Meta Platforms has reportedly instructed its managers to assign a greater number of employees a “below expectations” performance rating in the upcoming mid-year review cycle. This directive is part of the company’s ongoing workforce restructuring efforts, sparking concerns that performance reviews are being used as a subtle layoff mechanism.
According to a recent report from Business Insider, managers overseeing teams of more than 150 staff members have been directed to categorize between 15% and 20% of their workforce in the lowest performance tier. This marks a notable increase from the 12% to 15% range applied in 2024. The internal memo communicating this guidance was shared on Meta’s internal forum on May 14 and indicates that the mid-year reviews, commencing on June 16 and continuing through August, will serve as “an opportunity to make exit decisions.” This language suggests a strategic shift in how Meta manages its talent and workforce reductions.
Shift from Mass Layoffs to Performance-Managed Attrition
This approach contrasts with earlier large-scale layoffs conducted by Meta in recent years. While the memo states there will be no company-wide terminations akin to those earlier this year, some employees rated as low performers could still be asked to leave. Meta appears to be moving away from public mass terminations toward a more discreet process of workforce trimming through performance management.
This shift comes amid a period of significant internal tightening, particularly in employee evaluations. After a hiring surge during the pandemic and several rounds of layoffs that eliminated about 21,000 jobs between 2022 and 2024, Meta’s leadership is emphasizing a heightened focus on performance.
Earlier this year, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced plans to reduce the company’s headcount by 5%, stating, “I’ve decided to raise the bar on performance management and move out low-performers faster.” The recent memo aligns with Zuckerberg’s call for tougher performance standards and signals the company’s intent to link workforce evaluation directly to its strategic priorities, especially as it doubles down on investments in artificial intelligence.
Implications for Managers and Employees
Managers are now tasked with rating a larger percentage of their teams as “below expectations,” even if some employees’ performance may not strictly warrant such evaluations. This mandate places managers in a challenging position, balancing the need to convey company directives with the potential impact on team morale and trust.
Typically, managers serve as vital communicators of company messaging, including difficult news. However, when they are required to assign fixed quotas of low ratings, even potentially undeserved ones, this can strain their relationships with employees and hinder transparent communication.
The criteria for the “below expectations” rating have reportedly broadened. Business Insider notes that this category may now include employees who have recently left under what Meta terms “non-regrettable attrition,” encompassing those deemed dispensable. Also targeted are those given a “below expectations” rating this cycle, anyone disciplined in the last six months, or employees involved in earlier Employee Relations cases. This indicates that the evaluation may extend beyond current performance metrics to include other factors.
Broader Industry Context and Cultural Concerns
Meta’s increased focus on performance-based attrition is part of a wider trend across the technology sector. Companies such as Amazon and Intel have also implemented restructuring measures, often framed in terms of improving “efficiency” and “agility.” Amazon CEO Andy Jassy has emphasized speed and agility, while Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan plans significant layoffs in 2025 as part of business simplification.
According to Layoffs.fyi, over 130 tech companies have conducted layoffs this year, totaling more than 61,000 job losses. Meta is not alone in navigating workforce adjustments, but its use of performance reviews as a proxy for layoffs has raised unique concerns.
Observers warn that this tactic shifts responsibility for workforce reductions from leadership to managers, creating ethical and operational dilemmas. Managers must reduce team size while trying to maintain morale and may be pressured to label more employees as underperformers despite stable or improving outputs.
For employees, even those with previously strong performance reviews might now face risk under the new rating criteria and targets. This situation threatens to erode trust, breed cynicism, and transform performance evaluations from tools for development into mechanisms for quietly managing attrition.
Potential Impact on Company Culture and Innovation
If Meta’s definition of being “performance-driven” involves using reviews as a way to reduce headcount, this could create a challenging environment for innovation and employee engagement. The focus may shift from nurturing talent to controlling optics and operational costs.
This approach risks damaging workplace culture by creating uncertainty and stress among employees during review cycles. It may foster a perception that rules are changing unexpectedly, reducing the meaningfulness of feedback and potentially undermining meritocracy.
The evolving culture has been described by some as a return to “hustle culture,” where employees feel increasingly replaceable. Return-to-office policies and other changes are sometimes interpreted as efforts to create a leaner workforce, prioritizing efficiency over collaboration.
Concerns have been raised about the possible negative effects on employee mental health and the risk of burnout. HR teams are seen as needing to advocate for workers’ well-being beyond salary considerations, especially amid growing pressure to meet performance targets.
Meta’s reported push to increase “below expectations” ratings during the mid-year review cycle, which starts on June 16 and continues through August, signals a strategic shift in workforce management. By encouraging managers to use performance reviews as a mechanism to manage headcount, Meta aims to avoid large-scale public layoffs while still trimming its workforce.
While raising performance standards can drive excellence, the manipulation of evaluation scales risks damaging trust and morale. The coming months will reveal how this approach affects Meta’s employees and whether it achieves the company’s goals without unintended cultural consequences.
