When Elon Musk took over Twitter in 2022, he fired 80 percent of the workforce. In his opinion, Twitter employed too many useless, “woke” employees who would only restrict freedom of speech. What observers had expected, namely that the Twitter platform would crash or at least suffer a drop in performance, did not happen. Presumably also because many key talents who were dismissed in overzealousness or due to excessive demands had to be quickly rehired. <\/p>\n\n
However, it can be seen that many of the dismissed and supposedly non-essential employees did important work, the results of which will manifest themselves in the long term. Moderators who discourage hate speech and cyberbullying contribute to long-term community engagement. Others who ensure compliance with local legislation save the platform from lawsuits and severe penalties, such as those already imposed by the EU. <\/p>\n\n
The term that has become established in the start-up scene for Elon Musk’s behavior on Twitter is “Going Elon<\/em>“. It refers to the question of how many employees a company can lay off without the company collapsing. In principle, it’s like a game of skill called Jenga<\/a>. Players remove one brick after another from a tower until it collapses. Bricks that have no load-bearing effect are removed. The disadvantage is that the tower becomes more unstable. <\/p>\n\n Many startup founders, who have to pay close attention to expenses, paid very close attention to Musk’s approach. The short-term successes at Twitter seemed too tempting. Eighty percent less personnel costs with only slightly worse performance. The long-term effects became rather secondary, because when it comes to day-to-day survival, the bird in the hand counts more than the pigeon on the roof. <\/p>\n\n While “Going Elon” in 2022 was still too risky for many, that has changed. Thanks to artificial intelligence, startup founders now see their chance to replace the gaps with it. What used to be done by two designers and five programmers is now done by one designer and two programmers in combination with AI tools. <\/p>\n\n Several startup founders mentioned in conversations last week, when I toured Silicon Valley with the CEO of an IT company from Germany, that they had already cut staff and were increasingly relying on AI instead. And the positive results are now making them think about further reductions. There have – so far – been no catastrophic effects. AI has had a stabilizing effect. <\/p>\n\n “Going Elon” is now really possible for everyone with much less risk thanks to AI and benefits all sides. Founders need less money to set up a start-up. They are also now competing for less talent than before, because AI provides artificial employees. And for end users, it brings cheaper and a wider choice of services and products. <\/p>\n\n Managers must now ask themselves the question: can I save resources in my own company by “Going Elon with AI” and deliver more and better performance at the same time? How much can I increase output if I lay off 80% of employees and support the remaining top performers with AI? This may be life-changing for some or even many companies. And if you don’t do it yourself, your competitors probably will. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"