When No One Calls It Grief

Looking beyond visible behavior to understand what a leader may have lost.

By Dr. Jennifer Harden

A leader who once spoke freely in meetings now says little. Another takes on more work after a trusted colleague leaves. Someone else grows impatient whenever a new initiative is described as an exciting opportunity.

From the outside, these changes may look like disengagement, overcommitment, or resistance. Those descriptions tell us what we notice. They do not necessarily tell us what happened.

Before deciding what a behavior means, we can ask a different question: What has this person experienced that we have not yet understood?

A loss without an announcement

Some workplace losses are easy to identify. A colleague dies. A position ends. A business closes.

Others arrive inside changes that are presented as progress. A team is reorganized. A long-standing partnership ends. A leader keeps their title but loses the authority that made the role meaningful. A promised opportunity disappears, leaving a future they had already begun to imagine.

There may be no announcement acknowledging those losses. There may be a project deadline, a new reporting structure, and an expectation to keep moving.

The following illustrative composite draws on themes across several participants’ accounts. It does not describe any one participant or reproduce their words.

Consider a leader who has invested deeply in an organization and the people within it. Following changes in leadership and organizational priorities, familiar relationships are disrupted, and the leader’s experience carries less weight in decisions about the work. Concerns are raised, but the responses leave the leader feeling unheard.

Over time, the leader finds it harder to concentrate and feels less motivated. Work that once brought pride now brings frustration. From the outside, someone might notice reduced engagement without understanding the loss beneath it: trust in leadership, confidence that their contribution matters, and connection to an organization they helped build.

Understanding this experience requires more than asking whether the leader supports the change. It also requires listening to what changed in their sense of belonging, professional identity, and ability to contribute.

The change has an operational explanation. The loss also has personal meaning.

What behavior can leave unexplained

Silence, irritability, overwork, and withdrawal do not establish that someone is grieving. Each can have several explanations, including workload, conflict, health concerns, uncertainty, or circumstances outside work.

But when we treat behavior as the entire story, we may overlook a loss that matters to the person experiencing it.

A leader might remain productive while feeling disconnected from work that once gave them a sense of belonging. They might fill their schedule because slowing down would leave room for questions they do not know how to answer. These are possibilities to explore through conversation, not conclusions to draw from observation alone.

Recognizing that distinction matters. Naming grief for someone without listening can be as limiting as refusing to consider it.

Making room for the person's account

My doctoral research explored the lived experiences of 10 leaders with work-related unresolved grief. Their accounts brought attention to emotional and physical strain, gaps in organizational support, changes in professional identity, and varied ways of coping.

This qualitative study examined participants' experiences. It did not establish how common those experiences are among all leaders or provide a checklist for identifying grief in another person.

For practice, it invites a question: Are we giving leaders room to describe what a transition meant to them, or are we asking only whether they have adjusted?

Someone may need to talk about a relationship. Another may need to clarify what their role has become. A third may want to address a workload problem without discussing personal feelings. Listening means allowing those answers to differ.

Grief and burnout deserve different questions

The World Health Organization describes burnout as an occupational phenomenon associated with workplace stress that continues without successful management. Its definition includes exhaustion, growing distance or cynicism toward work, and reduced professional efficacy.[1]

That definition does not make burnout interchangeable with grief. A discussion about loss asks what has ended or changed and what that meant to the person. A discussion about workplace strain also asks about demands, resources, control, and conditions.

Both questions may be relevant. Neither should replace the other.

If a leader's responsibilities have doubled after colleagues leave, acknowledging the loss will not solve an unmanageable workload. Reviewing the workload matters. So does making room for what those departures meant.

Begin with curiosity and follow through

A useful opening does not require someone to accept the word grief.

You might ask:

• What do you miss about how things were before this change?

• What has become harder, and what do you think is contributing to that?

• Is there something about this transition that we have not made room to discuss?

• What practical change or support would be useful now?

Ask privately, explain who will hear the information, and let the person decide how much to share. Keep the conversation connected to what you can actually do. If you cannot change a decision, be clear about that while discussing the support or clarification that remains possible.

Acknowledgment needs follow-through. That could mean reviewing responsibilities, clarifying authority, making time for a transition conversation, or helping someone find appropriate support. The next step should respond to the person's account and the organization's circumstances.

A question worth keeping open

Leaders do not always have language for what they have lost. Organizations do not always provide it. A person may say, "I do not feel like myself at work anymore," long before they can explain why.

We do not have to supply an immediate label. We can take the statement seriously and ask what has changed.

For leaders reflecting on their own experience, consider:

What have I been trying to push through that may first need to be understood?

The answer may involve loss. It may involve rest, boundaries, role clarity, or a difficult conversation. Allowing room for an honest answer gives the next step a better foundation.

These questions are part of the conversation in my book, Leading Through Organizational Grief: What Leaders Carry During Organizational Change, published by Harden Leadership Press.

Learn more about the book

For consulting or speaking inquiries, email contact@drjenniferharden.com

Source

[1] World Health Organization. (2019, May 28). Burn-out an occupational phenomenon: International Classification of Diseases.

Privacy Policy