Ubisoft's Town Hall: A Failed Attempt to Soothe Employee Anxieties About the Company's Future!
Ubisoft recently held an internal Town Hall Q&A session, aiming to bolster employee confidence amidst significant upcoming changes. However, according to over a dozen anonymous employees who spoke to Insider Gaming, the meeting appears to have backfired, leaving many feeling more uncertain than before.
The session featured a host fielding questions for Ubisoft's leadership team, including CEO Yves Guillemot, Executive Vice President Cécile Russeil, Chief People Officer Sébastien Froidefond, CFO Frederik Duguet, and Chief Studios & Portfolio Officer Marie-Sophie de Waubert. The format was a roundtable discussion.
Those in attendance described the Town Hall as an exercise in evasion, with executives reportedly sidestepping direct answers and resorting to repeating earlier statements. A recording of the meeting was provided to Insider Gaming under the condition of not being publicly released.
The Return to Office Mandate: A Point of Contention
CEO Yves Guillemot kicked off the Town Hall by reiterating the company's decision for a 5-day return to office mandate. He emphasized that this was a carefully considered decision, believing it would foster greater efficiency, innovation, and velocity. He cited the perceived positive impact of the previous 3-day-per-week return, stating, "Working in person brings stronger performance, especially in the tech and creative industries."
Guillemot also addressed concerns about potential layoffs, stating, "Our only objective is to get Ubisoft back on the right path as soon as possible, to share success and profits." He expressed his personal commitment to the company's long-term flourishing, attributing success to the collective talents of the employees.
Interestingly, over 300 questions were submitted for the Q&A, with some receiving 700-800 upvotes – a significantly higher number than in previous calls. Employees attributed this surge in engagement to feelings of frustration, anger, and betrayal stemming from recent announcements.
One of the most upvoted questions focused on the 5-day return to office mandate. The core of the inquiry was whether Ubisoft possessed concrete data to substantiate claims that productivity and collaboration had improved since the implementation of the 3-day RTO policy.
Marie-Sophie de Waubert responded by highlighting that the company's understanding, both internally and externally, is that increased physical presence fosters improvements in collective creativity and collaboration. She pointed to other major companies in and outside the gaming industry, such as Riot Games, Activision Blizzard, Rockstar, Instagram, and Paramount, as examples that have also implemented return-to-office policies.
She assured that flexibility exceptions would be considered within a clear hybrid policy. However, when pressed for details on how many "at-home days" would be granted, Sébastien Froidefond indicated that these decisions would not be finalized until July.
Furthermore, a question about why Ubisoft wouldn't consider a 4-day return to office was met with a firm stance from Froidefond: "We have already explained this in the past, and our position remains the same; we are not considering a 4-day office workplace."
Significant Headcount Reduction on the Horizon?
Another pressing question referenced Insider Gaming's prediction of a potential reduction of over 2000 jobs due to cost-cutting measures. CFO Frederik Duguet clarified that while Ubisoft has never shared such numbers externally, it is true that the company will proceed with "additional targeting restructuring" to resize the organization and reduce costs.
Duguet further elaborated that by March 2026, Ubisoft's headcount is expected to be "significantly lower" than it was in September 2025, when the company employed 17,097 individuals. The exact meaning of "significantly lower" was not specified.
Acknowledging Communication Breakdowns
A silver lining from the Town Hall was Ubisoft's acknowledgment of a lack of clear communication regarding recent structural changes. Cécile Russeil admitted that many employees learned about these developments through media reports rather than internal channels. She recognized that the timing of the live Q&A session was a mistake, as employees had already been informed by external sources.
Russeil promised that in the future, press releases would be accompanied by internal emails, ensuring employees receive information simultaneously with the media and investors. Duguet added that as a publicly traded company, Ubisoft has disclosure duties to its investors, meaning sensitive internal information cannot be shared broadly before the market is updated.
The Future of Ubisoft's Creative Houses: Sale a Possibility?
A major concern raised was the fate of Ubisoft's Creative Houses if they fail to achieve profitability. Frederik Duguet reiterated that these houses are being set up for success and that the primary goal is for them to thrive. While acknowledging that not all might be profitable immediately, the focus is on their long-term contribution to Ubisoft's overall performance.
He stated that if a house underperforms against management expectations in the future, the root cause would be investigated, and discussions would be held with the team to explore avenues for improvement and profitability. Selling a Creative House was presented as a possibility, but not the initial course of action. Duguet mentioned that the company would consider selling if a powerful and motivated partner could be found, with a shared long-term vision and the capacity to invest in the brands' future, provided it benefits both the house and Ubisoft.
Employee Sentiment: Lingering Uncertainty
Despite the Town Hall, employees who spoke anonymously to Insider Gaming indicated that the meeting did little to alleviate their concerns about the company's future. Many felt that critical questions were deflected, leaving them with a sense of ongoing uncertainty.
What are your thoughts on Ubisoft's approach to communication and its return-to-office policies? Do you believe these measures will truly foster innovation, or are they a sign of deeper issues? Share your opinions in the comments below!
