A Duty of Care

When organisations talk about performance, productivity, attendance or behaviour, the conversation often centres on what can be seen. The targets that have been missed. The deadlines that are delayed. Unexpected changes in attitude or increased absence of an employee. A previously reliable individual who now appears disengaged. A colleague who seems withdrawn, irritable or distracted.

The problem is that human beings are rarely as simple as the metrics used to measure them. Unfortunately we forget this too easily.

A genuine duty of care requires organisations to look beyond what’s immediately visible. It means recognising that performance and behaviour don’t exist in a vacuum. Each employee brings their physical health, mental health, personal experiences, family circumstances and life challenges with them to work each day. Sometimes these factors are obvious, but more often, they’re not.

There’s a natural tendency to judge what we can see. If someone becomes less productive, we may assume they have stopped trying. If their behaviour changes, we usually conclude that they're being difficult. If they make mistakes, we may question their competence or commitment. But the reality could be very different.

There’s a natural tendency to judge what we can see. If someone becomes less productive, we may assume they have stopped trying ... But the reality could be very different.

An individual may be living with autism and struggling to cope with unplanned changes to routine. Another may be managing bipolar disorder and quietly fighting to maintain stability. Someone may be experiencing severe chronic pain, ME, or another long-term health condition that exhausts them long before the working day is over. They may be dealing with anxiety, depression, PTSD or the cumulative effects of trauma.

Outside of work, the picture can be equally complex. Relationships often break down. Sometimes marriages end. Loved ones become seriously ill. Parents age and require care, which can be stressful and often take a toll on health. Families experience financial pressures. Bereavement can arrive without warning and alter someone's entire world overnight.

None of these challenges are necessarily obvious. Some employees are open about their problems, but others aren’t. They keep their private issues to themselves. A true duty of care asks organisations to recognise that not every struggle is visible.

Many years ago, psychologist Edward Thorndike described what became known as the fundamental attribution error: our tendency to explain other people's behaviour based on their character while explaining our own behaviour based on circumstances. When we were late for a meeting, there was traffic. When someone else is late, they are disorganised. When we made a mistake, we were under pressure. When a colleague makes a mistake, we may assume carelessness.

the fundamental attribution error: our tendency to explain other people's behaviour based on their character while explaining our own behaviour based on circumstances

This tendency creates problems in the workplace because it encourages judgement before understanding. Behaviour rarely emerges in isolation. Health conditions, neurodiversity and personal circumstances can all affect how people communicate, make decisions and respond to pressure.

None of this removes accountability. Actions still have consequences. Standards still matter. However, a meaningful duty of care requires us to ask better questions before reaching conclusions.

What pressures is the person under?
What support was available?
Are there underlying health conditions?
Have significant life events occurred?
Are there circumstances invisible to colleagues, managers or the wider public?
These questions don’t remove accountability. Instead, they provide context, and it's the context that matters.

An employee experiencing chronic pain may appear distracted because every movement hurts. A colleague caring for a parent with dementia may seem exhausted because they have spent months sleeping only a few hours each night. Someone returning from bereavement may appear detached because they are dealing with grief that follows them into every room they enter. The visible behaviour is often only the tip of the iceberg.

The challenge for leaders is that empathy takes time, whereas judgement is quick. As a sufferer of chronic pain and ME/CFS, I was repeatedly judged for not being as energetic as others or not smiling enough. There was no acknowledgement of the context around how I presented. There was no duty of care.

The challenge for leaders is that empathy takes time, whereas judgement is quick.

It is much easier to look at a performance report than to have a sensitive conversation. It is easier to focus on a missed target than to explore whether an employee is struggling with illness, burnout or overwhelming personal circumstances. It is easier to label behaviour than to seek understanding. A strong organisational culture recognises this danger.

A meaningful duty of care does not mean lowering standards. It does not mean abandoning accountability or ignoring poor performance. Rather, it means understanding that effective support and appropriate accountability can exist together.

The best organisations ask what is happening before deciding what should happen next. They create environments where employees feel safe discussing health challenges. They train managers to recognise signs of distress. They understand that reasonable adjustments may enable someone to thrive rather than fail. They acknowledge that people experience life differently and that fairness is not always achieved by treating everyone identically. Most importantly, they recognise that every individual has a story that may be largely invisible to those around them.

The consequences of failing in this duty of care can be profound. In some situations, they can be devastating. People who feel unsupported, misunderstood or unfairly judged may experience worsening mental health, increasing stress, anxiety, depression and burnout. Physical health conditions can deteriorate. Relationships can suffer. Careers can be damaged. Talented individuals may leave roles they once loved because they no longer feel valued, understood or safe.

