Here’s a scenario we’ve seen play out in a lot of workplaces:

A people leader doing their best to keep their head above water knows they need to take action – to give the feedback, address the behaviour, step into the tricky conversation, whatever it might be.

But they hesitate.

Not because they don’t care, and not because they don’t want to lead well. Because in the back of their mind, there’s a question doing laps:

“What if this comes back to bite me?”

What if there’s a complaint?
What if it escalates?
What if I get it wrong?

So they pause… and then pause again… and sometimes, nothing happens at all.

And that’s usually where the real risk starts.

 

Why managers hesitate to take action (and why it matters)

If you strip it back, a lot of hesitation comes down to uncertainty.

What counts as fair?
What if the person perceives this as bullying?
What if I make the situation worse?

These are not small concerns. Under Australian workplace law, there’s a clear line between workplace bullying and legitimate management action. If management action is reasonable, and carried out in a reasonable way, it is not considered bullying. It is also relevant to mental injury claims in the workers’ compensation context.

But in practice, that line can feel blurry. So leaders hesitate. And when they do, issues that could have been addressed early often become:

• more complex
• more emotionally charged
• more difficult to unwind

 

When hesitation becomes a psychosocial risk

Under psychosocial risk frameworks, hazards don’t just come from workload – they also come from how work is managed and how people interact at work. That includes:

• inconsistent or unclear expectations
• underperformance left unaddressed
• unresolved conflict
• perceived unfairness in decision-making

In other words, the absence of management action can create risk.

When managers hold back:

• team tensions simmer (and then boil)
• frustrations spread beyond the original issue
• confidence in leadership drops
• psychological safety takes a hit

Before long, you’re not just managing one situation – you’re managing the ripple effects across the whole team.

 

Performance management is inherently stressful — but that’s not the problem

We’re stating the obvious here but: performance management, feedback conversations and disciplinary processes are inherently uncomfortable. They involve:

• uncertainty
• power dynamics
• real consequences for real people

And the reality is, we can’t eliminate that discomfort entirely.

What matters most is how those processes are managed.

When performance management is:

• rushed
• unclear
• inconsistent
• poorly communicated

That’s when risk increases – not because the action was taken, but because it wasn’t handled in a reasonable way.

 

What is “reasonable management action”? (and why it matters)

At its simplest, reasonable management action refers to everyday leadership decisions – like:

• giving feedback
• managing underperformance
• addressing behaviour
• responding to complaints

Those are all legitimate (and necessary) management actions. But just rattling these off doesn’t necessarily mean that they will meet the test for ‘reasonable management action’. That requires:

• the management action itself is reasonable
• it is carried out in a reasonable way
• and it takes into account the relevant circumstances

It doesn’t have to be perfect.

It doesn’t have to be comfortable.

It does need to be fair, considered and defensible.

And, importantly, the test is objective – it’s not about whether someone felt upset or disagreed with the action.

 

Reasonable management action as a psychosocial risk control

Here’s an important point and where industrial relations law and work health and safety law come together:

Reasonable management action isn’t just a legal definition. It can also be a psychosocial risk control measure.

When organisations embed these principles into their systems, they start to function as part of everyday psychosocial risk management.

That might look like:

• clear performance management processes
• documented procedures for managing conduct and complaints
• consistent expectations around fairness, proportionality and communication
• training leaders in how to apply these principles in real situations

And when those systems are in place, they help to:

• reduce unnecessary stress where it can’t be eliminated
• minimise harm caused by poor process or communication
• create more predictable and consistent experiences for employees

 

It protects teams — and it protects leaders

This is something we often see getting missed:

We talk a lot about how reasonable management action protects employees (which it does, and which definitely matters).

But reasonable management action also acts as a control measure for leaders.

Because without it, leaders are often dealing with:

• fear of complaints or escalation
• uncertainty about what’s “allowed”
• second-guessing decisions long after they’re made
• pressure to get it exactly right in messy, real-world situations

Leaders who feel ill-equipped to navigate what can often feel like increasingly complex people matters are often facing their own psychosocial hazards – and can themselves be at risk of harm.

But when reasonable management action is embedded into systems and understood by leaders, it helps to:

• increase clarity and confidence
• reduce rumination and hesitation
• support calmer, more considered decision-making

Which means leaders are better able to work well and stay well – while supporting their teams to do the same.

 

A practical way to apply this in real situations

This isn’t about memorising a legal test and hoping for the best. It’s about building a habit of pausing and sense-checking your approach before (and during) difficult people-management decisions. That might mean asking yourself:

• Is this action reasonable in the first place?
• Am I going about this in a fair and respectful way?
• Is my response proportionate to the situation?
• Have I considered the broader context and any relevant factors?

It’s less of a checklist, and more of a steadying pause when things feel uncertain.

And, ultimately, it’s a way to move forward with confidence, rather than avoidance.

 

The bottom line

Reasonable management action isn’t about avoiding hard conversations. It’s about:

• managing performance and behaviour fairly
• reducing unnecessary stress and harm
• creating consistency and clarity across teams
• supporting leaders to take action when it matters

Because when leaders feel confident to act – in a way that is fair, considered and grounded – you don’t just reduce complaints.

You reduce risk.

 

Download the reasonable management action thinking tool

If you’ve ever second-guessed a performance conversation or tricky people matter (or avoided one altogether), you’re not alone. That’s exactly why at Head Strong we’ve created a practical thinking tool to support leaders through these moments.

It’s designed to help you:

• pause before acting
• sense-check your approach
• reduce both psychosocial and legal risk as situations evolve

Download the Head Strong Reasonable Management Action Thinking Tool and keep it handy for the conversations that matter most.

 

Final thoughts

Working through complex people issues in isolation increases risk – for leaders and team members. One of the most important things to remember is to not try and do it all alone, particularly when matters are prolonged and/or complex.

Talking things through with:

• HR
• an Industrial Relations expert or employment lawyer
• another experienced leader
• a trusted advisor or coach

can help leaders:

• test assumptions
• reduce blind spots
• strengthen fairness and defensibility
• feel more supported and less under pressure

Pausing and seeking input is simply good psychosocial risk management.

Don’t feel like you have to do it all alone.