Intel will begin cutting about 1,000 manager jobs worldwide this week as part of an effort to become more competitive.

"This step is important because it addresses a key problem we've found in our efficiency analysis: slow and ineffective decision-making, resulting, in part, from too many management layers," chief executive Paul Otellini told employees in a memo sent out Thursday in the US and seen by ZDNet Australia sister site CNET News.com.

Intel spokesman Chuck Mulloy confirmed the layoffs Thursday, saying they would "both reduce costs and improve decision-making and communications." He didn't disclose the financial costs or benefits of the cuts, but said Intel plans to share more details July 19 when it discusses financial results for the last quarter.

A regional Intel spokesperson declined to comment on whether the cuts would affect Intel's Australian operations. He said the organisation was not publicly "breaking out" the numbers across business units, regions or sites.

The restructuring and regrouping effort comes after two years of sluggish performance at Intel. In 2004, the company had to delay or cancel a number of products. In 2005, Intel steadily lost market share to rival Advance Micro Devices.

"Intel has been besieged by slowing PC market demand and uncharacteristically fierce competition from rival AMD. The primary concerns facing Intel's operations are declining revenues and profitability," said Martin Kariithi, an analyst at Technology Business Review.

The move, along with the sale of some communications processor assets to Marvell Technology Group in June, is part of an efficiency review Intel launched in April to become more competitive. More cuts are likely as a result of the review, Otellini said.

"You should expect that we will continue to take actions, including selective reductions, as we complete analyses and decisions about investments, expense levels and organisational structures," Otellini said in the memo. "Over the last five years at Intel, the number of managers has grown faster than our overall employee population. Our efficiency analysis and industry benchmarking have shown that we have too many management layers, top to bottom, to be effective."

Kariithi estimated that the revenue per Intel employee dropped from US$408,175 in the fourth quarter of 2005 to US$371,075 in the first quarter of 2006, but he expects another round of layoffs to be announced during the financial results announcement.

To return revenue per employee to where it was a year ago, Kariithi said, Intel will have to lay off 10 percent of its staff--about 10,000 people.

Although AMD has been gaining share against its rival, it has had its own difficulties as well. Last week, the company announced revenue of US$1.21 billion, significantly less than the US$1.3 billion average expected by analysts and a nine percent decrease over the first quarter.

Most managers losing their jobs will be notified Thursday and Friday, Otellini said, and will get a minimum of three months' separation pay.

Henri Richard, executive vice president of sales and marketing at AMD, earlier this year said that AMD made some of its gains in part because of Intel's complacency. Characterising Intel as fat and sluggish has become a recurring theme with AMD.

Institutional intertia
In an interview Wednesday, Thomas Sonderman, director of automated precision manufacturing at AMD, said that the chipmaker realised in the 1990s that it never would be able to have as large a factory footprint as Intel. As a result, it optimised what it could do in a single factory.

Otellini rebuffed the notion that Intel had become self-satisfied earlier this year. Still, Intel has had trouble overcoming institutional inertia. In early 2004, CNET News.com asked then-CEO Craig Barrett and Otellini if the company's emerging problems were the result of overconfidence. The two said no, arguing that the problems that had emerged had fairly specific causes. A few months and a few more product problems later, Barrett issued an internal memo warning employees that the company had become somewhat complacent and needed to refocus.

Despite the warning, Intel didn't rebound. And employee head count went from about 85,000 at the end of 2004 to 100,000 at the end of 2005.

Otellini called for a thorough examination during the first-quarter earnings call in April. The project was then reiterated at a meeting with analysts.

The 90-day efficiency review began in late April and therefore should be complete in coming weeks. Mulloy declined to say when actions resulting from the review would be done because the company doesn't yet know, he said.

That review has already resulted in the sale of Intel's XScale communications and applications chip technology to Marvell. There have been some smaller actions from the review, Mulloy said, including the closure of a 19-person lab in Glasgow, Scotland.

Intel periodically conducts purges. After a mini downturn in 1998, the company reduced head count through voluntary departures and layoffs. After bulking up with several acquisitions in the dot-com era, the company subsequently whacked divisions and sold off other groups.

In Thursday's memo, Otellini sought to fan Intel employees' competitive fires.

"We have done extremely well over the past 25 years of the PC era. But we need to adjust now for where our industry is going. Competition will intensify across our product lines. Pricing will be aggressive," he said. "Our objective, and our destiny, is to refashion Intel now while we have the means and the time to do so, and ensure we continue to remain No. 1."