NYU Clinical Professor of Human Capital Management Anna Tavis joins Yahoo Finance Live to discuss the recent rise in worker layoffs across various industries.

Tavis notes that during the pandemic there were "a lot of opportunities" as remote work dominated. However, she believes current job cuts seem driven more by efficiency than overhiring. Companies are now focused on trimming head counts for optimization rather then account for excessive pandemic staffing.

When asked whether AI investments are playing into these cost-cutting strategies, Tavis says: "This is a combination of both." However, she stresses the approach "differs from company to company."

For more expert insight and the latest market action, click here to watch this full episode of Yahoo Finance Live.

Editor's note: This article was written by Angel Smith

Video Transcript

AKIKO FUJITA: Well, Cisco cutting thousands of jobs this weekend. And according to layoffs.fyi in the tech sector alone, more than 34,000 people have been laid off so far this year. That's just scraping the surface. Over 42,000 people and counting are being cut in other sectors like financial services and manufacturing according to Reuters.

For what this means for the future of workers, let's bring in Anna Travis, New York University clinical professor of human capital management. It's good to talk to you today. You know, it feels like we're increasingly hearing in these announcements, whether it is the tech announcements or those outside of tech. It's about efficiency, automation. I mean, is there a thread that we can point to beyond just overhiring that happened during the pandemic?

ANNA TAVIS: Yes, Akiko. Overhiring is going to be finding the reasons for this realignment looking back. Definitely in the pandemic, there was a lot of hiring, a lot of jobs opportunities, specifically in the tech sector. And these are the companies as we will remember that went remote first and were celebrating remote work.

Looking forward, however, I think there's a whole range of new reasons why companies are making these drastic decisions and cuts, and that has to do with, again, as you mentioned, efficiency, productivity, and the need to introduce efficiency tools and really quickly realign around AI and other types of technologies that are really replacing those very remote workers who have-- who have been kind of dominating the market before.

Because we can look internally as to what the companies are doing to execute on these layoffs, as well as internally that-- externally the dynamism of a market, whether there are other opportunities for those workers to move in and get new jobs and, you know, transition into new industries.

AKIKO FUJITA: Anna, let's pick up on that point because there has been an ongoing conversation about the concerns about artificial intelligence and what that ultimately means for the labor market. If you look at the cuts that have been announced so far this year, how much of them have been replaced by AI? How much of this has been about cost-cutting that will ultimately lead to investments to introduce additional AI technology?

ANNA TAVIS: I think this is a combination of both. It's a hybrid. Clearly, cost-cutting is the immediate need for companies, because according to PWC survey of CEOs, we know that productivity is number one concern for all of these, you know, senior executives. And the most immediate and obvious place to look to cut those costs will be headcount.

However, those companies that are more strategic, and I would put technology companies into that group, are looking ahead just as much as they are trying to catch up on inefficiencies of the last cycle. And looking ahead is-- Matter, for example, I think is a good example-- is one of the best examples of how to do a strategic realignment because they've been working on these layoffs for over a year looking internally and in strategically carving out those areas where they needed to cut.

So I would say it really differs from company to company, but those that are making those changes strategically are definitely looking more ahead than looking backwards to the times when they overhired.