แต่อย่างไรก็ตาม,ได้มีคำถามเกิดขึ้นจ

แต่อย่างไรก็ตาม,ได้มีคำถามเกิดขึ้นจากหลายๆนักทฤษฎีว่าการลดขนาดของแรงงานองค์กรช่วยให้องค์กรบรรลุเป้าหมายได้จริงหรือไม่
In direct contradiction, several authors maintain that the "downsizing is detrimental" perspective, suggesting that downsizing hinders organizational goal attainment (e.g. Baily et al., 1994; Cascio, 1993; De Meuse et al., 1994; Faltermayer, 1992; O'Neill and Lenn, 1995; "The death of corporate loyalty," 1993). Echoing others' arguments, Cascio (1993:95) observed that "in many firms anticipated economic benefits fail to materialize, for example, lower expense ratios, higher profits, increased return-on-investment, and boosted stock prices." While most published evidence supports one side or the other in this debate, there has been little attempt to reconcile these divergent perspectives.

There are, of course, several ways that the argument can be reconciled. One way, for example, would be to recognize that the question is not as simple at it first appears and that, while downsizing can be beneficial for organizations (as in a "necessary evil"), it is frequently not good for the laid-off employees or for the guilt-ridden "survivors." Another possible reconciliation considers the tradeoff between the short-term and long-term merits versus costs of downsizing. It can be argued, for example, that downsizing can be functional for the organization in terms of short-term profits and losses while simultaneously be dysfunctional for employees facing unemployment, loss of benefits, and a host of negative psychological effects.

Results (English) 2:

However, a question arose from many theorists that reducing the size of the labor organization to help the organization achieve its goals or not
In direct contradiction, several authors maintain that the "downsizing is detrimental" perspective, suggesting that downsizing hinders organizational. goal attainment (eg Baily et al., 1994; Cascio, 1993; De Meuse et al., 1994; Faltermayer, 1992; O'Neill and Lenn, 1995; "The death of corporate loyalty," 1993). Echoing others' arguments. , Cascio (1993: 95) observed that "in many firms anticipated economic benefits fail to materialize, for example, lower expense ratios, higher profits, increased return-on-investment, and boosted stock prices." While most published evidence supports one side. or the Other in this debate, there has been Little attempt to Reconcile these divergent perspectives. There are, of course, several Ways that the argument Can be Reconciled. One Way, for example, would be to recognize that the question is not as Simple. at it first appears and that, while downsizing can be beneficial for organizations (as in a "necessary evil"), it is frequently not good for the laid-off employees or for the guilt-ridden "survivors." Another possible reconciliation considers the. tradeoff between the short-term and long-term merits versus costs of downsizing. It can be argued, for example, that downsizing can be functional for the organization in terms of short-term profits and losses while simultaneously be dysfunctional for employees facing unemployment,. loss of benefits, and a host of negative psychological effects.

Results (English) 3:

However, questions arise from several foreign theories that reduce the size of the labor organizations help reduce the goal or not
In. Direct contradiction several authors, maintain that the "downsizing is detrimental," perspectiveSuggesting that downsizing hinders organizational goal attainment (e.g. Baily et al, 1994; Cascio 1993; De, Meuse et al.,. 1994; Faltermayer 1992; O, 'Neill, and Lenn 1995; "The death of corporate loyalty," 1993). Echoing others arguments Cascio',, (1993: 95) observed that "in many firms anticipated economic benefits fail to materialize for example, lower expense ratios,,, Higher, profitsIncreased return-on-investment and boosted, stock prices. "While most published evidence supports one side or the other. In this debate there has, been little attempt to reconcile these divergent perspectives.

There are of course several,,, Ways that the argument can be reconciled. One, example way for, be would to recognize that the question is not as simple. At it first appears, and thatWhile downsizing can be beneficial for organizations (as in a "necessary evil."), it is frequently not good for the laid-off. Employees or for the guilt-ridden "survivors." Another possible reconciliation considers the tradeoff between the short-term. And long-term merits versus costs of downsizing. It can be argued for example,,That downsizing can be functional for the organization in terms of short-term profits and losses while simultaneously be. Dysfunctional for employees, facing unemployment loss of benefits and a, host of negative psychological effects.