Stories of organisational failings are appearing more often in the media. Transgressive behaviour — sexual or otherwise — creates fear and insecurity at work. What stands out is the tendency to attribute these cases to a few bad actors. But is that the full story, or are we confronting a systemic failure? Dependence The cases I have seen share a clear pattern: a degree of dependency between the person experiencing the behaviour and the person exhibiting it. I avoid labels such as “victim” and “perpetrator” because they can be stigmatising and obscure possible organisational drivers. Unwanted behaviour is never excusable. Yet there may be more at play. Safety Organisations invest in policies and reporting routes to create safe workplaces. Still, much behaviour goes unreported. Despite greater attention to workplace safety, organisations often fail to deliver the level of safety that matters in practice. Why? Hierarchy The answer starts with power. Providing formal safety is not the same as actually making people feel safe. Managers and leaders frequently underestimate how power imbalances deter reporting. Raising a concern can make someone feel vulnerable, ostracised or at risk of losing their job or income. Faced with those stakes, many choose silence. The risk that boundary-crossing behaviour will be tolerated is therefore ever-present. A different approach So why do organisations claim, after each scandal, that they would do things differently “with the knowledge we have now”? Hierarchies are not new and neither is the risk of abuse. Nor will everyone necessarily have the resilience to speak up. Look deeper What if we dared to ask different questions: what drives the conduct? Could it be less about ambition or ego and more about powerlessness, fear of failure, scarcity or a need to be seen because people lack emotional tools to cope? That is work we can start today. We do not need new knowledge — we already know this. What we often lack is the courage to act. From my experience, asking the right questions with the right intent can unlock powerful insights even in a first conversation.

How do you deal with doubt while everyone applauds loudly and no one asks critical questions? Increasingly I see leaders who are suffering. Not because of their team, not because of their strategy, but because of their own inner struggle about the choices they make. Why is that? And why is it so hard to change? Pattern When I look around, I keep seeing the same pattern. Why is it so difficult to actually realise the change so many people long for? I encounter this regularly in my coaching. And that’s without even mentioning the world news that hits us every day: world leaders who do not tolerate dissent, who suppress opponents or people with different views, or who remove people from their positions when they raise critical voices. Trust In conversations I often hear a lack of trust to engage in conflict. There is frequently fear of the consequences, or a lack of confidence in a positive outcome. In addition, there is a group of people who have no desire at all to break the status quo. Power, money and status often play a role. Ego — or is it fear? Fear Fear is rarely visible, but it drives decisions more often than leaders admit. From an evolutionary perspective fear has valuable meaning because it helps us survive in dangerous situations. It puts us into an elevated state of alert. Fear, however, also causes us to switch from long‑term thinking to short‑term thinking. After all, a solution must be found now to eliminate the danger. Risks It is precisely that short‑term thinking that creates risks. Micro‑management, keeping talented people small or holding them back, withholding information or maintaining and promoting ‘yes‑men’ because people who are critical are seen as a risk. Fear also creates uncertainty. This often reinforces the sense of insecurity, which again necessitates short‑term thinking. Dilemma And with that the circle seems complete and fear continues to rule. After all, we all crave acknowledgement and nobody likes to be rejected. What if someone doubts your loyalty or competence? Especially when that is also tied to whether you keep your position. A devilish dilemma that our ego is all too ready to exploit. But what would happen if, as a leader, you gave your most talented people the space and saw critical questions as an opportunity to learn? There is a good chance the ‘yes‑men’ won’t like it — after all, they never dared to do this. Something a leader must also take into account. Space Imagine status or power played no role. That leaders set their ego aside and ‘yes‑men’ no longer nod along. That they see critical voices and opposition as opportunities — as fuel for growth. Then a psychologically safe environment could arise for creativity, growth, dialogue and — where necessary —conflict, without fear of negative consequences. Perhaps that is the leadership organisations — and the world — are most longing for right now. Long‑term thinking, then. Maybe, just maybe, new leadership will emerge that so many people are desperately searching for.

Is it ok to show tears? I wonder why this is. Is it macho behaviour, shame, fear of losing control, or maybe fear of feeling vulnerable? Playing Hide and Seek 
 What I notice, for example, is the wearing of large sunglasses at funerals. If you pay attention, you will see men (and women too) at every funeral wearing big sunglasses. The emotions are there, but it looks we find it difficult to show them in public. The question then is: who is fooling whom? Ego 
 Many men still struggle to balance reason and emotion. The mind often says it is important to be successful, while the feelings say it is time to do things differently. In my work, I also often see that men find it difficult to admit they are touched by their emotions. What I notice in conversations is something strange happens. We start to rationalise. By rationalising, we step away from our feelings and let our head take over. Asking questions like ‘what could I have done differently?’ or ‘why is this happening to me?’ we search for rational answers. This approach often helps us find answers, but our feelings are not allowed to come along. And that is a pity, because the feelings were there and could have helped if we had allowed them in. In that respect, there is much to gain, and we can learn a lot from most women. Shame 
 And why is it that we are allowed to show our emotions when we are happy or proud? Apparently, positive emotions are easily accepted. Could it be that it is not so much shame or fear of losing control, but vulnerability? If shame or control were the reasons, then you would expect men not to cheer loudly at a great sporting achievement or celebrate extensively when winning a very profitable contract. So, in our European culture, there seems to be a connection between the type of emotion and whether you are allowed to show it or not. Vulnerability 
 Of course, it is sometimes difficult to be vulnerable and show your emotions — at work, in public, and even at home. For this, it is important to feel a certain level of safety. Fortunately, it is possible to create this safety. Not by changing other people, but by being open to your feelings the next time they arise and accept and embrace them rather then push them away.

