We’re witnessing tremendous upheaval in the international development sector, as mass layoffs sweep across global humanitarian aid and development organisations. In just a few months, hundreds of thousands have lost their jobs.

The scope of this disruption goes beyond these numbers. Mass layoffs not only take a tremendous toll on those let go but also on those who remain, reshaping the culture, norms, and daily realities of their work.

This article focuses on the often-overlooked experience of survivors, individuals left to navigate the emotional, professional, and organisational upheaval following workforce cuts. We’ll explore the research behind “survivor syndrome” and provide essential strategies for leaders to actively support staff members through these difficult transitions.

Survivor Syndrome: The Signs & Symptoms

After witnessing the fate of their colleagues, survivors may be expected to feel relieved, and even appreciative, to still have their jobs. They would work harder and faster to reaffirm their commitment to the organisation, right?

The research shows that these assumptions are far from the reality faced by survivors. A study in the healthcare sector for example, suggests that remaining employees may fare worse than laid off employees who have transitioned into new jobs. Survivors were found to be less satisfied with their jobs, reported poorer overall physical health, and had a lower quality of life compared with those laid off.

Mass layoffs are highly disruptive for survivors, dramatically altering their daily routines, work patterns, social ties, and job roles. In the international development sector, these impacts may be amplified as individuals lose cross-regional networks built across countries and contexts. These changes give room for survivor syndrome to creep into organisational life. Survivor syndrome is described in the literature as a medley of negative emotions, attitudes, and beliefs that appear in staff members who remain following major workforce cuts. The emotional symptoms are often complex and conflicting; while survivors may feel relief at keeping their jobs, they may also experience grief over losing colleagues, guilt for having been spared, and anxiety about their own job security. These psychological burdens are intensified by heavier workloads, as survivors shoulder the responsibilities of those laid off.

One particularly pernicious symptom of survivor syndrome is survivor guilt: the emotional weight of being spared while others are not. Rooted in a sense of unearned fortune, survivor guilt may manifest in survivors as depression, fear, or anger. Its equally damaging counterpart is survivor envy: the feeling that those laid off received more attention and support, like financial compensation, counselling, or reskilling opportunities, than those left behind. While these resources are rightly provided for aiding victims in coping with the layoffs, an unintended consequence is that survivors may feel neglected by comparison.

Beyond the emotional strain, survivor syndrome also changes the attitudes and behaviours of remaining staff members. Numerous studies link it to declines in performance, learning, and innovation. Team dynamics often suffer as well, with research indicating a deterioration in morale and trust in management. At the organisational level, survivor syndrome means higher rates of absenteeism and voluntary staff departures.

With the rapid and large-scale nature of layoffs in the international development sector, the risk of survivor syndrome for remaining staff members is alarming. The good news? Survivor syndrome is not inevitable. While there’s no quick fix, research points to several areas where leaders can take meaningful action. In the next section, we draw on this evidence and our expertise to offer key steps leaders can take in helping survivors navigate change.

First-Aid: Treating Survivor Syndrome

“The role of leaders in managing the aftermath of downsizing is critical. Leaders must articulate new realities and emphasise the vital role survivors play in achieving organisational goals. Quality support for survivors is essential in setting new expectations.” – Dr. Kay Sahdev, CEO of ODRL

Whether survivor syndrome takes hold depends largely on how the layoffs and change are managed. Fostering a culture of high-trust, motivation, and growth is critical to ensuring survivors stay engaged, empowered, and aligned with the organisation’s evolving direction.

To meet the demands of this new organisational landscape, here are key steps leaders can take to better support their teams:

1. Be open and accurate in layoff communications.

Leading survivors through the mass layoffs begins with clear, compassionate, and consistent communication. Various research studies underscore the value of explaining layoffs openly and honestly, providing accurate information about what is happening, its strategic importance, and how it will affect the organisation and its staff in the short- and long-term. Without effective communication, staff members are left to fill in the gaps, often with fear, speculation, and worst-case scenarios.

