The agency world is the canary in the coal mine when it comes to market pain. Budgets here are the first to be cut and the last to recover. We’re not just late to the party — we’re left cleaning up after everyone else has gone home. Agencies shrink fast and expand slowly, mirroring the market’s every whim.

The axe is going to fall. Everyone in the agency world knows it. But when leaders choose to keep their teams in the dark about potential layoffs, they inflict wounds that go far deeper than any individual redundancy.

Some managers seem to think that, short-term, if employees know layoffs may be coming, people will down tools and spend their time frantically rewriting CVs and job-hunting. In larger companies, especially public ones, there’s also the fear of the news leaking to the media and the impact it will have on the share price and existing client relationships. Consequently, their teams often learn about it at the same time the media does. These are valid business concerns, but I believe they are ultimately short-sighted.

In the short term, this ‘gaslighting’ approach robs you of any chance of instilling a sense of urgency. This sense of urgency can make a big impact — not everyone freezes in the face of danger; if they did, evolution wouldn’t have brought humanity this far. I would even argue there’s a benefit to allocating specific time and support to help people plan ahead. I’ve seen ‘natural churn’ prevent a round of cuts more than once.

But more importantly, managers who choose to mislead their teams ignore the huge loss of trust and the long-term repercussions of cuts coming out of the blue. The people who stay behind following the next round of redundancies will never look at their workplace ‘family’ the same way again. It’s also an unsustainable practice because the rest of the industry notices; the people who move on tell their stories, and the whole work culture becomes more cynical and suspicious. It’s the cultural equivalent of ignoring polluting manufacturing practices because they’re good for short-term profits. Toxicity lingers.

I have actually experienced both approaches in action:

In one case, there was more or less complete transparency with employees, regardless of seniority. We were told where the revenue and pipeline stood and what the targets were. We were told how long we had to turn things around and what would happen if we failed. We all agreed to take salary cuts. Then we worked together to turn the business around.

I survived eight rounds of redundancies in that agency and saw the company go from nearly 200 people to under 30. Yes, it made us all nervous, and yes, it meant we spent some time looking around. But for the most part, it increased solidarity and made us want to fight for a company we liked working for and colleagues we absolutely loved. It didn’t prevent the end, mostly because the group ended up selling the company to a network that didn’t want the London office in that particular climate. But it’s worth mentioning that at the time of closure, we still had about five months of cash flow left — which, in an industry famously ‘six months away from bankruptcy, but three months in,’ is a good chunk of time to turn things around. If that company wasn’t sold, that office would have moved back to profit, as evidenced by at least four successful boutique agencies that were set up by the alumni. One of those would be, a few years later, acquired by the same holding company to relaunch the previous agency in London.

In the second case, following a merger, I kept pleading not to promise the impossible. It was clear cuts would have to be made. A case of simple maths — the holding company expected growth, while we were busy merging cultures and overnight went from 2–3 seats on every pitch in town to one. I was even clear about when we would have to make them. This being the contrasting case, you can probably imagine what happened: I was labelled as a nay-saying pessimist and bundled together with the first round of senior redundancies. Sharing the news with the team, my line manager praised what a consummate professional and gentleman I was about it all (his exact words). My last date at the office was three days earlier than the date I had predicted over six months before. Did I mention I’m a strategist?

The long-term impact on that company? High talent churn, loss of culture that took years to recover, and eventually a re-merger as the lesser in another round of consolidation.

Gaslighting people about coming layoffs or another round of redundancies isn’t just uncaring and unethical; it’s a bad business decision.

What are your experiences with layoffs in the agency world? How can we create a more honest and transparent workplace culture?