When well-meaning managers create risk without realising it

Managers rarely set out to create risk. In most cases, they are trying to be fair, reasonable and supportive while keeping the business moving forward. Yet one of the most common causes of employment law risk we see is not bad intent, but a gap between confidence and competence in people management.

This “confidence gap” is increasingly exposing employers to issues around performance management, capability, conduct and fairness — often without anyone realising there is a problem until it is too late.

The confidence gap in people management

Many managers are promoted because they are good at their job. They understand the role, know the business and are trusted to deliver results. What they are far less likely to have received is structured training in managing employees, handling difficult conversations or understanding how employment law expectations apply in practice. Confidence tends to develop quickly once someone has authority, but effective people management skills take time, experience and support to build.

At first, this confidence gap is rarely obvious. Issues are often dealt with informally. A conversation in passing, a quiet word, or a well-intentioned decision made on instinct. Managers believe they are handling things reasonably, and employers assume matters are under control. On the surface, nothing appears wrong.

When confidence replaces process

The risk starts to emerge when situations become more complex.

This is particularly common when dealing with underperformance, behavioural concerns, attendance issues or long-term absence. A confident manager may believe they have “managed this before” and feel comfortable relying on informal conversations or their own judgement. However, without a clear performance management process or an understanding of when formal steps are required, those early decisions can quickly create exposure for the business.

One of the most frequent issues we see is where managers avoid formal action because they believe they are being supportive. They may feel that issuing a warning would be unfair or heavy-handed, especially where an employee is trying their best. But without clarity around expectations, timescales and consequences, employees are often left unclear about how serious the issue is. When performance does not improve, employers can find themselves defending decisions that were made with good intentions but little structure.

Performance, capability and conduct: where things go wrong

At the other end of the scale, overconfidence can lead managers to act too quickly. Performance issues may be treated as misconduct, assumptions may be made without full investigation, or decisions may be taken without reference to company policies or employment law principles. Getting this distinction wrong is one of the most common and costly mistakes employers make, as we explore in more detail in our blog on performance vs capability vs conduct and why getting it wrong is costly.

Again, the intention is rarely to be unfair. It is usually about being decisive. But decisiveness without understanding carries just as much risk as inaction.

What makes this particularly challenging for employers is that these risks often only become visible when something goes wrong. A grievance is raised, a no-win no-fee solicitor becomes involved, or an Employment Tribunal claim is threatened. At that point, the focus shifts from managing the issue to defending the process — and gaps in consistency, documentation and decision-making quickly come to light.

Why good intentions are no longer enough

This is becoming increasingly significant as expectations around fair and consistent people management continue to rise. There is far less tolerance for informal or inconsistent approaches, even where managers are acting in good faith. Employers are expected to demonstrate that they have followed a fair process, applied policies consistently, and supported managers to make appropriate decisions.

The impact of getting this wrong goes beyond legal risk. It affects confidence across the business. Managers can feel undermined when their decisions are challenged, employees lose trust in how issues are handled, and leaders find themselves dealing with problems that could have been avoided with the right support at an earlier stage.

Closing the gap: supporting managers properly

Closing the confidence gap is not about criticising managers or removing autonomy. It is about recognising that managing people is a skill in its own right. Clear frameworks, practical manager training and access to HR advice all play a crucial role in helping managers navigate performance, capability and conduct issues with confidence that is well placed.

We see this regularly when employers ask whether they can move to dismissal after informal performance management has failed. In our Ask the Expert article on dismissing for poor performance without a formal warning, we explore why clarity, structure and timing matter so much in reducing risk.

In our experience, the organisations that manage employee issues most effectively are not those with the most confident managers, but those where managers feel supported to pause, ask questions and take advice before acting. Confidence underpinned by competence is what really protects employers, reduces employment law risk and leads to better outcomes for everyone involved.

As employment law continues to evolve, investing in manager capability is no longer a “nice to have”. It is a key part of managing risk, ensuring fairness and maintaining trust within the workplace. Good intentions matter but on their own, they are no longer enough.

Need a sounding board?

If you’re unsure whether a manager is handling an issue in the right way, or you’d like to sense-check an approach before it escalates, HR:4UK is here to support you. An early conversation can make all the difference, and we’re always happy to talk things through and help you decide on the next sensible step.