F-Secure capped its AI reorg cuts before talks begin. Write your six lines before you announce yours

On October 1, the Finnish cybersecurity company F-Secure said it plans to renew its operating model around what it calls AI-native ways of working. It reported 597 employees that day and said the change would remove at most 145 roles worldwide. Change negotiations covering every role, unit and location begin on October 6 in Finland.

F-Secure is larger than most companies reading this, and nothing has happened yet. These are plans, and they are still subject to negotiation. The announcement is still worth reading closely, because it is a clean template for telling employees, a board and the market about an AI-driven reorg before the design is final.

What F-Secure said

From the company’s release:

• Structure. F-Secure would organize into three business units: Partner Products, Embedded Security and Direct Business, “each owning its product, customer and go-to-market strategy end-to-end”. A New Ventures unit would incubate new business models and products. Technology, Strategy Office, Finance & Legal, and People & Culture would be the common functions.
• Ceiling on cuts. At most 145 roles go: at most 58 in Finland and at most 87 in other countries.
• New roles. The company says new roles are expected to open if the plan goes ahead.
• Money. Estimated gross annual cost savings are about EUR 13 million (company-reported). Part of that would be reinvested in growth, including new roles, technology and product initiatives. One-off costs are expected to be recorded as items affecting comparability.
• Timing. The Finnish negotiations are expected to take about six weeks under the country’s cooperation law. The target effective date is January 1, 2027.
• What does not change. The 2026 outlook, the medium-term financial targets and the financial reporting approach stay as they are.

The release does not define “AI-native” beyond saying that AI will increasingly support planning and execution. Notice that gap, too. The structure and the numbers are specific. The label is not.

Why the shape matters more than the size

Two choices in the release are worth borrowing.

First, the units are drawn around customers, not functions. Each unit owns product, customer and go-to-market from end to end. As AI takes over pieces of the work inside a function, a chart drawn by function leaves an open question: who is accountable when an automated step fails? A unit built around a customer group gives one answer.

Second, the cut is stated as a maximum, broken down by location, before talks start. That is a ceiling people can hold the company to, not a target to hit. Staff learn the worst case, and the board sees the plan’s downside in one number.

That ceiling is about 24 percent of headcount (145 of 597, our arithmetic), which is a large number. Saying it plainly on day one was a choice. The usual alternative is months of rumor before anyone states a figure.

The six-line test

Before you announce any AI-driven change to roles, try to write these six lines for your own company, one line each. If you cannot fill a line, you are not ready to announce.

1. Owner line. After the change, which unit or person owns each customer group from end to end?
2. Ceiling line. What is the most roles that could be affected, by location or team? Give a maximum, not an estimate.
3. New-roles line. Which roles do you expect to open, and roughly when?
4. Money line. What gross saving do you expect, and what share goes back into growth or new roles?
5. Date line. When does the new structure take effect, and what process comes before then?
6. No-change line. What can the board and staff count on staying the same, such as the forecast, the pay cycle or customer commitments?

Here is a small worked example. Picture a 60-person company with three functional teams: sales, delivery and support. Its owner line might read “Mid-market accounts: one lead owns sales, onboarding and renewal.” Its ceiling line might read “At most 6 roles across delivery and support; none in sales.”

Now run the checks. If writing the owner line shows that two people still own the same customer, the design is not done. If you can only guess at the ceiling line, the analysis is not done.

The numbers in that example are only an illustration. Consultation and notice rules vary a great deal by country and state, and F-Secure is following Finnish law. This post is education, not legal or HR advice. Ask counsel what your jurisdiction requires before you say anything to staff.

What to do this week

• Draft the six lines for one change you are weighing, even if it is months away.
• Mark each line “known,” “estimate” or “blank.”
• Redraw your org chart once by customer group instead of by function, and see who owns what.
• Decide which of the six lines your board should see first, and when.
• List every place where you employ people, so you know whose rules apply.

If you want a second pair of eyes on the design before it reaches your board, a consult block is time with coaches on org design, headcount policy and what the board should see.