Learnings from a Professional Divorce Doula — Layoffs Because You Got No Money
Continuing the separation thoughts for MRC’s (multiracial multicultural institutions) with my experience with layoffs. As it should be, this is really fraught and I’m going to focus on two different kinds of layoffs.
One, money isn’t coming in and it is a choice between closing down or doing a layoff. I will focus todays post on this situation.
Two, it has become clear a model doesn’t work — either for sustainability or impact — but your staffing doesn’t allow for a change in direction before an emergency happens. I will write about this situation tomorrow.
First, I’m a believer that every executive team should always be armed with the cost of closing down the business equitably. You should know what that number is and start to make plans in time to honor that number. I see the most difficult situations for staff teams pop up when leaders hold on to promise too long and then have to give really bad transition money to staff to make a layoff happen. Of course sometimes a promise fails, a contract isn’t honored, or a big move doesn’t pan out and the realization is more sudden. I do not deny this creates different conditions you must be responsive to, however more often, our lack of a closing plan often has us miss the intersection in which you can make plans that do not devastate everyone.
I know this is going to be the hardest thing I say for some but I think whenever possible we should be giving at least 8 weeks of severance to our teams (preferably 12). Sometimes this is not possible and I understand that. But humans need a month of recovery before a job search. We set up people to carry their trauma with them to the next thing. We support ecosystem health when we give processing time.
Next, in my experience multicultural and multiracial institutions the how you notify people is really important. There is no way to make a layoff unpainful. It is often a traumatic rupture and can be the worst day some people have lived. We architect these conversations to lower pain and I think that is an inadvertent programming to help the executive themselves, not the people working for them. Pain is inevitable and the architecture needs a structuring through a lens of transparency (it should answer the question why is this happening to me?) and care (it should answer the question, what do I do now?).
Staff should be allowed to be as angry as they want to be. Sad as they want to be. It is the one time I believe teams have no responsibility to be emotionally disciplined. Shock and programmed trauma response will do what they do. It is not our job to convince them of any narrative. It is our job to build a firm support wall and follow-up boundaries for separation.
Remaining staff should be absolutely clear about what they are signing up for. Changes will be made, values will be reevaluated, and strategy will be recalibrated. When possible, we should create an exit package that does not require economic or emotional peril to make the choice.
