In many organizations, the deterioration of workplace morale does not happen overnight. It develops gradually. The indicators aren’t yet in the red, but the warning signs are mounting: more frequent managerial tensions, rising sick leave, more active employee representatives, and a pervasive sense of fatigue evident even in executive committee meetings.
The HR director is wondering. Is this a temporary blip linked to an ongoing transformation? A delayed effect of a reorganization? Or a deeper disconnect between work organization, managerial practices, and employee expectations?
In Europe, 27% of workers report experiencing stress, anxiety, or depression caused or exacerbated by work (EU-OSHA - Psychosocial risks and mental health at work - OSH Pulse 2022). On this scale, these are no longer isolated incidents. The workplace climate is becoming a fundamental issue in HR governance.
In other words, the workplace climate can be seen as a leading indicator of organizational misalignment.
When it deteriorates, it rarely indicates an isolated problem. It often reveals a deeper underlying issue in the management.
In the French context, this issue also fits within a clear framework: the employer’s general duty of care, the inclusion of psychosocial risks in the DUERP, and the role of the CSE and the CSSCT in occupational health. Managing the workplace climate is therefore not merely a managerial responsibility. It involves the company’s accountability and its ability to integrate QVCT into a framework of sustainable governance.
Accurately assessing the nature of the decline is the primary strategic responsibility of HR leadership.
Summary
How can we tell if workplace morale has really deteriorated?
By analyzing the recurrence of tensions, their spread across multiple teams, and the convergence of related indicators —such as absenteeism, conflicts, disengagement, or alerts from the Works Council. If these warning signs persist and increase in frequency, then this is no longer a one-off incident, but a structural issue.
What are the first factors to analyze?
Before examining individual vulnerabilities, it is important to consider organizational factors: workload, clarity of roles, the quality of middle management, and strategic alignment. If these factors are out of balance, individual stress is often merely the visible consequence of a broader misalignment.
What are the risks for the company?
Rising absenteeism, long-term sick leave related to mental health, the departure of key personnel, recruitment challenges, and legal risks related to psychosocial risks.
Should we act quickly or make sweeping changes?
It all depends on the diagnosis. If the mistrust is localized and recent, targeted adjustments may suffice. If the misalignment is structural, then a more profound transformation of the work organization and QVCT management is required.
Identify the true nature of the decline: a temporary strain or a structural dysfunction?
Nearly 45% of European workers report being exposed to risk factors that could affect their mental health (EU-OSHA - OSH Pulse 2022). The scale of the phenomenon requires us to look beyond a superficial interpretation of the signs.
The first step is to determine whether we are dealing with a cyclical strain or a structural imbalance. This distinction determines how actions are prioritized.
Distinguishing indicators: timing, frequency, and scope of impact
Temporary stress typically arises in a specific context, such as a peak in activity, rapid change, or a complex project. It is limited in scope and temporary.
Conversely, when these signs persist, spread to multiple teams, and continue over time, the likelihood of an organizational imbalance increases. In Europe, 38% of employees report experiencing significant stress at work on a daily basis (Gallup - State of the Global Workplace 2025). If stress becomes a daily occurrence, it goes beyond occasional overload and becomes chronic tension.
How to distinguish between a temporary overload and a lasting loss of confidence
Occasional stress leads to fatigue and irritability. A loss of confidence, on the other hand, has a more profound effect on behavior: gradual withdrawal, disengagement, or even a sense of injustice.
When employees no longer believe in the fairness of management decisions or in management’s ability to take into account the realities on the ground, the deterioration goes beyond mere work intensification. It affects the psychological contract, a sense of purpose, and, increasingly, the conflicts of values that run through contemporary organizations.
Why a Misdiagnosis Exacerbates the Crisis
ESENER surveys show that 25% of European organizations still do not recognize the presence of psychosocial risks (EU-OSHA - ESENER 2024). This denial delays appropriate responses and perpetuates tension.
In France, an inaccurate assessment can also undermine the credibility of social dialogue and the updating of the DUERP. Downplaying a structural problem or overreacting to a temporary strain has the same effect: a gradual erosion of trust and a loss of clarity in the management of quality of life, safety, and working conditions.
Analyze organizational factors before individual factors
According to Gallup, only 13% of European employees are engaged at work (Gallup - State of the Global Workplace 2025). This figure cannot reasonably be explained by individual vulnerabilities.
When it comes to preventing psychosocial risks, established models emphasize organizational factors such as work demands, autonomy, support, recognition, and conflicts of values. An analysis of the workplace climate must therefore focus primarily on work organization and governance decisions.
Workload, prioritization, and implicit trade-offs
Four out of ten European workers are exposed to psychosocial risks linked in particular to work intensity and atypical working hours (Eurofound / EU-OSHA - EWCTS 2021).
If objectives remain unchanged despite reduced resources, if priorities are constantly shifting and directives are contradictory, then tensions become structural. They have a lasting impact on the perception of organizational justice and fuel a sense of loss of control.
Clarity of roles and areas of decision-making uncertainty
About 45% of European workers report psychosocial risk factors, including a lack of clarity regarding their roles (EU-OSHA - OSH Pulse 2022).
Organizational ambiguity fuels turf wars, interdepartmental rivalries, and a sense of unfairness. This is less a communication problem than a need to clarify the decision-making structure. If responsibilities are unclear, managing tensions becomes more difficult.
The quality of middle management as an amplifying variable
70% of a team’s engagement level is attributable to the manager (Gallup - State of the Global Workplace 2023).
Middle management plays a crucial role. It can absorb tensions, resolve conflicts, and provide stability for teams. But in a context marked by changing management models, the shift toward hybrid work, and pressure to deliver results, it can also find itself struggling. If managers themselves are under pressure or lack sufficient support, they become a weak link in the system.
