Cost saving in today’s world is not just a buzzword; it is rapidly becoming the primary goal for leaders. As the first consideration when making acquisitions, strategies today would be considered incomplete if there was no pillar or thrust that speaks to cost containment or saving. Across the world, corporate culture is adapting to this new ‘priority’ and the result is that CEOs today are proud to declare that ‘a Pula saved is a Pula gained,’ sometime even over ‘we have outperformed the market.’ This is because cost saving is within the control of the leadership as compared to the fierce markets sectors operate in.The case for corporate cost saving or cutting is a very strong one. The idea that, if a leader can save in their costs, then they are able to improve their chances of growing profits makes perfect sense. This has everything to do with the organisation making profits and not necessarily how staff feel about the savings. Clearly, there is a difference between cost containments and cost cutting. One seeks to cut out wastage and the other seeks to drive savings on items that are not mission critical, such as having to pay for staff uniforms or limiting WiFi access to staff. It is agreeable to most employees that wastage is not sustainable. What is less agreeable to staff, however, is removal of ‘small’ marginal benefits in the aim of cost cutting..By its very nature, “saving” suggests that one needs to be deprived of something. The cafeteria might stop offering unlimited coffee, for instance, or the toilet paper in the bathrooms is downgraded from 3 ply to 1 ply. These two examples would provide a financial saving, without a doubt. These cost saving measures and many others simply remove pleasures/perks/stuff from the table, being items that do not fall within the employment “benefits” of a staff member. The legal and moral obligation to provide toilet paper does not stipulate what ply that paper should be, right? Thus, to reduce to 1ply is legal and will also give a corporatesaving. That would be a tick for the ‘woke’ CEO. “A Pula saved is a Pula made,” he/she would say, right? However, if cost saving results in something of pleasure or comfort being taken away from staff, what is the value of the loss of happiness in the workplace? This cost can be converted to a monetary figure as staff morale has a clear and direct link to productivity and loyalty. It is not as easy to measure, which is probably why it is often ignored. At Hotwire, we believe that the cost of the loss of happiness is the greatest risk to a healthy corporate culture and, as a direct result, is a massive risk to the bottom line. So, cutting back on air fresheners or the number of spoons of sugar one can take may appear smart, but the fact is that the marginal saving it might make is far outweighed by the increased negative sentiment of staff..Making and keeping staff happy must become a strategic priority. We argue that it should be the number one priority, pillar and thrust in corporate strategies. This is, of course, if leaders truly seek sustainable profits. At the core of all organisations are humans. They, given love, attention, respect, and minor amenities, comforts, and niceties such as 3 ply toilet paper will go to great lengths to make any business a success. Wouldn’t you?Perhaps then we need to truly move from targeting profits alone to investing similar time and energy, and indeed vigour, in happy staff. Happy staff = Happy Shareholders!