The Impact of Downsizing on Families


TheImpact of Downsizing on Families

TheImpact of Downsizing on Families

Downsizinghas been one of the most controversial elements in the contemporaryworkplaces. It underlines the reduction in the size or magnitude of aparticular business entity through the elimination of divisionsand/or workers in a company. This is particularly aimed at coming upwith techniques for enhancing the efficiency and productivity, aswell as profitability in the short-term and long-term. Given itsintended effect or impact, it is evident that downsizing would have apositive effect on the sustainability of the business entity.However, the same may not be the case for the families that aredirectly affected by the downsizing. Indeed, while there may bediffering opinions, it is evident that downsizing would most likelyhave a negative effect on the families.

First,downsizing would, with no doubt, mean that the employees would eitherlose their sources of income or even have them reduced. This meansthat they would be experiencing a reduction in the disposable incomethat they can use on their families, whether to fulfill the basicneeds or even to cater for some luxuriesi.Of course, the loss of income could also mean that the families wouldnot only have to do with particular items but also move to otherneighborhoods that are cheaper for them, possibly for a short-term.Of particular note is the fact that every neighborhood comes withparticular social connections, as individuals form links with otherpeople in the neighborhoods. Needless to say, movement or relocationfrom a particular place to another would mean that the individualswould have to cut the links or connections. In essence, downsizingwould not only affect the economic prospects of the individuals butalso the social prospects.

Onthe same note, downsizing may mean that the parents would have lesstime for their families as the tasks that they are expected toaccomplish in the workplaces increase. Indeed, the elimination ofdivisions in the workplace would mean that the existing tasks wouldbe heaped on the remaining employees, which essentially means thatthey would have less time to spend with their familiesii.It is noteworthy that spending less time with the family is likely toresult in the development of cold relationships between the familymembers.

Inaddition, the loss of income and decrease in the amount of time thatthe individuals can spend with their families would result indepression and stress particularly in the case of individuals who aredirectly affectediii.This may result in stressful relationships between the family membersor even breakage of marriages and subsequently, separation. Thismeans that downsizing would result in the breakage of families.

Moreoften than not, some sacked members of the family have a hard timerevealing this development to the family members. Indeed, it is thecase that some individuals remain secretive about the loss of jobs,keeping their families in the dark, all in the hope of keeping theirstature in the family and trying to get other income generatingactivities before they can be discoverediv.This, essentially, means that the downsizing may result indeterioration of relationships between family members, causingfrequent rifts and mistrust. This particularly occurs in the case ofmen, especially given the largely patriarchal society thatcharacterizes the modern world, where men are supposed to be the mainproviders in the family. It is often the case that the loss of jobsfor men would most likely upset the balance in the families, withtheir women counterparts taking over the mantle of providing fortheir families, sometimes to the detriment of the authority of themen in the family front. The end result, in this case, would be thebreakdown of families.

Inconclusion, downsizing often breeds controversy, with numerousindividuals holding different opinions regarding its impacts andefficacyv.Nevertheless, downsizing, more often has a negative effect on thefamilies particularly the ones that are directly affected. Indeed, itis often the case that downsizing would result in a decrease in theincomes that families have at their disposal, particularly wheretheir services are reduced of even eliminated altogether. Inaddition, it may result in a reduction of the amount of time thatindividuals have at their disposal, which may essentially result inmore strained relationships between the individuals and theirfamilies. There are numerous cases where individuals would keep theloss of their job a secret in the hope of retaining their statues,which eventually causes rifts and mistrust in families.


Burke,Ronald J., and Cary L. Cooper. 2000.&nbspTheorganization in crisis: downsizing, restructuring, and privatization.Malden: Blackwell Publishers.

Cooper,Cary L., Alankrita Pandey, and James C. Quick. 2012.&nbspDownsizing:is less still more?&nbspNewYork: Cambridge University Press.

Greer,Charles R, 2004. Strategic&nbspHumanResource Management: &nbspGeneral&nbspManagerial Approach,Second&nbspEdition, Person Education

Karake,Zeinab A. 1999.&nbspOrganizationaldownsizing, discrimination, and corporate social responsibility.Westport, Conn. [u.a.]: Quorum Books.

MacCormick,David. 1998.&nbspThedownsized warrior: America`s army in transition.New York, NY [u.a.]: New York Univ. Press.

i Burke, Ronald J., and Cary L. Cooper. 2000.&nbspThe organization in crisis: downsizing, restructuring, and privatization. Malden: Blackwell Publishers.

ii MacCormick, David. 1998.&nbspThe downsized warrior: America`s army in transition. New York, NY [u.a.]: New York Univ. Press.

iii Karake, Zeinab A. 1999.&nbspOrganizational downsizing, discrimination, and corporate social responsibility. Westport, Conn. [u.a.]: Quorum Books.

iv Greer, Charles R, 2004. Strategic&nbspHuman Resource Management: &nbspGeneral&nbspManagerial Approach, Second&nbspEdition, Person Education

v Cooper, Cary L., Alankrita Pandey, and James C. Quick. 2012.&nbspDownsizing: is less still more?&nbspNew York: Cambridge University Press.

Related Posts

© All Right Reserved