Bolt CEO Fires Entire HR Team, Cuts 75% of Staff

“We had an HR team, and that HR team was creating problems that didn't exist...Those problems disappeared when I let them go.” The head of Bolt fired his entire HR team. Everyone. He claimed they created problems that were instantly solved when he let them go. The company has been struggling and the recent 30% reduction in workforce and "leveraging AI at our core" are meant to fix it. Worth $11 billion in 2022, the company was worth $300 million by 2024, when Breslow, the CEO left, only to return in 2025. He's cut a total of 75% of employees, down to around 100 now. We have to wonder if firing most of the staff and the entire HR department may have hidden the problems from view more than made them "disappear." We'll see how the company does moving forward. We also wonder who is doing the hiring, firing, payroll, processes, and legal work needed to keep them out of trouble. Maybe they won't have any now that there are only 100 people working together. Ever thought of eliminating your HR department to solve all those problems they're always talking about? #HR #Leadership #Culture #Downsizing #KandorGroup

The CEO of Bolt fired his entire HR team for "creating problems that didn't exist." Thousands of people celebrated the decision. I get it. HR has a reputation problem. Executives mock them publicly, and employees distrust them privately. The general sentiment is that HR exists to protect the company, not the people who work there. And honestly, in a lot of organizations, that's exactly what happens. But here's what those takes always get wrong. The issues people blame on HR are rarely about HR itself, but actually problems with company culture, for a simple reason: HR follows the culture and standards set by leadership. If your HR team seems bureaucratic, performative, or more focused on liability than people, it shows what your company truly values. When HR works the way it should, it's the function that makes sure a great hire doesn't walk out the door six months later, the team that catches a compensation gap before it becomes a resignation, and the person who tells a manager something they don't want to hear because someone on their team needed an advocate. If you think that’s creating problems that don’t exist, maybe leadership isn’t the right fit for you. Letting go of HR because the culture is broken is like turning off a smoke alarm just because the sound bothers you. Don't take the human out of Human Resources.

The CEO of Bolt publicly removed the entire HR department and said they were “creating problems that didn’t exist.” Harsh? Maybe. But what shocked me more was how many people actually agreed with him. Let’s be honest for a second: HR is one of the very few departments in a company that does not directly generate revenue. The salaries, budgets, events, systems, and operations of HR are all funded by the performance of other departments. Which means the real question becomes brutal: If a department doesn’t generate money… then how much value does it actually bring to justify its cost? Some HR teams build culture, performance, leadership, and business growth. Others build meetings, policies, delays, investigations, and endless processes nobody asked for. And when employees fear HR more than trust it… that’s when companies start questioning the entire function itself. Maybe the Bolt CEO simply said publicly what many executives quietly think privately. So here’s the uncomfortable question: Has HR become a true business function… or just an expensive support department surviving on old corporate logic? But let’s be real for a second 😂 No matter how much people complain about HR, the same company would probably collapse in 3 business days without them🤗 #HR

CEO Ryan Breslow fired Bolt's entire HR department this week. It's a clean story: one function, one decision, problem solved. Founders under pressure love a clean story. A lot of the commentary has focused on HR, but the more interesting question is whether the problem was ever really about HR at all, or whether it points at something structural that's harder to fix. 🤔 In scale-ups, businesses outgrow their operating models fast. The informal ways of working that hold at 20 people - shared context, visible decision-making, physical proximity - stop holding somewhere between 100 and 200. The company keeps moving at the same speed, but without the conditions that make that speed functional. Ownership gets murky and decisions start to stall. Support functions get caught in that drift. Built too early, or without a clear line to business outcomes, they add process without adding capability. This is a real problem, but it's a symptom of the drift, not the cause. The best people functions we've seen reduce friction rather than create it. They help leaders make faster decisions, build stronger managers, and keep culture tied to performance. When they're working well, you barely notice them. Increasingly, the sharpest teams are using AI to hold that line, automating admin, cutting overhead and redirecting effort toward management quality. Smaller teams doing higher-value work. 💪 Breslow's answer was to cut. That's one answer. The harder version is building a people function that never gives you a reason to. Link to the article below 👇 https://lnkd.in/e7CkaBP8

Stop defending a broken system. The news about Bolt removing their HR team shouldn't scare you. It should wake you up. I read the Inc Magazine article and found myself nodding along with the headlines. If an HR leader doesn't fit the vision of the company they should be replaced. Two quotes from that piece stayed with me. Jennifer Sey called HR professionals "officious hall monitors." Amanda Goodall claimed HR is the only department that gets a free pass for being useless. It is easy to get defensive but we need to be honest about our own reputation. I have sat in the Fortune 100 seat and watched the corrosion of this function firsthand. I have seen constant model changes and realignments that make business leaders cringe. They don't want another theoretical framework while they are trying to scale a business. Small and mid-sized companies are screaming for simple solutions to daily people matters. They need effective performance management and clear communication not more red tape. The solution is not just dumping money into AI or trimming staff to save on overhead. The solution is building a culture that actually drives productivity. We need people metrics that tell a story supported by financial diligence. Stop being a hall monitor and start being a business driver. If we don't provide value the business will find a way to operate without us. #HRstrategy #AIinHR #HRConsultant #HR

