While the dominant literature on downsizing suggests that workforce reductions have a negative impact on employee commitment, knowledge of downsizing is limited by the undifferentiated ways in which downsizing activities are usually approached. This study analyses differences in employee commitment depending on a) the downsizing method used (voluntary redundancies, divestment, layoffs and closure of units) and b) the degree of exposure of employees to the downsizing event. Using downsizing announcements and questionnaires, two distinct families of downsizing methods were identified. Layoffs and closure of units have a negative effect on commitment while voluntary redundancies and divestment have a positive effect. Employee exposure (direct, indirect or not exposed) to the downsizing event accounts for significant differences on commitment. Studying downsizing in a differentiated way shows that assuming that all downsizing is detrimental to commitment is inadequate. We outline the theoretical and practical implications of a more nuanced approach to downsizing.