Title: 说清退就清退，89% 的 AI 代替员工不过是一场豪赌 | BestBlogs.dev
URL Source: https://www.bestblogs.dev/article/3f20e7c0
Published Time: 2026-03-23 13:55:40
Markdown Content: Skip to main content Toggle navigation menu Toggle navigation menuArticlesPodcastsVideosTweetsSourcesNewsletters
⌘K
Change language Switch ThemeSign In
Narrow Mode
说清退就清退，89% 的 AI 代替员工不过是一场豪赌
爱 爱范儿 @Selina
One Sentence Summary
This article provides an in-depth analysis of the current trend of companies using AI expectations to conduct 'preemptive layoffs,' pointing out that most of these layoffs are not based on actual technical performance, but are cost-cutting gambles driven by the capital market.
Summary
Taking NetEase's termination of outsourced personnel as a starting point, the article reveals the global phenomenon of companies using AI as a justification for layoffs. Citing research from the Harvard Business Review, it points out that as many as 89% of AI-related layoffs stem from 'expectations' of the technology rather than actual replacement capability. This chain of layoffs—driven by Wall Street, pressured CEOs, and executed by middle management—is essentially a numbers game for the capital market. Through cases like the Commonwealth Bank of Australia, the article illustrates that AI's performance in real business often falls short of expectations, leading companies into the awkward situation of 'laying off and then rehiring.' The author warns that such hasty decisions not only harm employees' livelihoods but also create negative consequences far exceeding the cost savings from layoffs by destroying trust and fostering anxiety.
Main Points
* 1. Most AI-related layoffs are gambles based on 'expectations' rather than 'actual performance.'HBR surveys show that only 2% of layoffs occur because AI has truly taken over the work, while 89% are preemptive cost-cutting measures taken before the technology has proven itself. * 2. There is a clear capital transmission chain behind layoff decisions.Wall Street views 'embracing AI' as a positive signal to boost stock prices, forcing CEOs to make positive statements and issue layoff orders to fulfill capital narratives and manage investor relations. * 3. The 'perceived efficiency' of AI is not equivalent to real job replacement capability.Improving existing employee output with tools is different from completely replacing a role. Blind replacement often leads to business chaos, forcing companies to rehire laid-off employees in the short term. * 4. Hasty layoffs incur devastating organizational costs.Such decisions destroy trust between companies and employees, and the resulting industry-wide anxiety leads to talent attrition, with the cost of repair far exceeding the short-term savings from layoffs.
Metadata
AI Score
85
Website ifanr.com
Published At Today
