DOGE Layoffs And The Forgotten Art Of Strategic Workforce Pruning

Head of DOGE Elon Musk wields a chainsaw as he leaves the stage at the Conservative Political Action ... [+] Conference
Getty Images
When Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) introduced sweeping layoffs to federal agencies in the name of “efficiency,” it grabbed headlines. But are these drastic workforce reductions truly making the government leaner and more effective? Or are they inadvertently stripping it of key talent and institutional knowledge vital for long-term operational efficiency and innovation?
Layoffs surged by 245% in February, with 62,000 government employees cut under this initiative. Plans for deeper reductions are reportedly underway, targeting agencies like the IRS and Department of Education, with staffing cuts reaching up to 50%. Yet, the math doesn’t align with the broader fiscal goals. Economists at Deutsche Bank estimate a 10% reduction in the federal workforce would save just $25 billion annually, a mere fraction of total federal spending.
For leaders outside of Washington, this serves as a cautionary tale. We may not be governing federal agencies, but we all face decisions around workforce optimization. According to Korn Ferry, there’s a growing trend of companies focusing on "employee underperformance" as a key factor in layoff decisions, a shift from the past when external factors were often blamed. So the question isn’t whether we should realign our teams for efficiency, it’s how we do it without compromising operational efficiency, strategic foresight, morale and credibility.
What Happens When Workforce Pruning Goes Wrong?
Indiscriminate cuts paint every employee, team and department with the same brush. The result? Critical roles are eliminated, institutional knowledge is lost and remaining employees become disengaged, overworked and less productive. Instead of creating a stronger organization, we risk eroding the foundation it’s built on.
Federal layoffs under the DOGE initiative exemplify this. Slashing staff without precision undermines initiatives that demand specialized expertise, like modernization efforts at the IRS or long-term strategic projects within the Department of Education. The sweeping nature of these cuts overlooks the nuances and complexities of how employees contribute to organizational goals.