Why is CHANGE good when usually in the corporate world change means layoffs for hourly workers?

Whenever in the corporate world the bosses talk about change it usually means the hourly guys are going to get screwed. The bosses always say to embrace it and usually that means layoffs and more micro managing. When Obama preaches change his followers go nuts. These same people would be freaking out if their boss said the same thing true?
Why is CHANGE good when usually in the corporate world change means layoffs for hourly workers?
Instead of a corporate example, think of it in terms of sports teams: if you've just endured 8 years of a coach who led a championship team into total ruin, you're going to hire a new coach who has the most radically different style from the old one. Fans and players alike become so disgusted with %26quot;the old ways%26quot; that they will accept change at any cost. So it goes with politics, too.



But yes, you're absolutely right: mass %26quot;change%26quot; in the business world tends to involve an upending of routine and a lot of firings to shake people up. Not sure if this is a good thing when applied to the entire nation.
Why is CHANGE good when usually in the corporate world change means layoffs for hourly workers?
Very true! good post.
They are Drunk on the koolaid , and want something for nothing

vb

xp