Outplacement & Career Transition

Your Next Brand Ambassador Might Be the Person You Just Made Redundant

Adam Kurdas

October 15, 2026

Few people in your organisation will be listened to as closely or intently as the one who has just been told their role no longer exists. Former colleagues will ask what happened. LinkedIn networks will notice the change in headline. Recruiters, clients and future colleagues will hear some version of the story, often within days. It’s a version that tends to travel far and wide.

For HR and People and Culture leaders, this is more than just theory. AHRI's Quarterly Australian Work Outlook for the March quarter of 2026 found the share of organisations planning to recruit had eased to 59 per cent, down from 71 per cent the previous quarter. Redundancy intentions also softened as employers paused to reassess demand, costs and workforce composition. Periods of recalibration like this rarely pass without some roles changing or ending, and the organisations doing that work are still asking the market to trust them as an employer in the very same months.

Glassdoor's 2025 research into workforce reductions, drawing on US data, adds another layer. Reviews on that platform rose by 44% in the week following a major restructuring announcement, former employees grew from around 25% to 33% of all reviews and the employers with the strongest ratings beforehand experienced the steepest falls. The stonger the employer brand is, the greater the potential for loss.

That raises a question that shouldn’t be skipped. What would it take for someone whose role has been made redundant to walk away speaking well of you, without being asked to and without a settlement clause requiring it? In our outplacement work, we see the answer shaped in 5 distinct but impactful moments. The good news is that they sit largely within the organisation's sphere of influence.

Part 1: The language we choose

"They spent ten minutes on the strategic rationale before anyone said the word redundant. It sounded like a cover up, like they were trying to confuse us with data. By then I'd stopped listening."

Word choice, or lack there of, in a redundancy conversation carries real impetus. A leader delivering redundancy news, under pressure tends to move in one of two directions. Some conversations become so softened by phrases like "realignment" or "an exciting new structure". The person leaves unsure what has actually happened. Others lean heavily on legal and process language. And with that the human being and the rawness of the moment, and the opportunity for humanity vanishes.

The people we coach daily always recount to us the words and phrases used. Here’s a snapshot:

"Released", "transitioned out" or "freed up to pursue other opportunities" frames a loss as though it were a favour.
"Rightsizing", "streamlining" and "workforce optimisation" turn people into a cost line.
"Your position has been impacted" or "we've had to make some people decisions" avoids saying what’s happened.
"Surplus to requirements" or "we're heading in a different direction" can sound like a verdict on the person's worth.

People notice the difference between the words and the reality. In our experience is the part of the story they feel most, remember deeply and repeat long after. The better path is plain, kind and specific. Lead with the outcome early. Make clear that it is the role that is redundant rather than the person. Resist the urge to justify the decision at length, which usually eases the leader's discomfort more than it helps the employee understand. Acknowledging the impact honestly, with something as simple as "I know this is a lot to take in", does more for trust than a perfectly polished script.

Part 2: How the news is shared

"My access to the shared drive disappeared at 9.05am. The meeting invite, titled 'Quick catch up', arrived ten minutes later. I walked in thinking we were prepping for a meeting later in the day".

The sequencing and format of an announcement signal how much an organisation values the people affected. Ideally, people hear first in a private face to face conversation with their direct leader. And that is before any broader communication and before their systems access changes. Where security requirements mean access must be managed quickly, explaining that openly helps avoid the sense of being treated as a risk rather than a colleague. The opportunity many organisations miss is giving people some authorship over how their departure is share. Inviting someone to help shape their own exit story increases the odds they will tell it generously.

Here are a few well thought out approaches we’ve heard land well:

Providing an opportunity to have the afternoon off and a taxi home so the emotionally impacted person does not have to drive.
Asking someone how they would like their team, colleagues or clients to be told, offering to co-write a farewell message, or making time for proper goodbyes all return a measure of control at a moment when people feel they have very little.
Allowing people to take time to begin outplacement while they finish their time in the business signals a real investment in supporting them to find their next chapter.

Part 3: What happens after the conversation

"Eleven years there, seven to seven and Saturdays. And the only email I received afterwards was from payroll."

People retain very little from the initial conversation. Shock and shut down are completely normal responses, and the real questions typically surface later, when they’ve had more time to process, often late at night or around the kitchen table. A clear written summary within a day or two, covering entitlements, timeframes, key contacts and the support available makes sense. It gives people something steady to return to when they are ready.

While we know it’s uncomfortable, follow-up from the leader matters just as much as follow-up from HR. A short check-in a week later, an offer to act as a referee or write a LinkedIn recommendation, an introduction to someone in their network, or an open conversation about alumni, contracting or future re-employment possibilities all communicate that the relationship has changed rather than ended. These gestures cost little, and people remember them for years.

Part 4: Support that meets people where they are

"I was handed a brochure, a login and a coaches phone details to call, and I sat in the car park wondering what I was supposed to do. The login didn’t work and the coach I called got back to me five days later."

The first 24-48 hours shape how well supported someone feels. Access to a real person on the day, ideally both the outplacement coach and an EAP counsellor helps people move acknowledge their initial reactions, and without judgement. Practical matters such as financial advice and understanding entitlements usually sit alongside emotional ones. People need room for both at their own cadence.

Ongoing support works best when it reflects the individual rather than a process and timelines. Someone who has been with one organisation for 15 years and is entering the job market for the first time in a long while needs something quite different from an executive with a strong network. A person still processing the loss may not be ready for resume workshops in week one. Digital tools have a genuine place, but they work best alongside human coaching. When support is timely, personal and long enough to reflect the realities of the current market, people describe it as the point where they began to feel like themselves again. Many give credit to, or describe gratitude towards the organisation that made it possible.

Part 5: The insight that flows back to the business

"We invested in outplacement and never heard another thing about how our people were going."

Outplacement is often treated as the final step in a restructure. Yet a good partner sits in a unique position to inform what comes next. Through regular, de-identified reporting and conversations with the HR team, an outplacement partner can share how people experienced the process, where communication landed well or caused confusion, which skills and roles the market is currently rewarding, and how quickly people are securing meaningful next chapters. Individual confidentiality should always be protected, because the value lies in the patterns rather than the people. A key differentiator here is an outplacement partner that seeks to understand how the impacted person’s perception of the business, and ultimately its brand, was shaped by the provision of outplacement.

For organisations managing several of AHRI's "5Rs” (recruitment, retention, reorganisation, reskilling and redundancy) at once, these insights are surprisingly practical. They can sharpen the approach to the next phase of change, inform redeployment and reskilling decisions, flag risks to engagement among the people who remain, and offer an early read on how the organisation's reputation is travelling in the market. Used well, the end of one employment relationship becomes a source of learning for the many that continue.

Ambassadors are earned

In this context, a brand ambassador is rarely someone who posts a glowing tribute on their final day. More often it is the person who, 6-months later, is asked by a friend whether your organisation was a good place to work and answers honestly, that although their role ended, they were treated with respect throughout. That answer can't be scripted or purchased. However, it can be designed for.

Every organisation is balancing commercial pressure, legal obligations and genuine care for its people. Often with limited time and imperfect information. No redundancy process will ever feel good for the person on the receiving end. What remains open is whether it can feel fair, honest and humane. If it does the people who leave may carry that experience with them as a story worth repeating.

We would love to hear from HR, People & Culture and business leaders on this. If the last 10 people who left your organisation through redundancy were asked to describe the experience in a single sentence, what do you think they would say? And what is the one thing you have seen make the biggest difference?