In reference to the information provided by Toyota Australia suggests that the change implemented was driven from the external environment comprising of economic downturns and decrease of competitive advantage (Neo et al. 2011). The present interpretation is that Toyota Australia has adopted the political perspective of change when the decision was made to force as opposed to voluntary redundancy offered by Ford Australia (Spinks 2012). According to Graetz et al. (2011), the key features of this perspective revolves around acquiring organizational change via aggressive tactics that produces conflict that included bargaining. This directly reflects the continuous length of industrial conflicts that Toyota Australia has encountered from employees challenge for pay increment to forced redundancy (Drill 2012). It would appear that Toyota has neglected to approach this change decision from a psychological perspective to consider the damaging effects it would have on “survivors” from the redundancy movement (Graetz et al. 2011). The downsizing strategy implemented by Toyota Australia invokes what is term “survivor guilt”, which indicates a psychological reaction experienced by employees who survived and were able to retain their positions. However the impact can provoke anxiety over the stability of their jobs consequently decrease loyalty and staff morale. This anxiety is further exacerbated by the perception that good work ethics such as dedication and competency failed to save the jobs of their colleagues. Therefore, it is proposed