The difference between empathy and fixing: why managers get it wrong

When a colleague is struggling, the instinct to help is genuine and important. But help, in these situations, is frequently misunderstood.

Most people, when they want to help someone in difficulty, reach for solutions. They offer advice, suggest resources, identify silver linings, or move quickly toward what can be done. This feels like support. It looks like engagement. But it often leaves the person being helped feeling more alone than before.

Because what they needed was not a solution. What they needed was empathy. And empathy and fixing are not the same thing.

What empathy actually is

Empathy is the ability to recognise and share the feelings of another person. Not to resolve those feelings, not to reframe them, not to move through them efficiently. To recognise them, and to let the other person know they have been recognised.

In a workplace context, empathy looks like: asking how someone is and waiting for a real answer. Listening without redirecting. Staying present with discomfort rather than dispersing it. Saying ‘that sounds really hard’ and meaning it, without following it up with ‘but…’

The Centre for Creative Leadership’s Humanity Gap report found that 73% of managers said they needed more training to support a colleague through a difficult experience. Yet 90% said it was important to them to get it right.

That gap, between the desire to support well and the confidence to do so, is not a gap in compassion. It is a gap in knowledge and skill. And it is almost universal.

Source: CCL Humanity Gap Report (2026). Centre for Creative Leadership.

Why the impulse to fix is so strong

Fixing feels productive. In a work environment that values action, results, and solutions, sitting with someone’s difficulty without doing anything about it can feel passive, even inadequate.

There is also a self-protective element. Other people’s pain is uncomfortable to be near. The impulse to resolve it is partly about helping them, and partly about relieving our own discomfort. Moving toward a solution creates momentum, which feels better than stillness, and most managers have had no training in what else to do. So they default to the skills that work in other parts of their job: diagnosis, problem-solving, action planning. Applied to grief or distress, these skills tend to create distance rather than connection.

What gets in the way of empathy

Several things, in practice:

• Time pressure. Empathic conversations require unhurried attention, and workplaces rarely provide it. A manager who has three back-to-back meetings is unlikely to be fully present for a difficult disclosure in the corridor.

• Fear of saying the wrong thing. This is one of the most common reasons managers say nothing at all. The fear of making things worse outweighs the recognition that saying nothing has its own impact.

• Discomfort with emotion. Many people, particularly in professional environments, have limited experience of sitting with expressed emotion. It can trigger the impulse to manage, redirect, or bring things to a close.

• The wrong framing. If a manager frames a difficult conversation as a problem to solve, they will approach it accordingly. Reframing it as a conversation to have, one where the goal is connection and understanding rather than resolution, changes everything about how it goes.

  
  

Empathy is a skill, not a personality trait

This is perhaps the most important thing to say. Empathy is not something you either have or you don’t.

It is a set of learnable skills:

how to listen, what to say, how to hold a conversation when it gets difficult, how to stay present without trying to fix.

These can be taught, practised, and improved.

The Centre for Creative Leadership’s data showing that most managers feel underprepared is not evidence that managers are un-empathetic. It is evidence that organisations have not given them the tools.

That is a systems problem with a practical solution.

If you would like to discuss how to support your Managers, please get in touch.

I have a range of resources available on Gumroad, both free and paid.

What bereaved employees actually need from their manager

When a member of your team is bereaved, the instinct of most managers is to help. The difficulty is not intention, it is knowledge. Most managers simply do not know what to do.

So they default to one of two things: saying something well-meaning that does not land, or saying nothing at all. Both leave the bereaved employee feeling more alone than before.

Research from Canterbury Christ Church University, published in 2024, sheds important light on what bereaved employees actually say they need, not what organisations assume they need, but what the people themselves report makes a genuine difference.

What the research found

The study explored the experiences of bereaved employees and what they found helpful from the people around them at work. The findings were consistent and clear.

What bereaved employees needed was time, listening, and empathy. They needed space to process their grief at their own pace, without pressure to perform a recovery on a timeline that suited the organisation.

Critically, they needed their manager to make a genuine effort to understand what they were going through.

When that happened, when a manager dedicated themselves to truly understanding the employee’s experience rather than managing it from a distance, it substantially alleviated the employee’s distress.

When it did not happen, the opposite was true.

Source: Flux, R. (2024). Canterbury Christ Church University thesis on bereaved employee experiences in the workplace.

What this looks like in practice

Understanding does not require training in grief counselling. It does not require the manager to have experienced loss themselves.

It requires three things: presence, patience, and the willingness to not try to fix what cannot be fixed.

In practice, this means:

Asking how someone is and meaning it. Leaving space for an honest answer rather than accepting ‘I’m fine’ at face value. Checking in again next week, and the week after. Not assuming that because someone looks okay, they are okay. Following the employee’s lead on pace and what they want to talk about.

It also means understanding that grief is not linear. A bereaved employee may appear to be functioning well for several weeks and then find it harder as the numbness lifts. Anniversaries, milestones, and unexpected triggers can resurface grief long after colleagues assume it has passed.

