It was news that sent shock waves throughout the business world! A company was asking its employees to leave. In other words, it was initiating downsizing! Visit site here https://bitcoin-system.site to know more about bitcoin trading.
What is downsizing?
It refers to making something smaller. What does a company do to make itself smaller? It begins to remove employees, regardless of how long they have been working with the company. It is what Buenbit, the cryptocurrency exchange of Argentina, has been doing! It has removed almost 45% of its employees in 2022.
Reasons for Buenbit Downsizing Staff
Federico Ogue, the CEO of Buenbit, clarified that it had not been a sudden decision. The company had been pondering it for numerous days months. It planned to remove at least half of the staff acquired recently, along with a few top management personnel.
Additionally, the decision had no connection with the cryptocurrency crashes that had been occurring throughout 2021, and the earlier part of 2022. The organization always had plenty of customers. Even in July 2021, the number had stood at 400,000 users. The real reason was that the tech industry was encountering a global overhaul. No significant advancements were taking place. The tech industry seemed to be facing a lull in its operations. Ogue also stated that the decision had nothing to do with the collapse of the Terra ecosystem. This assurance was necessary, because Buenbit offers Terra-related services as part of its investment packages. Ogue reiterated that the company’s decisions had been pending for months, after witnessing what was happening to start-ups.
Considering all aspects of the situation, Buenbit decided that it would place all expansion plans on hold for now. Instead, the company would concentrate on the functioning of its branches in Peru, Argentina, and Mexico. It would not take on any new staff to replace the 80 people that had left the organization. It would give serious thought to launching operations in Brazil and Colombia. This time round, the organization would strive to give the impression of an effective and self-sustaining infrastructure.
Another significant factor was that Buenbit was not the only company to initiate changes in its recruiting and retaining practices and policies. Other companies were also being influenced by what was happening in the global economic markets. To illustrate, U.S-based Coinbase declared that it would be making changes in its staffing process, while the market dip was on. It would continue with the changes, even after the recent market dip ended.
Past Strategies that Worked
July 2021 witnessed a funding event, the Series A Funding Round. Libertus Capital, along with Amaiya Management, Galaxy Digital, and FJ Labs, also participated in this fund-raising event. The profits totaled $11 million.
March 2022 witnessed Buenbit granting customers the choice of collecting UST, an algorithmic Stablecoin. It also encouraged them to opt for staking, since the returns would be a healthy 18%. The company is also keen to have another fund-raising event.
All these gestures are fine, as appreciated by a venture capitalist, Matias Nisenson. However, he also voiced the opinion that today’s customers are not keen to take risks, especially in a macro environment undergoing rapid changes.
In such a scenario, what could Buenbit do?
Nisenson declared that the company could exercise any of the following options. The first one would be to request a well-known organization to grant Buenbit the essential capital to continue, even if it meant downsizing part/whole of the team. The same thought would stand even in the event of a meltdown. He also declared that many CEOs across the world, would be in alignment with his thought processes, despite what was happening. In fact, they would look upon the option as a lesser evil, wherein they would not have to think of shutting down all company operations, altogether. The second option meant going without external capital. Probably, it would also mean having to do without 50% of the staff, too. After all, projects had to be paid. Staff had to be paid. If there was no sufficient capital in the background, how could a company afford to keep on staff not really earning its pay? Therefore, if essential, downsizing would have to be done, regardless of the pain that people would be put through. ‘Laying off’ threats cause pain; there is no denying it.