In my experience at Amazon, line managers (5-20 people) still often act as if they have unregretted attrition goals.
It's up to the Sr managers and directors if they spread the 6% goal around all their teams, or let one or two teams "implode". But the line managers know that their team either needs to outperform other teams or that the performance management buzzsaw is likely coming for one or more of their reports.
Heck, I even saw directors and VP refer to "regretted attrition" and "unregretted attrition" in all hands meetings.
My impression is that most teams have high enough natural attrition that it doesn't really matter and some teams even seem completely immune to any sort of real change, even if they do extremely poorly on their deliverables. I know a few teams that other teams actively avoid working with, even preferring to reinvent some of their solutions, yet, more or less the same people have been working on these underperforming teams for several years.
I’ve noticed this too in my time in my org, it’s reasonably common to just rebuild something simple if the other team isn’t responding to your tickets and escalations. The fact that they are three or four different time zones away from me on either side of the country doesn’t help.
It's up to the Sr managers and directors if they spread the 6% goal around all their teams, or let one or two teams "implode". But the line managers know that their team either needs to outperform other teams or that the performance management buzzsaw is likely coming for one or more of their reports.
Heck, I even saw directors and VP refer to "regretted attrition" and "unregretted attrition" in all hands meetings.