The most common things managers get wrong

None of the following are malicious. They are the result of uncertainty, discomfort, and the very human impulse to make things better. But they are worth knowing about.

Filling the silence. Many managers feel that silence in a difficult conversation signals failure. In reality, silence is often the space in which the other person finds the words. Resist the impulse to fill it.

Offering silver linings. ‘At least you had so much time together’, ‘at least they are no longer in pain’. These statements, however kindly intended, tend to minimise the loss rather than acknowledge it. They communicate, subtly, that the grief should be manageable.

Asking once and leaving it there. Many managers check in once, hear that someone is fine, and consider the job done. Bereaved employees rarely disclose how they are actually doing when asked once, in passing. Sustained, low-pressure contact is what makes the difference.

Treating bereavement leave as the support. Bereavement leave matters, but it is the floor, not the ceiling. The return to work, and the weeks and months that follow, are often when the real difficulty begins.

A note on language

Follow the employee’s own language wherever possible. If they refer to the person who died by name, use that name. If they say ‘my loss’, use that framing. Avoid clinical or corporate language: ‘your bereavement’ can feel cold when someone says ‘my mum’.

It is entirely acceptable to say ‘I don’t know what to say, but I’m here’. This is almost always received better than a confident statement that misses the mark.

If you want to go deeper

This post covers the foundations.

I am running a free webinar, Holding the Holders, on 3 July, specifically for managers navigating this kind of work. Details on LinkedIn

What the Employment Rights Act 2025 Means for Pregnancy Loss at Work

New legislation is coming. And for the first time in UK employment law, pregnancy loss before 24 weeks will be formally recognised as something that warrants proper workplace support.

The Employment Rights Act 2025 includes provisions for neonatal care leave and is expected to extend bereavement protections to cover pregnancy loss at any gestation. This is a significant shift. Until now, employees who experienced early miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy, or molar pregnancy had no statutory entitlement to bereavement leave. Many returned to work within days, often with nothing more than a sick note and a hope that nobody would ask questions.

That is about to change. But here is the question every employer should be asking: will you be ready?

What the Legislation Will Require

The details of secondary legislation are still being finalised, but the direction of travel is clear. Employers will need to provide a minimum standard of leave and support for employees affected by pregnancy loss, regardless of gestation. This will likely include paid bereavement leave, protection from detriment for taking that leave, and a requirement that employers handle these situations with reasonable sensitivity.

For many organisations, particularly those in the public sector and Higher Education, this will mean reviewing existing policies, updating manager guidance, and ensuring that the people responsible for supporting bereaved employees actually know what to do.

Compliance Is the Floor, Not the Ceiling

Here is what concerns me. When legislation like this arrives, the instinct for many organisations is to treat it as a compliance exercise. Update the policy. Add a paragraph. Tick the box.

But compliance without compassion is not support. It is administration.

An employee who loses a pregnancy at eight weeks does not need a policy document. They need a manager who knows what to say and what not to say. They need a return-to-work conversation that is human, not procedural. They need an organisation that understands that grief does not follow a policy timeline.

The legislation will set the minimum. What matters is what you build above it.

Where Most Organisations Fall Short

In my experience working with employers across Higher Education, the NHS, the public sector, and corporate organisations, the gaps tend to fall in four areas.

First, policy and language. Many organisations still do not mention pregnancy loss explicitly in their bereavement or leave policies. If it is not named, it is invisible. And invisible grief is unsupported grief.

Second, manager readiness. Most line managers have never been trained in how to respond to pregnancy loss. They are afraid of saying the wrong thing, so they say nothing. Or they default to HR-speak that feels cold and procedural when what is needed is warmth and presence.

Third, communication and awareness. Even where good policies exist, employees often do not know about them. If someone has to search for support during the worst week of their life, the system has already failed them.

Fourth, support beyond the initial leave period. The first week gets attention. Then the organisation moves on. But grief does not work to a schedule. Due dates, anniversaries, other people’s pregnancy announcements — these can trigger intense responses months later. Good support is sustained, not episodic.

What Good Looks Like

Good pregnancy loss support is not complicated. It requires policy that names the experience explicitly, managers who are trained and confident enough to have compassionate conversations, clear communication so that employees know what is available to them, and ongoing awareness that grief has a long tail.

I have created a free checklist called “What Good Looks Like” that helps HR and wellbeing teams sense-check their approach across these four areas. It is not a judgement tool. It is a starting point.

The Window Is Now

The legislative timeline means that employers have a window — right now — to get ahead of this. Not to scramble when the regulations land, but to build something thoughtful and lasting before they are required to.

The organisations that move now will not only be compliant. They will be the ones their employees trust. And trust, once built, is the foundation of everything else.

Download the free “What Good Looks Like” checklist at www.campioncoachingconsultancy.com/what-good-looks-like-checklist Or book a discovery call to discuss how I can support your organisation: www.campioncoachingconsultancy.com/booking-calendar/discovery-call