The incentives just aren't designed to plan for decline.
I wonder if for tech companies part of the answer is also that moving people around is an 'easy' way to play with numbers. You go to the market / to your investors and say ''Hey, we've hired 1,000 people over the last 12 months, we must be doing so well [give us money]'', and likewise ''We're gonna lay off 1,000 people soon so we're all good here [give us money]''
They don't have a crystal ball. They study each possible conjecture, and then try to minimize risk maximize reward. Moderate growth might lead you to be eaten by a rapid growth. It's not a duality rapid growth or stagnation we are talking about. It's the risk of being eaten and left for dead in a competitive space.
I wonder how managed printing service companies deal with this
I brokered a five year deal earlier this year, and all vendors put a 7% yoy decrease in print volume
I wonder what it looks like at the top of these companies like Fujifilm or Ricoh for printing sales people - are they diversifying or trying to converge on a sustainable level of revenue?
However the “poor CEO gets fired with only a $10MM golden parachute” angle doesn’t play as well with the average reader