PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 10135164

Ethical downsizing. Managers must focus on justice and human dignity.

Abstract

It is vital that leaders and managers focus on justice and human dignity in the workplace when faced with the possible need to downsize. First, administrators should clearly identify the goals of work force reduction, evaluate their importance, and consider whether they could be achieved through other means. Once they have made the decision to downsize, top managers must clearly communicate the reasons and the goals to those responsible for identifying the employees affected. Employees selected for layoff should be identified on the basis of the articulated goals for work force reduction, whenever possible. When this is not clear, the tough decisions can be based on a variety of factors: "across-the-board" reductions; employee abilities, qualifications, and performance; diversity goals; seniority; or multiple criteria. It is also important to respect human dignity in the layoff process. Affected employees should be informed in advance and given an honest explanation for the layoff. Ordinarily, they should be encouraged to work until the effective date. All employees need a clear and honest explanation of the reasons for and the expected effects of the layoff. There should be a stress on the free flow of information, without an effort to control it. How downsizing is handled says a lot about the nature of an organization and its leadership. Ethical downsizing is, first of all, a refusal to deny the complexity of the issues and evidence of the organization's commitment to justice and human dignity.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

L J Weber. Ethical downsizing. Managers must focus on justice and human dignity.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10135164/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Information-sharing among couples considering multifetal pregnancy reduction.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the information-sharing strategies of couples considering fetal reduction, and the impact of these strategies on the chances of encountering hostility in their social networks. DESIGN: Cross-sectional design of semistructured qualitative interviews, coded with respect to sharing strategies and level of personally directed hostility encountered. SETTING: Multiple Pregnancy Management Program, Comprehensive Genetics, New York, New York. PATIENT(S) AND INTERVENTION(S): Fifty women and their partners who were making a first visit to our maternal-fetal management facility, in order to consider the possibility of multifetal reduction as a pregnancy-management strategy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Development of information-sharing strategies, and the chances of encountering personally directed hostility regarding multifetal reduction associated with more and less selective strategies. RESULT(S): Four information-sharing strategies emerged from the analysis. Two of these strategies were relatively open (extended network, and both parents). Two other strategies were relatively selective (qualified family and friends, and defended relationship). The selective strategies were significantly less likely to encounter to encounter personally directed hostility (odds ratio, 3.88; 95% confidence intervals, 0.87-17.30). CONCLUSION(S): Selective sharing of information for couples considering multifetal prgnancy reduction is a potentially useful strategy for moderating potentially stressful relationships in their social networks. Clinics should find a way of integrating the discussion of selective sharing into their clinic's cultural repertoire of patient-support services.

Communication↗