When Elon Musk bought Twitter in 2022, he made headlines not just for acquiring the platform but for the drastic, slash-and-burn tactics he employed. Thousands of employees were laid off, offices were downsized, and even coffee makers were auctioned off in a bid to “turn the company around.” Now, with Musk in charge of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), he’s bringing those same aggressive, cost-cutting strategies to the U.S. federal government. But will his slash-and-burn approach work there, or is he setting himself up for failure, just as he did with Twitter?
Musk’s Twitter Tactics: A Warning for Washington
Let’s start with what Musk did at Twitter. When he took control of the platform, he initiated a massive shakeup that included firing large swathes of staff, slashing budgets, and changing policies on a whim. The results? A platform with fewer employees, a drop in advertising revenue, and a shrinking user base. While some point to X’s global reach and Musk’s continued political clout, it’s hard to ignore the undeniable financial struggles.
But Musk doesn’t just focus on cutting costs. His approach also reflects a deeper ideological drive to eliminate what he views as a “woke agenda.” For example, one of his first actions was eliminating Twitter’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, leading many former employees to claim that the “culture of Twitter died.”
The Similarities Between Twitter and DOGE
When Musk transitioned to running the federal government’s DOGE, he brought this same mentality. Now, he is consolidating power, sidelining experienced government officials, and making decisions that may clash with constitutional limitations. People who’ve worked closely with Musk — such as Emily Horne, former Twitter policy communications head — warn that his approach is the same: ruthless, ideologically driven purges designed to reshape operations according to Musk’s worldview.
His focus on extreme cost-cutting is evident. Just like at Twitter, Musk seems to want to reduce government spending by dramatically shrinking the workforce. The goal? Save money by slashing budgets and creating a more “efficient” government. But as experienced professionals know, the government isn’t a private business. It has complex systems in place that aren’t easily replaced by efficiency-focused tactics.
Musk’s Leadership Style: Intimidation and Fear Tactics
While it’s not unusual for business leaders to impose strict measures, Musk’s style seems to be rooted in intimidation and a push for unquestionable loyalty. This has been evident in both Twitter and now DOGE, where employees have been expected to prove their worth in extreme ways.
Take, for example, how Musk allegedly had engineers print out their code and stand in line to have inexperienced staff members evaluate it. Former Twitter executive Rumman Chowdhury calls this a “fear and intimidation tactic” and wonders whether this leadership style is sustainable in the long term.
Will the Same Tactics Work in Government?
Musk’s cost-cutting at Twitter has not yielded clear success. In fact, he’s struggled with advertiser pullback, which has cost the platform millions. Rather than wooing back advertisers, Musk took a confrontational approach, even threatening brands with lawsuits. This combative style hasn’t helped his financial standing — he’s even sued major companies like Unilever and Mars for pulling their ads. This kind of aggressive behavior isn’t likely to inspire confidence in government stakeholders either.
His moves in Washington, though still in the early stages, show signs of a similar approach. Massive cuts to the federal workforce are on the horizon, and Musk’s “deferred resignation offer” email to government employees echoes the ultimatums sent to Twitter staff — a tactic that didn’t sit well with workers at Twitter and could backfire in the government setting.
Legal and Financial Fallout: A Warning for Musk
While Musk’s aggressive cost-cutting may have made headlines, it has left him embroiled in numerous lawsuits. At Twitter, he has faced ongoing legal battles with thousands of former employees who claim they were wrongfully terminated or denied severance. Musk’s legal strategy at Twitter has resulted in massive legal fees, making many question whether he truly saved the company money in the long run.
This situation seems poised to repeat itself in Washington. Legal experts like Shannon Liss-Riordan, who represents former Twitter employees, are already raising concerns about Musk’s decision-making style. If he continues to make decisions that aren’t grounded in law or respect for established rules, he could face the same kind of financial and legal fallout that plagued his Twitter tenure.
The Government is Not a Company: A Harder Battle
One of the most significant differences between running a tech company and the federal government is the presence of established laws, regulations, and civil service protections. Musk may have learned the hard way at Twitter that running a company is different from running a government agency. The stakes are much higher, and the consequences of mismanagement are far more severe.
Professor Nicholas Bagley of the University of Michigan notes that Musk’s attempts to centralise spending decisions might violate constitutional powers that belong to Congress. This could spark a series of lawsuits that may tie up his efforts for years to come. The government, unlike a company, is a complex system that requires long-term commitment and a balance of political and legal accountability.
What Lies Ahead: An Epic Battle?
Given the mess Musk has created at Twitter, many experts, including Ross Gerber, a minority stockholder in X, predict that his leadership in Washington will also lead to failure. Musk’s tendency to lean on extreme cost-cutting and confrontational tactics has not yielded results at Twitter, and it seems unlikely to work for the federal government either.
In fact, Musk may be facing an “epic battle” in Washington as he attempts to impose his vision of government efficiency. The U.S. government is a system that demands far more than corporate-style leadership. It requires a deep understanding of governance, respect for the rule of law, and a commitment to long-term solutions that consider the needs of all citizens — not just ideological goals.
Conclusion: Will Musk Learn from His Twitter Failures?
Musk’s slash-and-burn tactics may have made him a successful businessman, but his approach to Twitter suggests that this style won’t be effective in government. With ongoing lawsuits, legal challenges, and a shrinking workforce at Twitter, Musk’s strategy is already showing cracks. If he continues down this path in Washington, the consequences could be disastrous — both for the federal workforce and for the country at large.
Relevant links for further reading:
- Elon Musk’s Twitter Takeover
- Musk’s Leadership and Business Strategies
- Government Efficiency in the U.S.
Photo credit: Sole 24 Ore
