Inaction Is Not Neutral

Inaction Is Not Neutral: Why Avoiding Action Makes You the Problem

"What you permit, you promote."— Dr. Henry Cloud, Boundaries for Leaders

You have an employee, they are good at most of their job, great in fact. They are dependable and work really hard. In fact, you can live without them because no one else can do their role right now. However, there is a big issue that all their reports and peers can see. So you don’t want to rock the boat and deal with the situation because you fear losing them?

Think about a time in your career when you have been negatively impacted by someone in leadership not dealing with an issue.

That one hit me like a brick the first time I heard it. It’s simple, but it’s truth. If you allow something to continue unchecked, especially poor performance, you’re not just letting it happen. You’re sending a message to everyone watching that it’s acceptable. And that message doesn’t just affect one person, it shapes your whole team’s culture. It defines what kind of leader you are.As a leader, your silence speaks and not always in good ways.

In every organization, people are watching not just what you say, but what you choose to tolerate. Ignoring underperformance is one of the most common and costly mistakes in people management. It's uncomfortable. It’s emotional. But when we fail to take action, especially when a team member is underperforming, we don’t stay neutral, and we shift from being a solution to being part of the problem or the problem itself. Research backs this up. Studies show that a single underperforming employee can significantly drag down team morale, productivity, and engagement. Will Felps and his colleagues at the University of South Wales found that one negative team member can reduce group performance by up to 30–40%. A phenomenon they called the bad apple effect.  - Research in Organizational Behavior, Volume 27, 2006, 

I’ve seen it play out time and time again. I’ve had countless conversations with leaders, wrestling with these very situations. They’d describe the behaviours and the drop in team energy and offer excuse after excuse, hoping things would change without confrontation. And over time, I realized the only way to shift their perspective was to call it what it was:If you keep ignoring this, you’re not managing it you’re enabling it. You’re now the problem.

Why Don’t We Deal with the Issues?

If we know inaction causes harm, why do so many leaders still avoid dealing with underperformance? The answer lies in psychology, not incompetence. Avoidance isn't usually about not caring….it’s about discomfort, uncertainty, or fear.

Conflict Avoidance

Many leaders are afraid of confrontation. They want to be liked, or they worry about damaging relationships. According to Dr. Ginka Toegel of IMD Business School, leaders often think avoiding conflict is a kind of diplomatic choice. Avoidance only allows the damage to spread.“Many managers fall into the trap of being conflict-averse, mistakenly thinking that avoiding confrontation is the kind or diplomatic thing to do. In reality, avoidance can create greater long-term harm.” — Toegel & Barsoux, Harvard Business Review, 2016

Lack of Confidence or Skills

Some leaders just don’t feel prepared. The Center for Creative Leadership found that 46% of managers are uncomfortable delivering negative feedback. Without the right tools, even experienced leaders hesitate.“Even leaders with strong technical skills often lack the interpersonal tools to handle underperformance effectively.” — CCL, “The Leadership Gap,” 2018

Magical Thinking

Sometimes we convince ourselves things will get better on their own. We tell ourselves it’s a phase, or that they’re just having a rough quarter. That’s wishful thinking—what researchers call optimism bias.“Avoidance is often rooted in optimism bias—leaders convince themselves a problem will improve without intervention, which rarely proves true.” — Weitzel & Jonsson, 1989

Fear of Rocking the Boat

In lean teams or environments with high turnover, managers fear that taking action—especially if it leads to someone leaving—will make things worse. But in reality, most teams are relieved when action is finally taken.“Teams tend to be more frustrated with leaders who tolerate poor performance than those who make difficult personnel decisions.” — Gallup Workplace Study, 2021

Action Steps for Courageous Leadership

·       Diagnose the delay Ask yourself: What exactly am I avoiding? The person? The conflict? The fallout?

·       Get the facts, then act Take the emotion out of it. Look at the behaviour, the outcomes, and the pattern and respond to that.

·       Communicate with clarity Speak directly, respectfully, and consistently. Be honest about expectations and consequences.

·       Don’t wait for the perfect moment There isn’t one. However, the cost of waiting is often greater than the cost of taking timely action.

Leadership isn’t about perfection. It’s about courage. And sometimes, the bravest thing we can do is have the conversation that no one else wants to have. The one that protects the culture elevates the standard and helps someone grow.Or, in some cases, helps them move on.But either way, when you stop avoiding and start leading, you stop being the problem and become the example.