Length 2131 words (about 9 min)
Sign in to use highlight and note-taking features for a better reading experience. Sign in now
「开除速度一定要快！」
今年以来裁员的消息真是没完没了了，快进到网易正在大规模清退游戏外包人员，波及上千人。
据游戏新知报道，这一裁撤计划原定 5 月执行，却突然提前了一个月，提前的原因据悉是公司「对 AI 化后的效率提升颇为满意」，然后就决定，快快裁员了。
网易官方否认了「使用 AI 清退全部外包」的说法，但承认正在「逐步对一部分基础技能岗位的外包人员进行退场」。
但这个画面还是很好脑补的，网易也不是第一家 AI 大炼钢铁，如果新项目接入 AI，老项目用 AI 改造，短时间内肯定能看得见一些效果，快速决定裁员也就不奇怪了
▲ 图片来自：脉脉
全球都在赌裁员
网易不是孤例，它只是一个更大趋势的中国样本。
今年 1 月，Harvard Business Review 发表了一项引起广泛讨论的研究，由 Babson 商学院教授 Thomas Davenport 和 Return on AI Institute 联合创始人 Laks Srinivasan 主导。他们在 2025 年 12 月对 1006 名全球企业高管进行了调查，结论尖锐：大多数企业的 AI 相关裁员，并非因为 AI 已经能替代人类工作，而是在赌 AI「可以做到」。
数据相当刺眼：
– 60% 的受访企业已经因为 AI 的「预期影响」减少了人员
– 29% 因同样的原因放缓了招聘
– 但仅有 2% 明确表示，裁员是因为 AI 确实承担了原本由人完成的工作
换言之，89%的企业在 AI 尚未证明自己的情况下，就已经开始了人员调整。Davenport 和 Srinivasan 的原话毫不客气：AI 正在被当作「大规模裁员的理由，而这些裁员本质上只是粗暴的成本削减。
这种「预期性裁员」不是自然发生的。它有一条清晰的传导链：
第一枪由华尔街打响。资本市场把「拥抱 AI」视为利好。当一家公司宣布用 AI 替代岗位、削减人力成本时，股价就蹭蹭往上涨。Ford、Amazon、Salesforce、摩根大通的 CEO 们争相宣称白领岗位将大规模消失。这与其说是技术判断，不如说是投资者关系管理。
CEO 的压力就随之而来。当竞争对手都在讲 AI 转型的故事，沉默就意味着落后。即使 CEO 本人对 AI 的替代能力持谨慎态度，资本叙事的压力也会推动他们做出「积极」表态。
而表态一旦落地，就需要配套行动来兑现。裁员指令从上往下传递，到了中层管理者手里，往往变成了数字游戏。谁最容易被裁？不是绩效最差的，而是雇佣关系最灵活的，包括但不限于外包、合同工、初级和支持型岗位。网易先清退外包而非正式员工，就是典型的路径。
▲ 图片来自：脉脉
这条链条的荒诞之处在于：技术的不确定性本应让决策更谨慎，但资本市场的逻辑恰恰相反，谁先下注谁就占先机，哪怕赌注是别人的饭碗。
「满意」不等于「真能干」
平心而论，网易要求全员使用 AI 后确实可能获得了效率提升，裁减冗余外包岗位也可能是合理的资源优化。我们不该因为「AI 裁员」这个标签就自动否定所有调整。
但问题出在因果链上：如果真是用了 AI，效率提升满意，再以此为依据裁剪外包，还把原定 5 月的计划提前执行——这到底是「证据驱动的理性决策」，还是「先开枪再画靶」？ 「效率提升的体感」和「AI 真正能替代一个策划、程序员或美术岗位」之间，隔着巨大的距离。一个工具让现有员工多产出 20%，和这个工具能完全承担一个人的工作，是两码事。但在裁员决策中，这两者常常被有意或无意地混为一谈。
去年，澳洲联邦银行（CBA）提供了一个教科书级的反面案例。银行裁掉了 45 名客服人员，改由 AI 语音机器人接手基础查询，只保留少数人类员工处理复杂案件。
▲澳洲联邦银行 图片来源：ABC News
结果？机器人搞不定大多数查询，来电量不降反增，业务陪入混乱。最终 CBA 公开道歉，重新雇回了所有被裁员工。银行自己承认，初步评估时「未充分考虑业务需求」——换句话说，他们把 AI 在测试环境中的表现当成了真实世界的能力。
HBR 的调查数据揭示了一个更尴尬的后续：在那些因 AI 预期而裁员的企业中，已经有相当一部分在走回头路。Careerminds 的研究显示，约三分之一的雇主已经重新招回了 25%-50%被裁掉的岗位，35.6%甚至招回了超过一半。
原因很简单，AI 工具需要的人类洞察力远比预期的多，工具本身的表现也没有达到预期。
裁了再招，不只是管理决策的失误，更是对被裁员工的二次伤害：先说你的工作 AI 能做，然后发现 AI 做不了，公司又把你叫回来，把人当猴耍呢。
操之过急的代价
这种「赌」的行为正在产生远超裁员本身的后果。
网易事件曝光后，公司紧急公关，否认「用 AI 清退全部外包」。这个反应本身就很说明问题——企业自己也知道，「AI 替代人」这个叙事一旦失控，会引发比裁员本身更大的危机。
确实，发酵已经在发生。脉脉热榜里，「AI」和「优化」是高频词；微博、知乎的讨论在迅速扩散；其他游戏公司的外包员工也开始人人自危。一家公司的「预期性裁员」，变成了整个行业的焦虑传染。
这恰恰是操之过急的代价。当裁员决策基于「潜力」而非「实绩」，它传递的信息不仅仅是「这些岗位不再需要」，而是一个更深层的信号：你的工作随时可能被一个尚未存在的东西取代。这种不确定性制造的焦虑，比裁员本身更具毁灭性。它暗示每一个在岗的人都变成了预备被替代者，不在今天，就在明天。
这样的暗示除了激发焦虑之外，没有什么好处。信任被打碎，士气被消耗，人才在恐慌中流失。裁员又不是拔牙，拔错了还能装颗假牙回去。操之过急的裁员，只会导致修复的成本远高于裁员省下的钱。
60% 的企业已经在赌，剩下的正在用员工的生计下注。而赌输的后果，已经在脉脉、微博和每一次企业紧急公关里显现。
爱 爱范儿 @Selina
One Sentence Summary
This article provides an in-depth analysis of the current trend of companies using AI expectations to conduct 'preemptive layoffs,' pointing out that most of these layoffs are not based on actual technical performance, but are cost-cutting gambles driven by the capital market.