The consequences of failing in this duty of care can be profound. In some situations, they can be devastating

In the most tragic cases, the consequences can extend far beyond the workplace. History contains too many examples where people have been pushed beyond their ability to cope because warning signs were ignored, support was absent, or assumptions were allowed to replace understanding. Organisations that fail in their duty of care often discover too late that what appeared to be a performance issue was actually a person in distress.

A duty of care isn’t, therefore, merely a legal obligation or a human resources process. It is a moral responsibility. It requires organisations to recognise when people are struggling and to provide support before difficulties become crises. Looking away because a problem is uncomfortable, inconvenient or invisible is not neutrality. It is a failure of duty of care.

This responsibility doesn’t end at the office door. A modern duty of care must also extend to protecting employees from unnecessary harm arising from media attention, whether from traditional journalism or the increasingly aggressive environment of social media.

Recent events have highlighted how quickly individuals can become the focus of intense public scrutiny. When allegations, mistakes, controversies or disputes become public, organisations face an important test of their duty of care. It’s easy to prioritise reputation management, media strategy and public relations. It’s harder, but more important, to consider the wellbeing of the human being at the centre of the story.

It’s easy to prioritise reputation management, media strategy and public relations. It’s harder, but more important, to consider the wellbeing of the human being at the centre of the story.

Public attention can be relentless. Traditional media, online commentators and social media platforms can create an environment in which an individual feels judged not only for their actions but also for their character, background and worth as a person. People form opinions based on incomplete information. Context disappears. Nuance is lost. Complex human situations are reduced to headlines, hashtags and sound bites. Yet behind every news story, social media post or viral controversy is a real person.

The internet has given rise to countless self-appointed judges, juries and commentators. Many are quick to express outrage, condemnation or ridicule despite having access to only fragments of information. The loudest voices are often the least informed. Human beings become caricatures. Their lives, struggles and circumstances are compressed into a few words on a screen.

A genuine duty of care requires organisations to think carefully about how they support employees when public criticism emerges. It means recognising that online attacks can have very real consequences for mental health and wellbeing. It means resisting the temptation to distance themselves from individuals purely because doing so appears politically or reputationally convenient.

The measure of an organisation's duty of care isn’t how it treats employees when everything is going well. It’s how it responds when individuals are struggling, under pressure, subject to criticism or facing the most difficult periods of their lives.

However, duty of care is not solely an organisational responsibility. It is also a personal one. In an age of instant communication, each of us has a choice about how we respond to events and other people. Before posting, sharing or commenting on social media, we should pause and ask whether we know the facts, whether the source is trustworthy and whether our contribution adds insight or simply adds noise. Too often, people join online criticism without understanding the context or consequences of their words. A comment typed in seconds can contribute to weeks, months or even years of distress for someone else. Exercising a personal duty of care means recognising that there is a human being behind every headline, every social media profile and every news story. It means favouring empathy over outrage, evidence over assumption and understanding over judgement. Not every opinion needs to be shared, not every rumour needs to be repeated and not every argument needs our participation. Sometimes the most responsible action is to listen, verify the facts and consider whether what we are about to say will help or harm.

A true duty of care recognises that everyone is a human being first. It recognises that behind every media story, performance issue, behavioural concern, absence record, disciplinary process or public controversy there may be factors that aren’t immediately visible. The responsibility isn’t simply to judge what can be seen but to seek to understand what can’t. We need to realise that we never possess the full picture of another person's life.

A true duty of care recognises that everyone is a human being first ... The responsibility isn’t simply to judge what can be seen but to seek to understand what can’t. We need to realise that we never possess the full picture of another person's life.

The colleague who seems distracted may be attending hospital appointments between meetings. The employee whose performance suddenly changes may have received devastating news. The person whose behaviour appears unusual may be navigating challenges that few others understand. The individual being criticised online or traditional media may be carrying burdens invisible to almost everyone commenting on their situation.

A workplace built solely on judgement will frequently get people wrong. A workplace built on compassion, understanding and empathy stands a much better chance of helping people succeed. We all have a responsibility to question our assumptions, verify facts before repeating them, and consider whether our words, actions and online contributions are helping or harming. That's why every organisation, and every individual within it, should remember that our greatest responsibility extends beyond profits, targets and performance metrics. It extends to the human beings who make those achievements possible.

That responsibility has a name. It’s a duty of care.