An employee is going through a particularly demanding period.
Deadlines are piling up. A problem arises with a project. They need help, but hesitate to ask for it. Their manager seems overwhelmed themselves. Their colleagues are all working in silos.
So they keep going.
They absorb the pressure. They fix what they can. They keep certain difficulties to themselves.
From the outside, everything seems to be working.
Until it isn’t.
Workload doesn’t explain everything
The CNESST recognizes several psychosocial risk factors related to work, including workload, decision-making autonomy, recognition, organizational justice, and workplace support.
These factors do not operate in a vacuum. They can combine and collectively influence the experience of employees.
This is an important distinction.
An employee may have a heavy workload while still feeling that they can count on their team, get help when they need it, and speak openly about a difficulty.
Another may have a comparable workload but work in an environment where everyone works in silos, where asking for help is difficult, and where the manager is rarely available.
The volume of work is then only part of the equation.
Support is not just a matter of a good atmosphere
The CNESST defines workplace support through team spirit, group cohesion, and the collaboration of colleagues and managers in carrying out work.
This support can be very practical.
A colleague who helps solve a problem.
A manager who clarifies priorities when someone is overwhelmed.
A team that shares information rather than working in silos.
Responsibilities that are clear enough for everyone to know where to contribute.
A climate where saying "I need help" is not seen as a sign of weakness.
In other words:
Having a lot to do is one thing. Feeling like you have to carry it all alone is another.
More than one in four employees does not frequently receive support from their manager
Canadian data helps us measure the importance of this issue.
According to theStatistics Canada 2024-2025 Canadian Survey on Working Conditions, 79.5% of employees report receiving support from their colleagues most or all of the time.
When it comes to managers, that proportion drops to 73.6%.
In other words, a little more than one in four employees reports not frequently receiving this level of support from their manager.
This figure is significant because support doesn't only become important when a crisis occurs.
It is built through ordinary interactions.
In how we react when someone points out a difficulty. In the flow of information. In the distribution of responsibilities. In a manager’s ability to detect when someone is starting to run low on resources.
These are small, repeated behaviors that, over time, end up defining how a team actually functions.
When everyone starts carrying their load alone
A lack of support does not necessarily manifest as open conflict.
It can take hold much more quietly.
Employees ask for less help. Difficulties are raised later. Everyone becomes more protective of their territory. Certain people systematically take on more responsibilities. Meetings become primarily information exchanges rather than true spaces for collaboration.
And little by little, a mindset takes hold:
"I'll handle it myself."
This behavior may seem efficient in the short term.
But when it becomes a collective norm, it can reveal a team where mutual support is no longer fully functioning.
A 2023 study of 380 frontline healthcare workers observed a reciprocal relationship between social support from colleagues and burnout: a decrease in relational resources can contribute to a negative dynamic, while burnout itself can make maintaining those relationships more difficult.
The problem then becomes more complex than a simple question of workload.
We must look at how work is experienced collectively.
Support and psychological safety go hand in hand
To ask for help, you first need to feel that you can.
An employee who believes that asking for support will be interpreted as a lack of competence is more likely to keep the problem to themselves.
The same goes for overload.
While admitting "I can't keep up anymore" may feel like a risk to one's professional image, silence can become a defensive strategy.
This is where support directly intersects with psychological safety : the ability of a team to create an environment where members can speak up, ask questions, admit mistakes, or raise concerns without fear of negative interpersonal consequences.
The two issues are not identical.
But they reinforce each other.
A team that wants to provide more support must also allow people to express when they need it.
Managers play an important role, as does team dynamic.
Creating more support obviously does not mean turning the manager into a psychologist.
Their role is organizational.
Clarifying priorities. Providing necessary resources. Distributing responsibilities. Being available when a difficulty arises. Recognizing the signs that an individual or a team is starting to operate under constant pressure.
But it doesn't all rest on them.
Teams also develop their own habits: sharing information, helping one another, taking ownership, solving problems together, and building trust among members.
Over time, these behaviors become an informal culture.
And when bad habits have been entrenched for months—silos, tensions, burnout among a few individuals, lack of trust, or low accountability—a one-off intervention is rarely enough to transform the dynamic.
An established dynamic requires more than just an activity
This is an important distinction.
When a team is experiencing deep-seated operational issues, the goal is not to find an activity that will fix the situation.
First, you must understand what is happening.
What behaviors are being repeated?
Where are the friction points?
How are responsibilities actually distributed?
What role does leadership play?
What changes would be needed for the team to function differently in a few months?
It is from this understanding that a true action plan can be built.
Transforming team dynamics: a long-term process
This is the approach we favor at Latulippe in our Collective Performance.
We don't start by choosing an activity.
We start by understanding the team.
A process can include several steps.
1. Understand and diagnose
Identify current dynamics, behaviors that hinder team functioning, strengths to build upon, and priority issues.
2. Determine what needs to change
Clarify with the team and its leaders which behaviors need to evolve: communication, trust, mutual support, accountability, leadership, alignment, or collaboration.
3. Develop an action plan and set goals
Select the most relevant interventions based on the observed issues: strategic workshops, transformational experiences, team support, leadership coaching, or other targeted interventions.
4. Turn insights into commitments
An intervention is only valuable if it influences what happens afterward. The team must therefore translate its learnings into concrete behaviors and commitments in its daily routine.
5. Track progress
Observe what is actually changing: are new habits taking hold? Are commitments being met? Do certain obstacles persist?
6. Adjust
Because team dynamics evolve, the plan must be able to evolve as well. Subsequent interventions are adapted based on the progress made and the issues that remain.
The logic is simple:
understand → intervene → apply → measure → adjust.
This is what distinguishes a transformation process from a one-off intervention.
Support doesn't solve everything. But it is part of the equation.
A supportive team cannot sustainably compensate for chronic understaffing, unrealistic goals, or a structurally excessive workload.
It does not replace sound priority management, sufficient resources, autonomy, recognition, or access to professionals when someone is experiencing psychological distress.
But workplace support is indeed one of the factors an organization can influence.
And that is perhaps where the most interesting reflection lies.
When faced with pressure, some teams grow closer.
They communicate more. They redistribute efforts. They ask for help sooner. They solve problems together before they become critical.
Other teams do exactly the opposite.
Individuals isolate themselves and try to hold on on their own.
Workload matters. But how a team faces it together matters just as much.
At Latulippe, our Collective Performance approach is specifically designed to work on these dynamics within a structured intervention plan tailored to the reality of each team.
Because you don't transform the way you work in just a few hours.
You transform it by understanding what needs to change, intervening in the right places, and supporting the team long enough for new habits to truly take hold.