Summary
Taking NetEase's termination of outsourced personnel as a starting point, the article reveals the global phenomenon of companies using AI as a justification for layoffs. Citing research from the Harvard Business Review, it points out that as many as 89% of AI-related layoffs stem from 'expectations' of the technology rather than actual replacement capability. This chain of layoffs—driven by Wall Street, pressured CEOs, and executed by middle management—is essentially a numbers game for the capital market. Through cases like the Commonwealth Bank of Australia, the article illustrates that AI's performance in real business often falls short of expectations, leading companies into the awkward situation of 'laying off and then rehiring.' The author warns that such hasty decisions not only harm employees' livelihoods but also create negative consequences far exceeding the cost savings from layoffs by destroying trust and fostering anxiety.
Main Points
* 1. Most AI-related layoffs are gambles based on 'expectations' rather than 'actual performance.'
HBR surveys show that only 2% of layoffs occur because AI has truly taken over the work, while 89% are preemptive cost-cutting measures taken before the technology has proven itself.
* 2. There is a clear capital transmission chain behind layoff decisions.
Wall Street views 'embracing AI' as a positive signal to boost stock prices, forcing CEOs to make positive statements and issue layoff orders to fulfill capital narratives and manage investor relations.
* 3. The 'perceived efficiency' of AI is not equivalent to real job replacement capability.
Improving existing employee output with tools is different from completely replacing a role. Blind replacement often leads to business chaos, forcing companies to rehire laid-off employees in the short term.
* 4. Hasty layoffs incur devastating organizational costs.
Such decisions destroy trust between companies and employees, and the resulting industry-wide anxiety leads to talent attrition, with the cost of repair far exceeding the short-term savings from layoffs.
Key Quotes
* 89% of companies have started personnel adjustments before AI has even proven itself. * AI is being used as a justification for mass layoffs, which are essentially just blunt cost-cutting. * There is a huge gap between the perceived improvement in efficiency and AI's ability to truly replace a planner, programmer, or artist role. * The anxiety created by this uncertainty is more devastating than the layoffs themselves.
AI Score
85
Website ifanr.com
Published At Today
Length 2131 words (about 9 min)
Tags
AI Layoffs
Corporate Management
Workplace Anxiety
Capital Market
NetEase
Related Articles
* ChatGPT and Claude Just Dropped Major Updates: Workers Who Can't Manage AI Agents Face Obsolescence * NVIDIA's $20 Billion 'Acquisition' of an AI Company Founded by a High School Dropout * Just Released: Nano Banana 2! Affordable and Powerful—Here Are the Details After My Hands-on Experience, focusing on high cost-performance, strong comprehension, and subject consistency, significantly lowering the cost barrier for AI image generation.") * Massive Layoffs at Block: A Radical AI-Driven Organizational Transformation * After Experiencing Zhipu's Newly Released GLM-5, I Finally Understand Why It Had Silicon Valley Scratching Its Head * The Final Interview with the Creator of OpenClaw Before Joining OpenAI: It's Hard to Compete with Someone Doing It Purely for Fun HomeArticlesPodcastsVideosTweets