I have had a few friends come to me recently, complaining about their work.
It is not always about the work itself. It is more about not knowing what is happening. There are rumours about layoffs, processes ending, teams changing, and projects moving around. Nobody seems to have a clear answer, and I can see what that uncertainty is doing to them.
This whole thought started with one of my friends.
She works for a large organization in a non-technical role. It is a repetitive process, and she has been doing it for about five years now. Things have been going well. The job pays her well, she is comfortable with the work, and she has been able to build her life around the stability it gives her.
She did not feel the need to move somewhere else or completely change her career.
And there is nothing wrong with that.
Some people value career progression. They want to learn more, take on bigger roles, and constantly move towards the next thing.
Others value reliability. They value knowing what their work is, knowing what it pays, and knowing that they can make commitments based on it.
A job can simply be a job that gives someone a comfortable life.
It does not have to become their identity or a never-ending challenge. They do not have to constantly turn themselves into a different person just to prove that they are growing.
For years, the job gave her exactly what it promised. Nothing more, nothing less. Because of that, she could make promises outside the organization. She could plan her expenses, take on responsibilities, and build a life around the income and stability she had.
Now there are rumours that the process may be going away, and that one change has created a whole chain of uncertainty.
Nobody knows what will happen to the people working there. Nobody knows whether they will be moved, retrained, or asked to leave.
Everything is unclear.
I am not saying that an organization should never expect its employees to change, adapt, or learn new things.
That is a reasonable expectation.
Roles change. Clients move on. Projects end. Processes become outdated. Organizations restructure. Change is inevitable.
But the way an organization handles that change makes a huge difference.
When a role changes, the organization has to understand what the role is becoming. The manager has to know what is needed for the process to continue and what the employee must learn to continue contributing within it.
You cannot simply tell everyone to upskill and leave the rest to them.
Upskill into what?
What is the process becoming? What skills will actually be useful? What will the employee be expected to do six months from now? Is there a path for them to move from where they are into the new role?
Asking someone to adapt is reasonable. Keeping them uncertain about what they are supposed to adapt to is not.
What is one of the most valuable things an employee can offer an organization?
The first thing that comes to my mind is dependability.
I believe one of the most meaningful things you can do for your career, no matter what your role is, is make a promise and deliver it.
You tell your manager that you will complete something by a particular date, and then you complete it.
When you do that repeatedly, people begin to trust you. Managers can plan around your work. Timelines can be communicated to customers and clients. Other teams know when they can begin their part.
That predictability makes a meaningful difference to both the employee and the organization.
But if an organization expects certainty from an employee, should the employee not be able to expect some certainty from the organization too?
No company can promise that a role will exist forever or that nothing will ever change. Change is part of how organizations survive.
What employees should still be able to expect is some clarity about what is happening.
What is changing? Why is it changing? What does the organization expect from the employee? What can the employee do to adapt? Is the process ending? Is another role available? When can people expect an actual answer?
Even saying, “We do not know yet, but we will have a decision by this date,” is better than leaving everyone in silence.
Uncertainty does not lead to productivity.
Once someone begins wondering whether they will have a job next month, every conversation with their manager starts to carry a second meaning.
They begin wondering whether they should apply elsewhere, cancel a plan, or reconsider a financial commitment they have already made.
Their attention is no longer entirely on the work.
That is not because they suddenly became a bad employee. It is because uncertainty has entered every other part of their life.
Some people adapt quickly when things change. They enjoy learning new things, moving between roles, and figuring things out as they go.
Others need more time, clearer direction, or a stronger sense of stability before they can adapt.
A manager cannot assume that every employee will respond to change in the same way.
They have to understand the people on their team. They need to know their strengths, how they work, what kind of support they need, and where they may be able to contribute when the process changes.
An organization has the same responsibility.
People, process, and profit are tied together. They are not separate things that can be changed independently without affecting one another.
People keep the process working. The process allows people to deliver value. That value eventually becomes profit.
When a company ignores one of these and focuses only on the others, the whole system starts to weaken.
Most processes began as an answer to a real problem.
Someone before the current manager made a decision based on the problems they faced at that time. A person may have stayed in the same role for five years because they understand the work and remain valuable there.
This is where I think the answer to most complicated problems begins with one simple question.
Why?
Why does this process exist?
Why does this person work in this role?
Why have they remained there for so long?
Why was the system designed this way?
Why is something no longer working?
Ask those questions before taking a sledgehammer to the whole thing.
Companies sometimes dismantle teams and processes, only to realise later that the work still needs to be done. Then they recreate similar roles, rebuild the same systems, or hire different people to solve problems that the previous employees were already handling.
Moving fast and breaking things may work in some situations.
It should not become an excuse to stop thinking.
Layoffs are part of this conversation too.
I understand that layoffs are not always avoidable. Projects end. Clients leave. Revenue changes. An organization may no longer need a certain process or may not be able to afford the number of people it currently employs.
A difficult decision may have to be made.
But how the company handles that decision still matters.
Cloudflare’s recent layoffs are one example of a company at least trying to reduce the damage. In the company’s announcement, affected employees in the United States were offered base pay and continued healthcare through the end of 2026, giving them more time and space to decide what came next.
That does not make losing a job easy. It does not remove the pain or uncertainty that comes with it.
But it recognises that people cannot rebuild lives they planned around their income in a few weeks.
People may have dedicated years of their time and energy to a company because the company made them feel comfortable and secure. That comfort allowed them to make promises outside the organization.
They may have taken a loan. They may be supporting their family. They may have planned an education, a marriage, a move, or something else that depends on the income they were told they could rely on.
Giving someone a short notice period and telling them to use it to find another job is not much of a transition plan.
AI has now become part of this conversation too.
I understand the value it can bring to an organization. It can improve productivity, automate parts of a process, and change how certain work is done.
But the existence of AI does not mean everything has to be replaced with AI.
Before replacing a person, a role, or an entire process, the organization has to understand why it exists. What problem does this person solve? What knowledge will disappear when they leave? What looks simple only because someone has spent years making it work smoothly?
Can the employee use the new tools instead of being replaced by them?
Can the process evolve without throwing away everyone who currently understands it?
I still believe dependability matters. Employees should make promises they can keep and deliver what they say they will.
But that relationship has to work both ways.
No organization can guarantee permanent employment. It can still be honest about what is happening, clear about what is expected, and considerate of the fact that employees make decisions about their lives based on the stability their jobs provide.
People can handle change. They can learn, move, adapt, and begin again.
Keeping them uncertain does not prepare them for change.
It only leaves them standing in the same place, wondering when the ground beneath them is going to move.
Top comments (0)