The first generation of the layoff paradigm can initiate when Systems
Owners are compelled to implement mass layoffs in the System Framework because of
business losses. The second generation of paradigm shift layoffs launches when
Systems Owners implement mass layoffs in System Frameworks because of
cost-cutting and systems restructuring. A cost-cutting task force may modify
the layoff criteria model and system resources. Parameter modification creates
the third generation of paradigm shift layoffs. Systems Owners can perceive a
new paradox for economic development and work performance during the guideline
layoff approach in the second generation. A single entity is supposed to perform
assignments instead of multiple entities in system operations. The new
cost-saving strategy model in the third generation of paradigm shift justifies
multiple layoff models in system frameworks. Inevitable complexity can be generated
on the System Platform when a single entity encounters an overburdened workload
(Complexity Mode).
Lack of standardization surrounding structural performance factors
challenges Systems Owners to implement multiple consecutive layoffs, although
Systems Owners report unexpectedly high profits (Crash Mode).
Business Frameworks can encounter diffusive models in several
categories. Phenomena grow through business losses, a contractual
right to layoff, cost-cutting, modification, economic development, unexpectedly
high profits, and highly overworked employees on the evolutionary path of
system performances.
Observation:
According to an observational study, the complexity map of the third
generation of paradigm shift layoffs creates an array of functional
disabilities in social mechanisms. The parameter array transfers Biological
Systems to Crash Mode. Systems Owners can hardly roll back changes from Crash
Mode to Complexity Mode at this juncture.
