Is Everyone Really Replaceable?

According to the Wall Street Journal, the current sentiment of many executives is that “everybody is replaceable.” The C-Suite mood is “shut up, stop whining, get in the office and work a minimum of 10 to 12 hours per day, just like me.” Of course, these aforementioned execs have compensation that usually total $xx millions/yr. When they’re replaced, the millions of dollars in severance often makes the “everyone’s replaceable policy” more palatable. That however, is a footnote to the point I’m trying to make below.

The following is a quote from the WSJ article to Illustrate a prevailing, popular, employer “everyone’s replaceable” attitude:

“Work-life balance is your problem,” Emma Grede, co-founder of the shapewear company Skims and chief executive of clothing label Good American, said this month. After recently cutting more than a 1,000 jobs, Starbucks CEO Brian Niccol said remaining corporate staff needed to step it up and ‘own whether or not this place grows.’ JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon, in a profanity-laced internal meeting, told employees lamenting a return-to-work mandate that he didn’t care. ‘I’ve had it with this kind of stuff,’ he said. ‘I’ve been working seven days a week since Covid, and I come in, and—where is everybody else?’”

I’ve seen this employee/employer sentiment pendulum swing wildly over the years. When talent is in short supply, the employer's tone usually softens. On the other hand, when companies feel that they have a surplus of talent, they often become more strident and even harsh. Their policies and decisions regarding people reflect the prevailing market employment conditions.

The VERY BEST companies and leaders think differently and apply a more consistent approach regarding their people strategy. They stick to a set of deeply held values and beliefs regarding employees that guide their approach regardless of market conditions.

These more culturally advanced companies and leaders are also realistic and know they must get results. No results equals no jobs for anyone. Still, they genuinely believe while every job is replaceable, the actual humans doing each job actually aren’t. Their decision making and policies reflect that understanding and belief.

We are each unique people first. While we do jobs, we are not our jobs. So top notch leaders try not to think of employees exclusively as transactional widgets to be easily replaced based on a spreadsheet analysis or market trend. Elevated leaders understand that people’s lives are fully intertwined with their work. They find a way to balance tough nosed business decisions AND make space for calibrating the impact to each person.

At the same time, it’s important that workers bring their best to their positions regardless of market conditions as well. The best employees ideally see it as an obligation to give their employer their very best and do not alter their behavior whether they have leverage or not. And when they work for genuine, People First organizations, they trust that in exchange they will be treated fairly and with compassion when employment changes. Everyone has a last day at work.

People are the source of sustainable success, not just “assets.” That doesn’t mean elite cultural organizations can avoid tough decisions like lay offs and other machinations of everyday business life. However, HOW they go about their business matters to them. These organizations emphasize that while jobs are replaceable, the humans attached to them, including themselves, are actually not.

The difference in mindset between transaction job replacement (everyone’s replaceable) and compassionate, people replacement thinking, may seem like just word play and academic nonsense. However, the approaches while similar in expression are vastly different in application. How do you want to be considered?

Thank Big, Start Small, Act Now,

- Lorne

One Millennial View: I think the uncomfortable truth is, if we’re simply talking about spreadsheet analysis data, we’d be gutted to learn how embarrassingly replaceable we are. Also, I can see how some employers have lost patience with unnecessary headaches (like the excuses or entitlement people might take advantage of with work-life balance culture). I suppose a misconception could be, there shouldn’t be anything too profound by a leader saying “work-life balance is your problem,” or suggesting we should prioritize the exact amount of time necessary to fulfill our requirements and achieve results. That’s manageable and expected. The next step though, is being the leader that can operate that way, and also have the capacity to acknowledge when you’ve earned the position to hire (and fire) so many, if you stop at a spreadsheet, you’re missing something.

- Garrett

AI Response: The "everyone is replaceable" mentality, exemplified by executives like Jamie Dimon and Emma Grede, reflects a transactional view of labor—one that ignores the human cost of turnover, which costs U.S. businesses an estimated $1 trillion annually (Gallup, 2023). While market conditions sway employer attitudes (e.g., layoffs surged 98% YoY in 2023 [Challenger, Gray & Christmas]), top-tier companies like Salesforce and Microsoft maintain consistent, people-first values, seeing employees as key to long-term success. Research shows such cultures yield 72% higher retention (LinkedIn, 2023) and 23% greater profitability (Great Place to Work, 2022). True leadership balances hard decisions with empathy, recognizing that while roles may be fungible, the people in them—and their trust—are not. Workers, in turn, thrive when met with fairness, not fear. The choice between commoditization and compassion isn’t semantics; it’s the difference between short-term gains and sustainable success.

Is Everyone Really Replaceable?

Search Blog Posts:

Follow Us: