There are many reasons why clients seek business coaching, but most share one essential goal: they want to feel fulfilled in the effort they invest at work. Fulfilment isn’t just about achieving results – it’s about believing those efforts matter and are treated fairly.
It’s well known that people usually leave managers, not jobs. One theme that comes up repeatedly in coaching sessions is frustration among motivated employees who struggle to accept that underperforming or disloyal colleagues seem to face no consequences – and sometimes even enjoy protection from management. Leaders often justify it with comments like: “She’s been here since day one,” or “He knows the company systems inside out – we can’t risk losing him.” While understandable in the short term, these justifications slowly erode trust, morale, and the sense of shared accountability.
In any organization, fairness and consistency act like invisible glue. They hold together engagement, trust, and productivity. When fairness falters, even the most dedicated employees begin to question their commitment.
When high performers see colleagues tolerated or rewarded despite poor performance, psychologists call it procedural injustice. It isn’t just frustration about outcomes—it’s the deeper feeling that workplace rules aren’t applied equally. That inconsistency damages trust in leadership and weakens confidence in the systems meant to ensure accountability.
As a coach, I often hear a variation of the same question: “Why should I care so much when others get away with mediocrity?” It’s not a complaint about workload—it’s about dignity. Fairness is closely tied to self-worth. Employees who once believed in their company’s values start to emotionally detach when they see those values upheld selectively.
One manager once told me, “If you want something done, give it to the busiest person.” Such patterns are common. Loyal employees are often overloaded because managers rely on them more, assuming they won’t resist. Meanwhile, underperformers are shielded from extra demands – a dynamic some call the loyalty penalty. Dependable team members carry heavier loads without recognition, while others evade scrutiny. Over time, this imbalance corrodes trust and motivation.
Managers often underestimate how destructive inaction can be. Avoiding confrontation might feel kind or politically safe, but silence communicates its own values. When underperformance or disloyalty goes unchecked, it quietly normalizes mediocrity.
Ironically, most leaders don’t avoid action out of negligence but out of avoidance fatigue. They fear demotivating others or being seen as punitive. But true fairness isn’t about punishment – it’s about predictability, transparency, and trust. It means everyone knows the rules and believes they apply equally.
The best cure for perceived unfairness is clarity of process. Employees must understand what good performance looks like and what happens when standards aren’t met. Studies show that transparent, consistently applied systems build a strong sense of fairness – even when the feedback is tough.
From a coaching perspective, a few practices make the biggest difference:
Fairness doesn’t mean every outcome feels good. It means processes are transparent, reasons are explained, and accountability is distributed evenly. In that environment, trust becomes a competitive advantage.
Fairness is not a soft skill – it’s a strategic asset. When organizations reward contribution, confront misalignment, and communicate transparently, they build resilience and long-term loyalty. As a coach, my message to leadership teams is simple and enduring: fairness isn’t about being nice; it’s about being trusted.
