Goldman Sachs Is Terminating Poor Performers. You Should Too

Not every person you hire is going to be a home run. And the more people you hire, the more likely you are to have some dead weight around the company. With nearly 50,000 employees, it makes sense that financial giant Goldman Sachs wants to cut some employees loose.

Reports are that they will cut between 1 and 5 percent of jobs this fall. While that may be awful for Goldman Sachs employees who will lose their jobs, cutting poor performers is a policy you should follow in your business. Here’s why.

Your business needs everyone to count.

I’m not saying that you should hire only type-A people who are busting their buns to become CEOs. You definitely want people who are content to just do their jobs–yes, even some of those “lazy girl” type employees (who come in all genders).

To keep reading, click here: Goldman Sachs Is Terminating Poor Performers. You Should Too

Related Posts

2 thoughts on “Goldman Sachs Is Terminating Poor Performers. You Should Too

  1. When did requiring the workers to do the job hire for, became a need to force evaluations on performance on the job? Isn’t feedback on performance a necessary and ongoing process in every job? The only thing “quiet quitting” established was that some jobs don’t really require a major effort and if you wished to progress further in your career plans (get a promotion), you might have to put in more effort.
    Requiring a worker to do the job that they were hired for is not demanding but an essential reason you have the job. Maybe sometimes the review of the performance may sound overly demanding and one has the right to ask for explanations and re-training, but eventually to keep the job everyone has to perform the minimum effort required because no one gets paid to just show up to work.

  2. The problem is that this often turns into “lean staffing”, where you have just enough people to handle the workload. And the problem with THAT is that as soon as someone gets sick or quits or gets promoted, everyone goes from 100% to 120% booked. That very quickly becomes standard, and everyone burns out.

    I’m not saying that trimming dead wood is bad. But there are inherent risks to this that are worth considering. If you trim too far, you lose flexibility and become fragile as an organization.

Comments are closed.

Are you looking for a new HR job? Or are you trying to hire a new HR person? Either way, hop on over to Evil HR Jobs, and you'll find what you're looking for.