Many leaders now hesitate to raise performance concerns because they fear a bullying complaint. That hesitation feels safe, but it usually increases psychosocial risk for everyone. This article explains why high standards and psychosocial safety are not in conflict, and how to hold both. It draws on the approach in our Leading Performance Safely program.
The quiet retreat from performance conversations
Across Australian workplaces, a pattern has emerged. A manager notices that someone's work is slipping. They plan to raise it, then delay. They worry about how the person will react, whether a complaint will follow, and whether HR will back them. Weeks pass. The problem grows, colleagues absorb the extra work, and frustration builds on all sides.
When the conversation finally happens, it is late, loaded and far more likely to go badly. The thing the manager feared becomes more likely because they waited.
Avoiding performance conversations is not kindness, and it is not risk management. It shifts the risk elsewhere.
What the law actually says about reasonable management action
Under the Fair Work Act, bullying does not include reasonable management action carried out in a reasonable manner. Setting expectations, giving feedback, raising concerns about work quality and managing underperformance are all legitimate parts of a leader's role.
The test has two parts, and both matter:
- Is the action reasonable? Is there a genuine performance issue, and is addressing it a proportionate response?
- Is it carried out in a reasonable manner? Is the process fair, timely, respectful and consistent with policy?
Most problems arise from the second part, not the first. A legitimate concern raised publicly, sarcastically, without warning or months after the event can still cause harm and expose the organisation to risk. Recent decisions show regulators and tribunals looking closely at how management processes are run, which we explored in From bullying to management processes.
Why avoidance increases psychosocial risk
The Model Code of Practice on managing psychosocial hazards names poor support, low role clarity, poor organisational justice and conflict among the hazards employers must manage. Avoided performance conversations feed every one of them:
- Role clarity suffers because the person never learns what good looks like.
- Workload rises for others who quietly pick up the gaps.
- Fairness erodes when the team sees standards applied unevenly.
- Conflict escalates because small issues are left until they become large ones.
- The person themselves loses the chance to improve early, when support is easiest to offer.
A late, formal process is almost always more distressing than an early, informal conversation.
High standards, held safely
Holding high standards safely means being clear about expectations while paying attention to the conditions people work in. In practice it looks like this.
1. Raise it early and keep it small. The best performance conversation is a short one held soon after the issue appears. Describe what you saw, its effect, and ask for the person's view.
2. Check the work before judging the worker. Ask whether workload, unclear priorities, missing resources, change or something outside work is contributing. A leader's job is to fix the work, not just the worker.
3. Separate the person from the problem. Talk about specific behaviour and outcomes, not character or attitude.
4. Be clear about what happens next. Agree what will change, what support will be provided and when you will check in again.
5. Notice your own state. If you are frustrated or rushed, you are more likely to come across as harsh. Pause before the conversation, not after it.
6. Document fairly and consistently. Notes should be factual, shared where appropriate and applied the same way across the team.
7. Repair when it goes wrong. If a conversation lands badly, return to it. Acknowledging the impact is a sign of strength, not weakness.
What organisations need to provide
Individual leaders cannot carry this alone. Organisations reduce risk when they:
- train leaders in practical conversation skills, not just policy
- give HR partners a clear role in early support, not only formal processes
- review performance management processes as part of their psychosocial risk assessment
- make sure systems for rating and promotion are fair and checked for bias, as discussed in Managing bias in performance appraisal
The bottom line
Psychosocial safety does not mean lowering expectations. It means holding expectations in a way that is clear, fair and humane. Leaders who raise issues early and respectfully protect their people, their teams and their organisation.
If you would like to build this capability in your leaders, explore Leading Performance Safely or our psychosocial hazards training, or contact us to discuss your needs.