Re: the conversation about "the courage to choose", whether companies "must" pursue layoffs, and whether forced part-time arrangements lead to disengagement, I seem to recall a recent FORTUNE article profiling 9 or so companies that as of mid-January, despite recession, had never had a layoff.  Question: does that mean they operate from a different philosophy of profits vs. people, or they're simply being run in a more sustainable way? I recall that the list included, for example, Aflac, Devon Energy . . . Re: Steve's comment on business being plagued by a focus on quarterly numbers,  I led a piece of global research a couple of years ago in which we interviewed managers in 40 countries and 3 industries. One finding was how much managers in other countries think that "being Wall Street-driven" and "focusing on quarterly profits vs. people" is a US phenomenon that has been exported (because much of the world's recognized frameworks for and research on management are generated in North America), leaving managers around the global feeling pressured to focus on the bottom line first and foremost. They didn't use the word "plague" or "epidemic" per se, but they definitely indicated they thought there had a been a spread of an "all that matters is the quarterly bottom line" and they felt somewhat powerless to fight the phenomenon.