当裁员的时候，就有一个裁员名额落到你的头上。
也有人描述了裁员的过程，
董事会根据财务部门的营业数据，决定裁员，再将裁员名额分配到各个部门，由部门负责人来决定谁去谁留。
公司也会将裁员计划提交给董事会和律师，敲定福利和遣散费。
他们必须在一定的时间内做出决定，会议将在1-3天内发出通知，通知人们决定。
这是一个冷酷而残酷的过程。
对于裁减人员的选择，主要是基于利用率，但也可以是其他因素
(例如，你和同事相处得好吗，客户喜欢你吗)。
1- Finance identifies that based on pipeline, current work, and trajectory that the company will be in the red and will burn through its cash hoard.
2- Finance will have multiple teams look at the data to validate.
3- A board meeting is held allowing the board to decide to (1) layoffs, (2) look for investors, and (3) get loans. In this market 1 is the only option.
4- Finance will give the $$ that needs to be cutto be comfortably in the black again. Another sub committee is formed and does multplie full day session immediately after to identify what internal initiatives are cut, what departments have head count reductions, and what hiring decisions will.be impacted.
5- A plan(s) is created and presented to the board and lawyers. At some point they have talked about benefits and severance and it's finalized here.
6- The rules are sent down in-force to department heads. They are given #'s of people to remove at each level. The high performers stay, but for everyone else it is this is when senior leadership get involved to decided who loves and dies in the grey area.
7- They must have the decisions made by a certain time, meetings are sent out with 1-3 day notice to inform people of the decision.
It's a cold and brutal process. For personnel selection, it is primarily based on utilization, but can also be other factors (i.e. do you get along well with coworkers, does the client like you).
The BIG issue is NO ONE anywhere gives honest reviews. If someone is below average (I have done this myself) the reviewer might like the person and be less honest. So if someone meets expectations, they might bit be.
These will hit senior roles as well, specifically for the bradely rules, where you are promoted to uselessness. Layoffs generally target these people first, allowing more competent people to take over. But you might have the most competent account lead in the region, but has missed all sales targets badly for 3 years, they will get hit as well.
有人力资源部门的网友给出了裁员的
实践引导
，例如，每个级别必须解雇多少人。
他们有明显的考虑因素——
他们会查看你的kpi，如利用率、业绩评级、销售额等。
但他们也会关注未来几年的薪资水平、薪酬范围和晋升轨迹
。
如果一个人没有那么多的人际网络，在高层中也缺乏支持和支持，那么就更容易让他离开。
HR gives Practice Leads our Reduction in Force (RIF) #s, eg, how many must be let go at each level.
Practice Leads fill in the names.
Yes there are obvious “talking point” considerations - they look at your KPIs, like utilization, performance ratings, sales, etc.
But we also look for years at level, pay band, and promotion trajectory. For example, if I have an SM who is a first year, ambitious, moving up quick, and not highly paid, of course I will keep them over a fifth year SM who is struggling to meet their sales, who is (in my opinion) overpaid due to being brought on during the 2021 competitive hiring blitz, and who isn’t “partner track” or maybe isn’t a cultural fit.
It’s also a little easier to let go of someone who doesn’t have as much of a network and lacks sponsorship/advocacy within the higher ranks. At best, they’re an unknown commodity and unprotected. At worst, they’re a poor performer and their prior EY bosses are struggling to say/document it (I say that specifically because of EY Nice mentality and everyone being so hesitant to give tough feedback even when it is warranted).
有网友认为，裁员可能是公司范围内的事，
但要根据每个业务部门的业绩而定
。
业务做得好的部门不会因为整个企业经营不善而裁员。
It varies across practices. Just like layoffs. Layoffs may be firm wide but it is based on the performance of each practice. A practice that is doing well will not be laying people off because the firm as a whole is not doing well.
有网友认为，就裁员而言，最重要的是，
任何带有“高级”字样的头衔都有更高的风险
。为了增加利润，公司很乐意将高端员工安排在高级职位上。mgr和sr mgr也一样。
On top of that any title with “senior” is at higher risk. The firm will happily place higher end staff in senior roles to increase margins. Same goes for mgrs vs sr mgrs.
