In a webinar from The HR World and sponsored by Thomas – Engage Today: how to fight the disconnection dilemma – panelists explored how to spot signs that employees were losing engagement with their work and what could be done to ensure they remained connected and productive as much as possible.
During the webinar, panelists Kira van Niekerk – Global Connection Director, Thomas and Charlotte (Lottie) O’Brien – Head of People & Culture at Stopford discussed how the first signs of disconnection could be detected and what HR could do to respond. Here they tackle a further two questions:
Q: How does disciplinary action work alongside addressing disconnection?
Kira van Niekerk: Disciplinary action and addressing disconnection aren’t opposing approaches – they’re parallel tracks that serve different purposes.
- Disciplinary action focuses on behaviours and outcomes: attendance, performance standards, policy adherence.
- Connection work focuses on conditions: the psychological, relational, and cultural factors that shape how someone shows up.
When used together, they give leaders a fuller picture. You can still hold someone accountable for performance while simultaneously exploring what’s driving the disconnect – whether it’s unclear expectations, unmet support needs, misalignment with strengths, or relationship breakdowns.
Healthy organisations don’t choose between the two; they apply both. Accountability sets the baseline. Connection unlocks the solution.
Q: If an employee underperforms, are we ‘letting them off’ by putting it down to disconnection? Can you spot the difference?
Kira van Niekerk: No, and this distinction is critical.
Disconnection is an explanation, not an excuse. When someone is disengaged, demotivated, or misaligned, it doesn’t remove accountability. Instead, it helps leaders diagnose why performance has slipped and what levers can be pulled to change the trajectory.
Here’s the difference:
| When we let someone off | When we address disconnection |
| We overlook performance gaps | We clarify expectations and goals |
| We avoid difficult conversations | We have deeper, more honest conversations |
| We accept excuses | We identify root causes and actions |
| Nothing changes | The employee gets a realistic path forward |
| Leaders carry the load | Accountability is shared |
Addressing disconnection actually creates a more robust, human-centred form of performance management. It helps leaders intervene early, reduce attrition, improve morale, and avoid formal action where possible, without compromising standards.
Lottie O’Brien: You’re not letting anyone off by considering disconnection – you’re just making sure you understand why the underperformance is happening before jumping to formal action.
Disconnection and performance management can happen together. If someone is struggling because they feel lost, overwhelmed, or out of the loop, you support them and set clear expectations.
If someone understands what’s needed but still chooses not to engage, that’s a different conversation – and that’s when disciplinary steps make sense.
Spotting the difference is mostly about behaviour:
• Disconnected = trying but not quite getting there
• Disciplinary = not engaging, ignoring expectations, or repeating issues despite support
So, you’re not excusing behaviour, you’re just treating people like humans first and making sure you’re tackling the real cause.
Q: Disconnection can feel a bit ‘soft’ to discuss sometimes. How do we make it a board-level priority – and should it be?
Lottie O’Brien: Yes – but you need to frame it in business terms, not fluffy wellbeing language.
The board listens when you link disconnection to things they care about:
• lower productivity
• mistakes and rework
• people leaving unexpectedly
• culture slipping
• early warning signs that something in the business isn’t working
Connection is basically a free performance booster for SMEs; if people feel connected, they work better, communicate better, stay longer, and spot issues early.
So, it’s not a “soft” topic – it’s a practical one that affects the bottom line.
Kira van Niekerk: It definitely should be because connection is no longer a “nice-to-have”; it is a hard business lever. To elevate it to board-level priority, reframe it through metrics that leadership already cares about:
Make connection a strategic risk and ROI issue
- Disconnected employees cost organisations in productivity, errors, turnover, presenteeism, customer experience, and innovation pipeline decay.
- Connection predicts performance, retention, leadership effectiveness, and team cohesion. This connects (literally) to core KPIs.
Tie it to financial impact
Board members respond to quantified value:
- The cost of one regretted leaver
- The drag created by slow decision-making
- The compound loss from disengaged teams
- Retention and performance uplift achieved through improved connection
Connection becomes a cost-saving and value-creation strategy.
Anchor it in organisational resilience
High-connection organisations demonstrate:
- Faster adaptability
- Stronger leadership pipelines
- Healthier cultures
- Lower risk of toxic teams or compliance issues
Boards want resilience baked into the system, not reacted to when it’s too late.
Make it measurable
With tools like the Connection Measure and Thomas Connect insights, boards see:
- Baseline connection scores
- Team-level hotspots
- Trends across leadership layers
- Impact of interventions
Once something becomes measurable, it becomes manageable – and fundable.