Consistency between strategic rhetoric and reality on the ground
When mental health is declared a strategic priority without being translated into concrete managerial practices, a disconnect emerges. This inconsistency undermines the credibility of QVCT management and can be perceived as a gap between rhetoric and reality.
Assess the level of vertical and horizontal confidence
27% of European workers report work-related mental health issues, often linked to a lack of support and trust (EU-OSHA - OSH Pulse 2022). The workplace atmosphere is inextricably linked to the quality of trusting relationships.
Trust in management
The widespread disengagement observed in Europe (72% of employees are disengaged or actively disengaged) often reflects a loss of confidence in the company’s strategic direction.
If decisions are difficult to understand or perceived as inconsistent, mistrust sets in.
Managing the organizational climate therefore requires a clear alignment between strategy, decision-making, and communication.
Managerial trust
With 38% of European employees reporting high daily stress levels (Gallup 2025), the ability of local management to manage workplace tensions appears to be critical.
In a hybrid environment, where teams are constantly evolving, managerial oversight becomes more challenging. If managers lack the necessary tools, tensions will inevitably arise.
Interdepartmental cooperation
45% of European workers report psychosocial risk factors, including role conflicts and difficulties in cooperation (EU-OSHA - OSH Pulse 2022).
Horizontal tensions, though often less visible than hierarchical tensions, nevertheless play a significant role in deteriorating workplace morale. If these interfaces are poorly managed, organizational misalignment becomes more pronounced.
Social dialogue
The Barometer Syndex-Ifop 2023 reveals a significant gap in perception: 5.7/10 for employees versus 7.8/10 for executives regarding the quality of labor-management dialogue.
In France, social dialogue serves as a key driver of QVCT management. While it may merely act as a barometer, it helps gauge tensions. When integrated into the company’s overall management and aligned with strategic decisions, it becomes a tool for regulation and governance.
Assessing the business risks associated with a deteriorating work environment
The workplace climate has a measurable impact on an organization’s performance and sustainability. It is not a peripheral issue, but a strategic indicator.
In France, the absenteeism rate reached 4.5% in 2022, up from 3.2% in 2019, and 44% of employees took at least one sick day during the year (AXA - 2023 Absenteeism Report).
Psychological disorders account for 22.2% of long-term sick leave (AXA - Datascope 2023). If mental health becomes a major factor in prolonged absenteeism, then the issue of workplace morale is directly linked to sustainable performance.
The cost of absenteeism is estimated at approximately €4,000 per year per employee, or nearly €108 billion in France (research cited by Laurent Cappelletti - Ouest-France 2024). This is a macroeconomic estimate, incorporating both direct and indirect costs.
The rise in long-term absenteeism undermines business continuity and can accelerate employee turnover.
In a context where three out of four occupations are in high demand in the labor market (Dares 2023), a deteriorating labor relations climate is a hindrance to attractiveness.
Finally, 17% of companies report at least one sick leave case related to psychosocial risks (BDO / OpinionWay - Psychosocial Risks Barometer 2024). The legal and reputational risks cannot be ignored. If psychosocial risks are not included in strategic risk mapping, then the company is underestimating a major vulnerability.
Structuring a prioritized assessment
59% of employee representatives believe that the handling of their demands is subpar (Syndex-Ifop 2023). This finding calls for a rigorous and collaborative approach to the assessment.
Prioritizing means identifying the levers with the greatest systemic impact. When resources are limited, starting with foundational organizational factors (workload, roles, or strategic alignment) allows you to address multiple issues at once.
Aligning internal tools with major national surveys (INSEE/DARES – CT-RPS 2024) allows the analysis to be situated within a recognized framework.
Qualitative feedback remains essential. In Europe, 55% of organizations involve employees in the design of measures to prevent psychosocial risks, down from 2019 (EU-OSHA - ESENER 2024). Cross-referencing quantitative indicators, feedback from the field, CSE alerts, and HR data (turnover, minor accidents, or short-term absences) helps avoid a one-sided interpretation.
Detailed mapping by industry or population group is necessary, as certain sectors are particularly vulnerable.
Finally, it is essential to avoid the “report-and-forget” effect: only 54% of reports of psychosocial risks lead to concrete action (BDO / OpinionWay 2024). Without operational follow-through, trust erodes and leadership loses credibility.
Mediation: Rapid Intervention or Organizational Transformation?
In 2023, 26% of French employees work remotely (Dares). This lasting transformation of organizational structures is reshaping collective dynamics and management models.
When mistrust is high (59% of employee representatives rate the level of trust as poor (Syndex-Ifop 2023)), a feedback mechanism or the involvement of a third party can help resolve the situation. If the tension is localized and recent, this approach may be sufficient.
Conversely, certain situations stem from the very structure of work itself: isolation, hyperconnectivity, blurred boundaries, or difficulties in managing hybrid work environments. If the misalignment is structural, then a more profound transformation is necessary.
Psychosocial risks must be incorporated into strategic risk mapping. Sequencing actions over time, rather than multiplying ad hoc responses, is essential for the sustainable restoration of workplace morale and for integrating quality of life at work into the company’s overall management.
Conclusion
A deteriorating work environment is never the result of a single factor. It stems from complex interactions between work organization, managerial practices, the quality of labor-management dialogue, and strategic coherence.
For the HR director, the challenge lies in carefully assessing the situation, prioritizing areas for action, and fully integrating psychosocial risks and quality of life at work into the company’s governance.
Viewing the workplace climate as a strategic indicator helps inform decision-making, anticipate imbalances, and support sustainable performance, while upholding the company’s social and regulatory responsibilities.
