Monday.com Cut 630 Jobs and Said It Wasn't About AI. Read the Denial

Monday.com just cut 630 people, a fifth of the entire company. The memo went out of its way to say it was "not to reduce costs or replace people with AI."

Read that line again after you see the details. The cut is 20% of staff, disclosed in a July SEC filing. About 350 of those roles are at the Tel Aviv headquarters. The company is taking a restructuring charge of up to 55 million dollars, most of it severance. The two co-founders, still co-CEOs, called it the most painful decision since they started the company. And in the same breath, they pivoted the whole business to what they now call an "AI Work Platform."

So the official version is: we cut a fifth of our people, we are rebuilding the company around AI, and this is not about cost or replacing people with AI. That combination is worth pausing on, because you are about to hear a smaller version of it yourself.

Why is the denial the tell?

Nobody denies the thing that is not happening. You do not put "this is not about replacing people with AI" in a layoff memo unless you already know exactly how the layoff looks. The sentence is not information. It is damage control. And the fact that a company felt it needed the sentence tells you more than the sentence itself does.

The pattern is not about whether Monday.com's leaders are honest or not. It is about a simple rule: the more a public message works to pre-empt an interpretation, the more likely that interpretation is correct. The reassurance is aimed at the thing being cut.

Where you will hear this exact sentence

You will hear it, in a smaller room, from your own clients. The phrasing will be familiar:

• "We love the work. This has nothing to do with replacing you."
• "This is not about the quality, it is just a budget thing."
• "We are not cutting you, we are just restructuring for now."

Then the scope quietly shrinks. The retainer gets paused for a quarter. The project that was always coming back does not come back. The words point one direction. The budget points the other.

Believe the number, not the paragraph

For four months straight, AI has been the single most cited reason for job cuts in the US, named in roughly a quarter of them. Some of that is real. A lot of it is cover, the same AI cover story six Wall Street banks used the same quarter, because "we are leaning into AI" is an easier thing to say than "we are cutting to hit a number." Either way, the reassuring paragraph is not the signal. The number underneath it is.

So when a client's words and a client's budget disagree, believe the budget. It is the part with consequences attached. A client who genuinely values what only your agency or service business provides does not need a paragraph explaining that the cut is not about you. That paragraph is always written for the thing being cut.

What to do with this

Two practical moves:

• Listen for the pre-emptive denial. When a client reassures you about something you had not questioned, treat it as a signal to look at the budget, not the words.
• Make yourself hard to file as a cut. The clients who quietly trim you are the ones who cannot name the specific outcome your fee buys, the same test creative roles are being judged against right now. Make that outcome impossible to miss, so you are not the easy line to reduce while everyone says nice things.

The last time a client told you a change was "not about the work," did the budget that followed actually agree with them? That memory is usually more instructive than the memo.

The JAS newsletter breaks down one of these shifts every week for people who run and sell services. It is free, and you can subscribe below.