Imagine working in an organisation where difficult conversations are consistently avoided. Unfortunately, this happens more often than we might think. Recently, I heard about an organisation where challenging discussions are systematically sidestepped. Underperforming employees are not coached on their behaviour; instead, they are left to their own devices, and when things really go wrong, they are transferred elsewhere. This gave birth to the title of this blog. Judgement My first reaction was, ‘How can management let this happen?’ I admit, I quickly formed a judgement myself. It was quite confronting to realise this as I began writing. After all, I’m expected to observe and listen without judgement. A Pattern Emerges Delving deeper, a clear pattern appeared. A manager displays inappropriate behaviour, and the organisation fails to respond adequately. Both employees and the manager suffer as a result. The consequences are predictable: high absenteeism, frequent turnover, motivation problems, and a poorly functioning department. And that’s not even considering the impact on the manager. It seems easier to request a transfer to make it someone else’s problem rather than giving the manager the opportunity to learn from their mistakes. Naming the Issue By ‘naming the issue’, I don’t mean simply relocating the manager to a new role or department. I mean addressing the behaviour itself and seeking the root cause — without judgement. Any form of judgement risks creating an unsafe environment for everyone involved. Employees hold back out of fear of repercussions. Managers hesitate to show vulnerability and ask for support. The organisation is left grappling with persistent problems. Everyone loses in this scenario. So, what makes it so difficult to have conversations about performance? I can only speculate. Leadership True leadership means initiating these conversations, creating a safe space, and treating everyone with respect — even when mistakes are made. After all, mistakes are essential for learning. In other words, we must talk about it. Only then can we uncover the underlying issues, respect everyone’s viewpoints, and investigate root causes. For clarity: this doesn’t mean agreeing with every opinion. I sincerely hope this organisation cultivates a culture where situations like these are not only recognised but openly discussed. Change begins with making things talkable. Perhaps the involved manager will finally have the space to reflect on their behaviour and its consequences — without being transferred for the fifth time. And how wonderful would it be if the team where this manager recently started could enjoy a leader who builds a trusting, high-performing environment where people are happy and openly share how rewarding it is to work together.

Or is the balance between work, personal life, and personal growth completely missing? Increasingly, alarming reports are emerging about young people living and working on the brink of burnout. Recently, an article in the Dutch Financial Times had the headline, “Young People with Burnout: Hype or Everyone's Problem?” This was followed a few days later by an article from a Dutch news station with the headline, “Number of Young Workers with Burnout Symptoms on the Rise.” Control What strikes me when reading these articles is why it seems difficult to pinpoint the cause of complaints like this. According to researchers, these issues are often caused by performance pressure, financial incentives, and the impact of the internet, social media, and the fear of missing out. This results in the loss of control over one’s own life. An interesting question in my opinion is, where does the responsibility for the loss of control lie? Dilemma In my neighborhood, I see countless examples of people who fit exactly into the picture the researchers paint. A busy job, a high mortgage or rent, often a parents with young children, a partner with an equally busy job, and a busy social life. And let's not forget the desire to personal growth. This can be driven by personal need or by the expectations of employers, partners, or environment. Being in such a situation, constantly trying to meet expectations and financial obligations, raises the dilemma: what choices do I make to better balance my life, and what am I willing to give up? Unaware What I notice is that people are often not even aware that they are losing control. In conversations, I notice an urgent need for a different way of living , yet they continue without really investigating the root cause. When the root cause is sought, often people feel that the ability to change falls outside their influence. The question is whether this is always the case. Awareness Employers often are not aware that some of their employees are 'on the edge' until they call in sick. Then there is attention, as work gets left behind or a temporary worker needs to be hired. If it lasts longer, a reintegration plan has to be drawn up to support employees in their recovery. Unfortunately, by then the employee is already long term sick, and the employer faces unforeseen costs. And when the employee is back to work after a long recovery process, the underlying cause is often not found. Boundaries In my coaching sessions, I ask people to critically examine the balance between work, personal life, and personal development. Not because it always has to change, but to investigate how they balance them. Often this immediately provides insight. Then it suddenly becomes understandable that with a busy job, a busy personal life, and huge ambitions, it's likely that you go beyond what is healthy Choices Insight helps. While it doesn’t eliminate all the stress factors mentioned earlier, it can help you regain control over your life by prioritizing. By recognizing and discussing causes, you can look for solutions. For example, accepting that sometimes your personal life requires more attention, making work or personal growth less prominent. It’s a matter of making choices. Balance I am convinced that people are ultimately more successful if they dare to make choices. I believe that this approach can significantly reduce stress or burnout-related absences. Curious why I’m convinced it can be different, have a look at https://www.anderz-om.nl/en/balans or contact me for more information.

