Reskilling non-tech employees into tech roles of the future does more than address the bad press that comes with layoffs - every round of cuts carries a hidden cost most orgs don't put in a spreadsheet, and a tech talent bill they eventually pay anyway - at external hire rates.
Calculate your real cost ↓"Cutting headcount reduces costs."
It reduces the payroll line, but it doesn't reduce costs. Replacement hiring, productivity loss in the team that remains, and the institutional knowledge that walks out the door cost more than the savings in most Australian organisations, often within 12–18 months. And when you eventually need tech capability again, you're paying external hire rates to get it back.
"It takes too long to reskill non-tech people into tech."
Not true. Structured reskilling programs for non-technical employees consistently outperform external hiring on retention, cultural fit, and time-to-productivity. Woolworths achieved 100% program completion and 100% retention at 24 months, with Year 1 ROI of $360K. The people are already there, and we can get them job ready in one quarter.
"Investors will see this as decisive action."
Sometimes. But a meta-analysis across 15,000 layoff announcements found the average 2-day share price return was −1.2%, and Stanford's Jeffrey Pfeffer notes layoffs often signal strategic difficulty rather than discipline. The market is not as impressed as the board paper assumes.
The Australian Human Resources Institute puts average direct hiring cost at $23,860 per candidate, with up to 1.5× annual salary as the true replacement cost when you factor in onboarding, ramp time, and productivity deficit.
AHRIThe people who stay are not grateful. They are scared, overloaded, and updating their LinkedIn. 69% also say the quality of the company's product or service declined after the layoffs. You cut 20% of the team and eroded the performance of the 80% who remain - that's a cost transfer.
LeadershipIQAcross a meta-analysis of 34,000+ layoff announcements, layoff news is associated with a significantly negative share market response in both the short and medium term.
Meta-analysis, ScienceDirectResearch shows it takes up to two years for a replacement hire to reach the productivity of the person they replaced. The process knowledge, client relationships, system expertise, and team context that walked out the door in a redundancy package are not replaced by an external hire.
Training Industry QuarterlyAdjust the sliders for your scenario. The productivity loss figure uses a conservative 30% productivity decline for remaining staff over six months.
Slide to match your situation. Results update in real time.
A Neoma reskilling pilot starts with 20 people - enough to prove ROI before you scale. Woolworths Group delivered $360K Year 1 ROI. The maths tends to be uncomfortable.
Talk to us about itWe'll send a summary of your numbers and context on the reskilling alternative.
* Calculations are estimates based on AHRI benchmarks ($23,860 average direct hiring cost; up to 1.5× salary for full replacement cost), LeadershipIQ survivor productivity research (74% decline rate, modelled conservatively at 30%). Individual results vary by industry, role seniority, and retention conditions.
Australian tech teams average 28% women. Many CTOs are KPI'd on closing that gap. This calculator shows exactly how many women you need to add — and makes the case for reskilling over recruiting.
Slide to match your team. Results update in real time.
Your tech team is 28% women. The industry average is also 28%. To reach 40%, you need 6 more women on a team of 50. The external hire market for women in tech is competitive and slow. Reskilling from your existing workforce gets you there in one quarter — and the women you develop stay, because they weren't poached from somewhere else.
* Industry average of 28% women in Australian tech teams sourced from WGEA workforce data. Reskilling timeline based on Neoma's delivered cohort programs (up to 20 women per quarter). Individual results vary by cohort size and program design.
Many redundancies in 2026 are coupled with tech strategy, but appear as cost-cutting decisions. The organisation needs more technical capability, so non-technical roles look expendable. But the external tech talent market is expensive, competitive, and slow. Your existing people are already here, already across your culture and processes, and - with a structured reskilling program - already more capable than you think.
We don't put just anyone through a program. We run rigorous assessment - aptitude, attitude, and potential - and select only the people we're confident will thrive in a tech role. Every person who comes through will earn their place.
Cohort-based, coach-led, built around your actual tech stack. Not a video library of self-paced learning or a bootcamp with strangers. Sprint cycles, peer programming, designed for 100% completion because the cohort works together. People graduate job-ready.
Our measure of success is retention at 24 months, not completion at week eight. We design programs that people finish, perform in, and stay for. Because a reskilling program that produces turnover is just an expensive version of what you were already trying to avoid.
From the people who've done it with us.
I have had the privilege of partnering with Gemma Toogood over the past few years on the Microsoft Tech Talent Generator initiative. Her exceptional work in designing and delivering highly technical programs has enabled professionals from non-technical backgrounds to transition into [tech] careers. Her dedication will have a lasting impact on every learner who emerges from this program.