Sr title = more risk during tough economical times.
Nah. Seniors are needed. Staff are generally useless.
Yet seniors are fired and staff is put under fire. In the end it's all about cutting costs.
有网友认为，
可以先
按经理和合伙人的个人厌恶程度排序。然后按级别和工资对员工进行分类。
经理们会根据业绩提出他们认为应该淘汰的人选。
拥有最大权力的合伙人可以推翻对较低合伙人/经理的裁员。
然后找到支持裁员的理由
，如工作时间记录、出勤率、利用率、参加的培训、获得的执照、之前的评论、客户投诉、错误等。
另一种选择是，
合伙人和管理人员被要求向被选中的人发放PIP，或者让他们的生活陷入地狱，直到他们辞职
。直到你晋升到管理层甚至合伙人级别，你才会看到这一面。
该网页认为作出裁员决定的依据实际上是90%的办公室政治和10%的绩效。
In my experience.... "We need to cull $x amount of FTE"
-
sort by personal dislikes across managers and partners .. these go first
-
sort employees by level and salary
-
managers suggest who they think should be culled based upon performance. Because the is their job and interest to make their team/client portfolio profitable.
-
partners with most power override cull to understaff lesser partners/ managers. Anyone can be culled here based upon numbers and your place in the ultimate hierarchy (fukng managers and senior managers is also intentional part of the plan). They don't know who you are, they don't care, you aren't on their engagements, your just a number.
-
find reasons to support the layoff, time entry, attendance, utilization, trainings attended, license attained, prior reviews, client complaints, mistakes etc
Getting put out of your misery is the Nice way.
Alternatively, partners and managers ordered to dish out PIP on the selected people and/or make their life hell until they resign. Their status and bonus is based upon getting rid of you for Free whether they agree with it or not. In my own experience this was my new manager initiation / pledge. My belief is this category of people can perform/review well, work hard, they just don't like you, you arent organic (lateral), non cultural fit, or they can't decide what to do with you, or they think you're already checked out and looking. They hate you but they Need you.
This is the real reason pip and reviews sound bs and not logical for many because this is the true nature of politics in the partnership model of professional services firms. You don't get to see this side until you're management or even partner level.
If you're under utilized it means you're either unknown, no one likes you enough to reschedule / put time and effort to train or mentor on their team, or you're already on the sht list.
THIS. i hate when people just assume that pips are purely performance based. it’s literally 90% office politics and maybe 10% performance
If one is under utilized that also means that these incompetent partners are unable to sell. EY truly sucks
有一位网友也分享他的经历，有一次裁员让我很难过。我是Senior，我那个被解雇的朋友也是。我从经理和短信中听到了很多关于他的好评。但是，有一个员工非常懒惰，表现很差。他却已经在那里待了一年半了。
这本身并不是真正的问题。更重要的是，这种人每天5点就下班了，一旦离开电脑就不可能联系上他。甚至当我们试图在晚上完成一份报告时，他们总是不在线，在这种情况下，只有我和我的经理工作到晚上10点或11点。
Its interesting to hear these responses. Im really sad about one of the layoffs. Im a senior and so is my friend who got laid off. I was surprised because i heard really good things about him from managers and SMs. Also, there’s a staff who is extremely lazy and is a poor performer. He’s been there 1.5 years now and still doesnt have teams or outlook on his phone and is slow to respond.
How is not having teams or outlook on your phone an indication of performance?
That alone isn’t really the problem. Its more that this person logs off everyday at 5:00 and is impossible to reach once they’re away from their computer. Or even when we’re trying to push to finalize a report in the evening, they always leave us and log off and it’s just me and my manager working until 10:00 or 11:00 at night in those situations. Just not a team player
So they want a work life balance? Cope harder haha
I see your point. We all have to protect our personal lives to make we have one😂
Honestly i just think the person does sloppy work and is lazy. Gets the same comments everytime and doesn’t care to fix it next time. And i get WLB is important. But actively logging off at 5:00 everyday and refusing to work before 9:00am is not realistic if you work for a client server.
Also im not alone. The person’s counselor set up a meeting with me to tell me they were considering PIP for them and wanted my opinion. So im not the only one who’s noticed.
