Alright some very quick (assumptive) analysis: 1. Looks like the company was nuking most of the sales org. If they’re keeping <25% of an org the calculus isn’t, “Are they doing a good job and have we given them a fair shake?” It’s more, “Who are the top performers we need to keep? We have to get rid of everyone else.” Totally unfair to her. It may have been nigh impossible to reach the performance bar required to stay. But hard to say with no info. 2. The fact that it’s two HR people who don’t know her is either a big mistep or it implies her manager (and possibly her manager’s manager etc.) are gone too. 3. The HR team was probably given a big list of names they needed to tell, and probably had no clue as to why the decision making led to some staying and some going. That’s not a fun position to be in, but could be the only alternative to a mass firing in a giant Zoom meeting depending on how much of management was also fired. 4. It’s interesting that they’re so clear it’s performance-based and not a layoff. That’s not an accident. Could be to avoid regulations around the WARN act, or as justification to give zero severance. Usually in this call they go over the high level of that stuff, but this one took a turn. Sad across the board.