Or is this a short-term strategy that ultimately does not make sense? Recently, during a walk, I saw a company's slogan that got me thinking. This slogan suggested that it's important always to get the most out of people (and organizations) An interesting slogan, ' we get the most out of people' . And what does that mean? For example, I initially imagined squeezed oranges rather than optimally performing people. Maximize II'm not entirely sure what this company meant by this slogan. What I do know is that it doesn't immediately give me the feeling that it's good for the people who work for this company. Or is that because I often see and speak to people who put in maximum effort at work and then push past their limits until they get sick and burn out? Optimal Personally, I would much prefer to talk about getting the optimal or best out of people. I am convinced that this yields better long-term results and probably happier employees, with less absenteeism and turnover. The idea that people can always perform at their maximum is, in my opinion, utopian. Sustainable A lot of attention is currently being paid to sustainable business practices. Maybe it would help organizations to also view sustainable business from the perspective of people's resilience. Sometimes, you are more resilient than at other times. Sustainable business then results in not only environmental benefits but also benefits for the people. Trust Last week, I facilitated a 'High Impact Leadership' training in Paris. One of the topics discussed there was the importance of trust in organizations. And that this is the basis for building successful teams where people are not afraid to discuss difficult topics. How wonderful would it be if everyone found their work environment so trustworthy that there is understanding for personal situations like illness, home life, or other non-work-related issues that affect resilience? Unfortunately, the reality is often that this safety does not exist. So, people continue to perform maximally until they collapse, quit, or become long-term sick. Premiere league See the differences compared to top-level sports. Periods of intense performance are alternated with periods of rest to recover and become stronger. Success is achieved there by finding the optimal balance between hard work and timely rest to achieve top results. With the Summer Olympics approaching, maybe it's a good moment to discuss optimal workload at the next staff meeting. Hopefully, there is enough trust to have these conversations with each other. My conviction is that everyone wants to be successful, preferably with the right balance to perform optimally. What do you think?

Sometimes well-intentioned advice leads to unintended outcomes, while meaningful conversations often result in new insights. 26 December 2024 Tempting as it may be to give advice, everyone deserves the time and space to discover and learn on their own, without direction or judgment. As a child, like many others, I experienced bullying and name-calling. My typical response was to say, “you are what you say,” driven by helplessness or fear of consequences if I stood up to the bullying. Perhaps I already intuitively sensed that retaliating wouldn’t change anything. Insight Incidents in youth that seem random at the time can later provide valuable insights. This happened to me during a recent conversation with someone I hadn’t spoken to in a long time. We discussed similarities in our work, hobbies, and personal lives, and found we had more in common than we had thought. Because I have known and respected this person for many years, observing how he handles personal hardships, the conversation lingered in my mind. Voice This morning, a voice in my head said, ‘you want what you say.’ Only one word different from the phrase I often used as a child in response to taunts and bullying. Reflecting on this today, I realized there is very little difference between what children wish upon each other during bullying and what adults wish upon each other when trying to help. The bullying child feels, even if just for a moment, superior by humiliating another child. There is no consideration for the bullied child’s feelings. Similarly, when I, with good intentions, advise someone based on my experiences without considering the potential consequences, I unintentionally create a sense of superiority. In both cases, there’s a chance the other person’s behavior might change. This blurs the line between advising and bullying, an interesting and surprising revelation I find humor in as a coach and consultant. Flashback Reflecting on my conversation earlier this week, the proverbial penny dropped. Was the phrase that woke me up this morning lingering in my mind because we have a tendency to want to change people around us? Did the personal commonalities remind me of this, or was there something else that struck a chord? The central question thus becomes whether our advice truly provides others with the space and safety to express what they might want to say, or do we advise them to do things because we wish to steer them in a certain direction? Gift What I repeatedly learn is that every conversation offers opportunities for growth. Whether it involves bullying, advising, or coaching, if you remain open, you can derive something valuable from each interaction. I now can see the bullying from my youth as a gift. I have learned much from it, even though that realization came much later, along with the awareness of the limitations I had created for myself due to the bullying. Tempting as it may be to give advice, everyone deserves the time and space to discover and learn on their own, without direction or judgment. And if I’m ever asked for advice, I’ll start by repeating the phrase that woke me up this morning.