I've been through throttled layoffs in the past. They're much much worse.
1) You're always looking over your shoulder, and can't think about long term projects or work.
2) The first people out (frequently the weakest performers) are able to find jobs the easiest, but by the time the better employees are also let go, the market demand has been filled.
3) It encourages and environment of non-cooperation. Employees cooperate more when they think they'll see each other again. If it's "there's 3 of us here today, and probably only 2 in a few months" then there are multiple incentives to not compete.
Better to get it over with all at once wherever possible. Companies that need multiple rounds are usually either mis-run or in markets deteriorating extremely rapidly.
I agree, its like being stuck in purgatory. Although, I disagree somewhat with your last statement -- in my experience, all throttled layoffs have been a result of acquisition synergies. The current one around me is by a market leader with a great past and excellent vision of the future.
From my experience there's an easy way out of this: take control of your own career. Ask yourself: are these the conditions I want to work in? whats best for me; family; situation? Are there opportunities here while everyone else is looking over their shoulder?
But when layoffs are as big as 14k, rarely are employees evaluated for individual value...it's usually entire business units or office locations that are closed. Throttled or not, the people exiting Cisco have likely already been picked...not much they can do about it in the meantime.
20% is a very high number, especially given how many layoffs Cisco has had. I've been in situations where 10% got laid off, and there were still weak performers who could be let go. This usually happens in cultures where it is very hard to fire people, so they use layoffs to cover for weak performance management. (And weak performance management can be a cause to need the layoffs to begin with)
Serial acquirers almost always are in throttled layoff mode. It's how they justify the acquisitions. Companies that have been passed by the market (think IBM) tend to cut gradually over time. Occasionally you have companies where both have happened. (Think your phone or cable company)
1) You're always looking over your shoulder, and can't think about long term projects or work.
2) The first people out (frequently the weakest performers) are able to find jobs the easiest, but by the time the better employees are also let go, the market demand has been filled.
3) It encourages and environment of non-cooperation. Employees cooperate more when they think they'll see each other again. If it's "there's 3 of us here today, and probably only 2 in a few months" then there are multiple incentives to not compete.
Better to get it over with all at once wherever possible. Companies that need multiple rounds are usually either mis-run or in markets deteriorating extremely rapidly.