Paradox of personnel cuts: streamlining but not increasing profits

Anphabe Company's newly issued report "Restructuring the organizational operating system" shows that there is currently a paradox of efficiency when streamlining does not go hand in hand with efficiency.

Accordingly, in reality, businesses often expect personnel/streamlining cuts to create a straight line upwards in profits. However, many businesses are falling into a "downward spiral" when cutting beyond the system's load-bearing limit because the more they try to cut to increase profit margins, the higher the hidden costs and operating risks. An Anphabe survey in Vietnam at the end of 2025 shows that only 31% of businesses said that current streamlining efforts meet expectations.

According to the report, there is currently a situation of productivity crisis and the psychological burden of those left behind after streamlining. During the streamlining process, as the human resources team becomes "thiner and leaner", roles and functions are integrated, 66% of personnel are burdened with more workload and 78% have new responsibilities.

After streamlining, the workload of the remaining personnel can increase by an average of 25-30%, making many employees feel more stressed and pressured. Anphabe company warns that a more worrying consequence is when employees have to apply new or contrasting skills that are not properly trained, making them feel "squeezed dry". At that time, efforts to make the organization more streamlined create the effect that the company/business only has a framework but lacks vitality and creativity. Employees do not work "smarter", they are only "holding" the work of retired colleagues.

The report also shows that in the context of the organization's "energy tank" running out, up to 63% of employees also feel exhausted regularly; 49% are always under pressure to always be ready to connect.

Notably, the report points out that many streamlining efforts are mainly focused on mid-level management (42%) and the criteria for cutting are only revolving around performance and position surplus before, rather than adaptability. That is, businesses are optimizing structure but have not optimized organizational energy.

See the original here