Ryan Breslow recently made headlines after eliminating Bolt’s HR department, arguing that some internal processes were “creating problems that didn’t exist.” It raises an interesting leadership question: As companies scale, are some organizations becoming too process-heavy and bureaucratic? Or is HR still essential for culture, compliance, hiring, and employee development? With AI, automation, and lean operating models growing fast, do you think companies should: - reduce management overhead, simplify internal processes, and operate with smaller support organizations? Or does removing HR create larger long-term risks? Curious to hear different perspectives from leaders, engineers, HR professionals, and operators. https://lnkd.in/diQby6Ea

Bolt CEO Ryan Breslow fired the entire HR department, and says the problems disappeared along with it. In 2022, Bolt was valued at $11 billion. By 2024, around $300 million. A drop of nearly 97%. Breslow returned to the company in 2025 and announced an austerity mode. He cut 30% of staff, cancelled the four-day work week and unlimited PTO. He replaced almost the entire leadership team. And disbanded HR completely. His explanation: "We had an HR department, and that HR department was creating problems that didn't exist. The problems disappeared when I let them go." A small people operations team took its place, focused on employee training and support. According to Breslow, during the growth years the company developed an entitlement culture: people felt they deserved a lot, but worked less and less. "That's the main thing I had to fight." Today at Bolt, quote: "the team is four times smaller, much younger, works much harder, and has a different energy." The story is resonating across LinkedIn because it touches on a long-standing debate: where is the line between HR as a bridge between business and employees, and HR as a bureaucratic layer that adds complexity where simplicity is needed? Breslow has clearly found his own answer. But the question remains open. What do you think: is HR a necessity, or an overhead that can be avoided? Join the conversation in the comments.

I read an article this week about Bolt’s CEO defending his decision to fire the entire HR team, saying they were “𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘥𝘪𝘥𝘯’𝘵 𝘦𝘹𝘪𝘴𝘵.” The argument: once HR disappeared, so did the problems. And my first reaction was: Maybe this says less about HR… and more about how HR was positioned. Because I remember starting as the first People & Culture lead in a start-up/scale-up environment. To be honest, I had to earn my seat at the table. I had to convince people that People & Culture wasn’t “nice to have”. Not through policies, frameworks or creating more process But by:  • understanding the business deeply  • adjusting priorities as the company scaled  • showing business impact from HR initiatives  • being flexible with how and where I spent my own time I remember our CEO once calling me “𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗰𝗶𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗼𝗿𝗴𝗮𝗻𝗶𝘀𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻.” I still feel proud of that compliment. Not because it meant “protecting people from the business”. But because it meant helping the organisation grow without losing itself. And maybe that’s where things sometimes go wrong. HR goes wrong when it becomes disconnected from the reality of the business. When it creates process without purpose. When it becomes a function that people experience as slowing things down rather than helping them move forward. But equally: Organisations go wrong when they reduce People & Culture to administration and remove the role of challenge, perspective and conscience altogether. Because growth creates pressure. And under pressure, organisations need someone asking: 👉 Are we growing in a way that is sustainable? 👉 Are we building capability, not just speed? 👉 Are we creating performance without quietly damaging culture? In my experience, good HR doesn’t create problems. It often surfaces the ones that already exist. The uncomfortable question is: When people say HR is creating problems… 👉 Are they creating them? 👉 Or are they simply making them visible? Source: https://lnkd.in/eU5_gw2s

Ryan Breslow at Bolt made headlines this week for scrapping his HR team. 😲 Obviously….. The internet loved it. But here’s what the headline missed - This is the same company that took a $30M personal loan from its own business, watched its valuation fall from $11 billion to $300 million, and cut 30% of its workforce. 👀 And the replacement for HR? A people operations team focused on training, support and empowerment…. So an effective HR team with a fancy new name then…..? 🧐 This is exactly what HR should be doing. Good HR doesn’t create problems, we navigate it - to protect businesses from decisions that carry real risk. You wouldn’t hire a doctor and then blame them for giving you advice you didn’t want to hear would you? When CEOs, boards and HR are aligned - really aligned - people functions thrive and so do businesses. When HR is positioned as the problem, it’s usually a signal that something isn’t working at the top. 🙊 HR isn’t the enemy of business. We’re the partner that helps you build one that lasts….. Thanks to Diane Brady at Fortune for the original piece that got me thinking. How well does your leadership team actually partner with HR? 💜 #rebrand #HRLeadership #PeopleFirst #FutureOfWork #Leadership #Culture