When Employees Are at Work but Not Well
When Employees Are at Work but Not Well
A team can have a good attendance record and still struggle to deliver. Calls take longer. Small errors need correcting. A normally engaged colleague becomes quiet in meetings. A supervisor sees the change but has no clear explanation for it.
Performance conversations matter. So does curiosity. Before deciding that an employee has lost motivation, it is worth asking what the usual reports cannot show.
Presenteeism describes being at work while illness or poor health affects one’s ability to perform at the usual level. Someone may work through pain, exhaustion, anxiety or another health concern because they need their income, feel responsible for colleagues, or believe taking leave would reflect badly on them. Attendance data records them as present; it says little about how difficult the day was.
The potential cost is substantial, although national estimates require care. A 2024 Sanlam Benchmark report cited a South African estimate of R235 billion a year in mental health-related presenteeism costs. That is a modelled economic estimate, not a measured loss that can be applied to any individual business. Its value is in drawing attention to a cost that sick-leave figures alone cannot capture.
International research points to the same visibility problem. A study examining depression-related productivity costs across eight countries found that estimated presenteeism costs per person tended to be five to ten times absenteeism costs. The relationship differed by country and by the assumptions used, but it challenges the idea that days away from work tell the whole story.
What might a business notice first?
In a customer-facing team, it may be shorter conversations and more unresolved queries. In manufacturing, it may be slower work or more rework. In professional services, it may be missed details or decisions that take longer than usual.
None of those observations proves a health condition. Poor tools, unclear instructions, understaffing and management practices can produce similar results. That is precisely why a responsible response begins with investigation and support, rather than an assumption about an individual.
Managers can ask whether workloads are realistic, whether people have adequate breaks and whether employees know how to seek help. An employee who raises a health concern should be directed to appropriate support without being pressured to disclose a diagnosis to colleagues or to a wider management team.
How H360 WHIP can help
H360 WHIP can help organisations look beyond the attendance column. Its digital screening can identify potential physical and mental health risks, while aggregated reporting can help leaders examine patterns alongside absenteeism, productivity and departmental information available to the business.
For example, if a department reports rising fatigue concerns while its service quality declines, that pattern gives leaders a reason to investigate. It does not prove fatigue caused the decline. Scheduling, staffing, equipment and employee feedback should also be considered. Individuals with concerning symptoms need appropriate clinical assessment; a dashboard cannot diagnose them.
A healthier workplace measures performance seriously and treats the people behind those measures seriously too. Asking what may be affecting an employee’s ability to work well can lead to better decisions than waiting for that employee to disappear from the attendance register.
Request a Free Workforce Health Assessment to explore the health-related risks that conventional attendance reports may overlook.
