This dissertation investigates the phenomenon of intentional disengagement as a strategic employee response to massive organizational change, with a particular focus on mass layoffs. Drawing on the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model (Xanthopoulou, Bakker, Demerouti, & Schaufeli, 2007) and Punctuated Equilibrium Theory (PET) (Gersick, 1991), this qualitative, embedded, multiple-case study challenges traditional assumptions that engagement and performance are positively correlated under all conditions. Through in-depth interviews with both managers and individual contributors at large corporations who were retained and not retained during periods of mass layoffs, this study uncovers how individuals recalibrate their relationship with work and self during sustained periods of significant instability. Findings reveal that during times of massive organizational change, even high performers may intentionally disengage from portions of their role, while maintaining or improving performance through boundary-setting and role prioritization. Thematic analysis, completed with NVivo coding, illustrates that intentional disengagement is not apathy, but a form of adaptive resilience. This research contributes to the theoretical evolution of the JD-R model by introducing workplace stability as a critical moderating variable, decoupling engagement and performance, and proposing intentional disengagement as a viable response to psychological contract violations. Practical implications underscore the importance of leadership transparency, role clarity, and psychological safety in sustaining performance during periods of transformation. This is the foundation to begin studying how intentional disengagement can be used as a mechanism to refocus time and energy away from that which is out of a person’s locus of control and towards things which will move them higher and farther than they would have been had they maintained their level of engagement throughout the PET events, which is massive layoffs in this study.