Stop blaming AI for your layoffs.

Jensen Huang told other CEOs to stop blaming AI for their layoffs. In an interview this week he called the narrative "too lazy." His point: AI only became genuinely useful in the last year or so, so blaming it for cuts now doesn't make any sense.

He went further: it was just a way for them to sound smart.

He's right. It's about the story you tell when you cut. My recommendation: tell the truth.

"We're restructuring around AI" has become what "right-sizing" and "focusing on our core" used to be.

The data backs his timeline

Mercer's study of ~12,000 leaders found 98% are planning org-design changes — but only 25% of HR functions are actually using AI to support work redesign. MIT found that despite $30–40B poured into enterprise GenAI, 95% of organizations are getting zero return.

If almost nobody has redesigned the work, AI can't be what eliminated the roles.

The narrative isn't just lazy and dishonest. It's expensive, and the bill lands on the people who stay.

Three things to keep in mind

1. The story you tell about a cut is a promise to the survivors

Tell people "AI made this role redundant" when it didn't, and you've taught every remaining employee that AI is coming for them next — with no plan, no reskilling, no path.

You didn't just cut headcount. You cut trust, and you'll pay for it in engagement, commitment, and the innovation you were hoping AI would unlock in the first place. Mercer shows employee thriving at its lowest since they began measuring in 2018.

2. "We cut because of AI" and "we haven't deployed AI" can't both be true

Pick one. If you invoke AI as the reason, show the redesign behind it: what got automated, what got rebuilt, what people do now instead.

If you can't, you didn't restructure around AI. You cut based on your P&L and rode the coattails of everyone else doing the same. Your team will know which one it was.

3. Huang's advice is the operator's job, not the slogan

His real line wasn't "AI won't take jobs." It was: you're not going to lose your job to AI, you're going to lose it to somebody who learnt AI better than you.

That's an enablement mandate. The companies that win the next stretch aren't the ones that cut fastest and blamed the robots. They're the ones that taught their people to use it, to expand their roles and find new ways of working.

The buyback tell

BILL announced a 30% cut the same day it authorized a $1B buyback. The market liked it, and yes, the survivors who hold equity got a bump.

But a buyback lifts your share count math, not your people's sense of where they stand. What they heard: AI is coming, capital comes first, and there's no plan for me.

To be clear

I'm not anti-layoff or naively pro-AI. Cuts are sometimes necessary, and AI will reshape every job. But "we're doing it because of AI" is not a strategy.

If it's true, show the work. If not, have the decency to say what's actually happening — the quarter was soft, you made bad calls, you over-hired in 2022.

Your people can handle the truth.