2. Make change collaborative.

On its own, effective communication won’t “cure” survivor syndrome. Past research points to the importance of centring staff voices in the design and implementation of organisational changes during and following the layoffs. This may look like collecting feedback or actively listening to survivors’ perspectives, surfacing any concerns before they escalate. Involving staff members in problem-solving and decision-making can ease survivor syndrome by restoring a sense of control and agency, both of which are so often lost during mass layoffs. When survivors are invited into the process, not just informed of it, they’re more likely to buy into the changes and contribute to their success.

3. Establish fair and respectful layoff decisions and procedures.

Survivors are closely watching how you handle layoffs, and their perceptions of fairness and justice of those decisions will shape their reaction. Previous research shows that when survivors view layoff decisions and processes as fair, it can mitigate some survivor syndrome symptoms, including guilt, anxiety, and job insecurity. When staff members believe their laid off colleagues, and they themselves, were treated with dignity and fairness, it reduces any uncertainty about future layoffs and preserves their trust in management.

4. Give survivors the resources and support they need for growth.

The immediate needs of survivors cannot be overlooked, with internal talent development becoming more critical now than ever. As their roles shift or expand, reporting lines change, and work practices are challenged, survivors will need clear guidance to understand how their work is changing, along with the skills and training needed to adapt and succeed in this new “business as usual”. Creating opportunities for growth within the organisation is also key to retaining talent. Together, these efforts signal that the organisation is committed to the long-term development of its people.

In this post, we have explored the often-neglected impact of mass layoffs on survivors. Managing survivor syndrome is no easy task, but doing so is imperative for preserving organisational resilience, trust, and performance.

At ODRL, we partner with organisations to navigate these transitions with integrity, helping leaders recognise the signs and underlying causes of survivor syndrome, and respond with research-backed strategies. If you’re preparing for, going through, or recovering from layoffs, and want to talk through how to support your team, we’re here to connect. You can reach out to us here or via email at enquiries@odrl.org.

References

Appelbaum, S. H., & Donia, M. (2000). The realistic downsizing preview: A management intervention in the prevention of survivor syndrome (Part I). Career Development International, 5(7), 333–350. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000005384

Datta, D. K., Guthrie, J. P., Basuil, D., & Pandey, A. (2010). Causes and effects of employee downsizing: A review and synthesis. Journal of Management, 36(1), 281–348. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309346735

Devine, K., Reay, T., Stainton, L., & Collins-Nakai, R. (2003). Downsizing outcomes: Better a victim than a survivor? Human Resource Management, 42(1), 109–124. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.10071

Gandolfi, F., & Hansson, M. (2011). Causes and consequences of downsizing: Towards an integrative framework. Journal of Management & Organization, 17(4), 498–521. https://doi.org/10.5172/jmo.2011.17.4.498

Harney, B., Fu, N., & Freeney, Y. (2018). Balancing tensions: Buffering the impact of organisational restructuring and downsizing on employee well-being. Human Resource Management Journal, 28(2), 235–254. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12175

Molloy Consultants. (2025). USAID StopWork. Retrieved June 5, 2025, from https://www.usaidstopwork.com/

Sahdev, K. (2004) Revisiting the survivor syndrome: The role of leadership in implementing downsizing. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 13(2), 165-196, https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320444000056

Travaglione, A., & Cross, B. (2006). Diminishing the social network in organizations: Does there need to be such a phenomenon as “survivor syndrome” after downsizing? Strategic Change, 15(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsc.743

Werr, A., & Wakeman, W. (2020). Dealing with “survivor syndrome”: After a downsizing, those who got to keep their jobs are often far less happy than you might guess. In Sweden through the crisis (pp. 481–488). Stockholm School of Economics Institute for Research. Retrieved from https://www.hhs.se/en/research/sweden-through-the-crisis/dealing-with-survivor-syndrome/