Employers who sack people are the bad guys in the public imagination. After all, they are the ones slashing the payroll and forcing loyal staff to leave the jobs they love and look for work elsewhere.

However, this image is a long way from the reality – the managers who make and convey decisions about redundancies very often find it a difficult, painful exercise.

“Redundancies can be almost as stressful for the people making the cuts as they are for those losing their jobs,” said David Pardey, senior research and policy manager at the Institute of Leadership and Management.

“While the need to reduce staffing levels is a rational response to market conditions, the reality of telling people they are losing their job generates a strong emotional reaction . . . with feelings of guilt, regret, fear – it may happen to you – anxiety and even anger to be expected.”

John, who does not want to give his real name because he is still making cuts at the software company where he is chief executive, said: “It can be very emotional when people have been with you for a while and have been loyal. But you have to think about what you need to do to keep the business going, and that you cannot keep other staff employed if you do not keep the business.” Stephen Sacks, chief executive of Wallace Sacks, a clothing and textiles importer, agrees. His family-owned business has been trading since 1981 and enjoyed consistent growth until it was hit hard by the devaluation of sterling. By the end of last year it was obvious that if he did not take action the whole business could go under; the result was a restructuring plan that gave e-com-merce a more central role and cut costs, allowing him to stabilise the company’s position.

However, a big part of the cost-cut-ting came from making more than half the business’s 48 staff redundant. “[Telling them] was very emotionally draining,” he said. “I did it on a Friday afternoon and then slept for most of the weekend. That was the most difficult part of it.

“Going in to work on the following Monday to sit directly opposite someone who had been made redundant after 10 years’ service was also tricky. Unfortunately, given the size of the company, staff were required to work through their notice period. “The atmosphere became very difficult,” he said.

Like John, Sacks reminded himself that the redundancies were necessary if the business – and the jobs of at least some staff – were to survive. “Having that threat about the performance of the business spurs you on,” he said. “The process was difficult and [some people] took it very badly, but on balance I felt better after I had done it because I knew that I was getting to the root of the problem.” While the firm is still losing money, his recovery plan seems to be working.

In a small or medium-sized company like Wallace Sacks it is possible for the person who makes the decision about redundancies to also be the one who tells staff their fate. In larger organisations this task will usually fall to line managers or team leaders, often with support from the human-resources department.

However, many managers lack confidence in their ability to do this, said Virginia Merritt, managing partner at Stanton Marris, an organis-ational consultancy. “Even if they have had training or done it before, they are really unsure about how to do it without upsetting people,” she said. “At a human level they still shy away from it . . . they can get very depressed thinking about having to make other people leave.”

This desire not to upset people can actually make things worse if it leads to delays or to the manager being unclear about the redundancy itself. On the odd occasion employees can leave such meetings without realising that they have lost their jobs. This is why preparing for the conversation is important, said Sue Turner, UK human resources director at Bank of Ireland.

“This means having as much personal information about the person as you can, including length of service and whether they are the sort of person who is likely to hold [their emotions] in or whether they will want to go straight home,” she said.

It includes thinking about how the person might react and then preparing your own response. It may even extend to having a counsellor on hand if you suspect that someone will take the news particularly hard. All of this will help managers to feel more comfortable about the process.

While employers have a responsibility to treat both redundant staff and those who remain with courtesy, respect and thoughtfulness, managers also need to keep an eye on their own state of mind. An overwrought, upset manager will not be much good at helping redundant staff learn about their options or motivating those who remain. So, it’s time for the usual advice about wellbeing at work: eat well, exercise and get enough sleep.

“Doing something like going fora run in the morning before you have to [make someone redundant] helps you to keep calm and focused,” said Turner. “Otherwise you end up being more stressed than the person you are making redundant and they will end up asking you if you are okay.”

Maintaining a work-life balance is very important, Sacks said. He found his happy family life helped him keep things in perspective.

It is also a good idea to turn to human-resources professionals for advice – Turner and her team have been supporting managers as they made 600 people redundant at the start of the year – or simply to talk over the experience with other managers in the same position.

Senior executives could turn to colleagues on the board, said Merritt. “This is a time when you need some experience on your top team – someone who has done this before and can talk to you about what it feels like.”

Explore Career

• Graduate

• Senior Executive

• Recruiter Forum

• Top 50 Women

• Best 100 Companies

• Careers in

Times Recommends

• Inspirational leadership
• How to get a new job
• The reluctant CEO