When you have to cut IT, here's how to choose who goes

The relationship between tech staffers' rank and effectiveness isn't linear. Keep that in mind when you have to do less with less

Sometimes, less is more, more or less. That applies to people, specifically who you keep when you have declining budgets that force tech staff layoffs.

Got that?

What follows might not be for you. I'm not sure it's for me, for that matter. Read and decide whether this is good advice for you, or whether it would make you a cold-hearted member of the illegitimi.

[ Learn all about the concept of doing less with less the Slow IT way. Rant on our wailing wall. Read the Slow IT manifesto. Trade Slow IT tips and techniques in our discussion group. Get Slow IT shirts, mugs, and more goodies. ]

Start with a well-documented statistic: The best employees are, by every measure, 10 times more effective than average ones. Next, check your compensation system. I'll bet you don't pay them 10 times as much.

The curve is nonlinear, which means that, in general, if you have an accurate eye for talent, every additional dollar you pay for talent pays off more than the dollar before it.

Which means your most expensive employees are cheaper than your cheapest ones. Conversely, your least expensive employees cost you the most, when viewed from the perspective of bang per buck.

Next, we need to talk about your standards -- namely, whether they're high enough. Put plainly: When you rate that an employee "meets expectations," are your expectations as high as they ought to be? Or are you giving accepting mediocrity because you just aren't willing to insist on more and to take the unpleasant steps needed to get it?

It's a difficult question to answer, because you only know what you know, and you have a strong incentive -- the intense desire all of us have to practice avoidance in the face of unpleasant tasks -- to give yourself the benefit of the doubt.

Here's one way to start getting a handle on the question: Look closely to determine whether you have any employees who "hide behind the herd." They're the employees who handle routine responsibilities just fine, but who only accomplish anything beyond the routine by "collaborating" with other employees, even when your instructions were for them to handle the situation on their own.

If you have any employees like this, you can do much better.

If you can, it's time to raise your expectations so these folks no longer meet them. Don't hide in the bushes to trap them. Be open about it. Make it clear you're raising the bar and let them know what it's going to take from now on to continue to be considered a successful employee.