Every human experiences grief in their context—yet, workplace culture is often unwelcoming of it. Being inhospitable to people suffering from complex, profound loss.

Regardless of the cause for bereavement, societal pressure and stigma cause more problems for those in grief, according to a study by the University of Oxford.

The death taboo, as they call it, is still widely talked about in society. The amount of literature on it is vast; many studies have discussed how it has changed over the years but it still stays as a phenomenon, plaguing society, diffusing into the workplace.

At Google, Laszlo Bock decided to make a change in 2011. “If the unthinkable happened, the surviving partner should immediately receive the value of all the Googler’s unvested stock,” said Bock in his book, Work Rules!.

For the next ten years, the survivor will receive 50 per cent of the Googler’s salary. “There’s no benefit to Google,” added Bock, “But it’s important to the company to help our families through this horrific if inevitable life event.”

A plethora of tactics can be applied in the workplace to manage grief. Time-off policies, sensitive leaders and open conversations will make a significant impact on employees when they are mourning.

Reality is, they are either rare or non-existent in the workplace.

Also Read: Our true competitor is ignorance: Honestbee ID Country Director talks strategies and key learnings

In the same vein, it is often seldom mentioned in management workshops, with the focus usually on employee engagement, retention, driving performance during positive periods.

Managers are often prepared to celebrate birthdays, give gifts when there are promotions and visit when people are ill, but when it comes to death, it is often silent and avoided. By default, bereaved employees are left alone for a few days, sparing the office from grief.

After that short period, they return to work, often accompanied by the expectations of others that they are ‘fit’ and ready to work. That damaging silence is what deprives people of support, often eroding relationships, draining working lives and removing workplaces of meaning.

While a difficult topic to broach upon, companies still need a better approach to grief. Regardless of the business results of continuing engagement and driving productivity up after mourning, there are many more obligations that manager need to fulfil.

Work-life balance is phasing out in favour of work-life blend. For many, the workplace has emerged as a primary domain where people seek to fulfil self-actualisation and self-esteem needs, apart from the socio-economic benefits.

In this new era—with many names, such as the Purpose Economy and The Fourth Industrial Evolution—the primary narrative has been shifted to fulfilment, meaning and purpose at work.

A high standard for employee engagement, it is small wonder that companies fall short at dealing with negative periods when the game of catch-up is still going on.

People often make work a pillar of their identity, but when their other support crumbles, a workplace that causes disenfranchises, them will only create more friction.

Here’s the problem: grief is stigmatised.

Also Read: Practicing radical honesty with your team and more insights from Weiting Tan

When disenfranchised grief sets in, which is defined as “a loss that is not or cannot be openly acknowledged, publicly mourned, or socially supported”, the additional layer brings the employee down.

Isolation sets in, giving the illusion that they are alone when in reality, people are simply incapable of dealing with grief. It is especially salient for people in leadership roles, renowned organisations and highly competitive workplaces; they are expected to “keep it together”.

In the short term, disenfranchised grief erodes performance. When looking at the long term, it diminishes commitment and creates disloyalty—why would someone work for a company that does not support them at their lowest?

Like mentioned, most people are incapable of dealing with the grief of others. It is something that cannot be fixed. It has no expiry date. Studies have shown that grief can go reappear after intense periods of mourning, obeying its own timetable.

In Sigmund Freud’s seminal paper “Mourning and Melancholia”, Freud stated that grief is work for us even though it is uncontrollable. The only choice we have is to work through it without crumbling under all the distress.

How do leaders support grieving workers?

The popular interpretations of grief state that it starts and ends within five stages, according to David Kessler and Elisabeth Kübler-Ross. Painted as a steady march forward, studies have proven that it is a fallacy.

Psychologists argued that, in a chaotic and messy world, humans often seek to recognise patterns, in an attempt to make sense of what is occurring around them. Grief does not unfold in a neat, linear manner: it ebbs and flows, and it can reoccur even when we get momentum and return to the rhythm of life.

Kübler-Ross’s study has some merit: it is what we expect to occur during grief, and it is what we expect of ourselves. Mourning employees will experience both progressions and regressions after a loss.

Be present

When grief flares up acutely or occurs after bereavement, the best a leader can do is acknowledge the loss without making demands or requests. It is their grief to bear, and it is their life to lead.

Also Read: Are you a human resource?

The critical point here is for managers to avoid impulses to “fix” things. Managerial actions will only serve to decelerate their recovery, often causing them to return to work with a more detached self. As mentioned, death is unfixable. It is a problem without a solution. Rather than doing problem-solving, managers should be present and providing support.

While close colleagues typically reach out to grieving coworkers, it is more significant for a manager to do so; they are a representation of the organisation. Demonstrating their support is a signal that the workplace cares, thereby building culture.

Kessler describes grief as “one of the most crucial experiences”—employees will, therefore, remember how managers handled the situation. A manager’s presence will go a long way toward reassuring employees that they are valued and supported, while also humanising the organisation, which workplaces often lack.

Checking in on the employee through a phone call and if welcome, a personal visit, are simple things that will touch the employee. Even inquiring about whether they would appreciate your presence at the memorial service, regardless of their answer, is already creating significant impact.

While it may be challenging to broach on the topic during their time of grief, what is important is that managers be open about the policy for bereavement.

You recognise the loss they experienced: but what do they want you to tell others at work? When do they have to return to work? What is the policy for that? Undeniably an awkward topic to discuss in the immediate aftermath of a death, grieving employees will appreciate the clarity.

In the tsunami of grief, work can form a lifeboat for them to sit on and wade through the storm.

While they yearn for clarity, there is no clear way or recommendation for when to return to work. According to a Canadian study on labour laws regarding grief, it is commonly three days of unpaid leave. Although it is changing that to five in September 2019. According to the Society for Human Resource Management, employees are, on average, given paid bereavement leave. The question is: is it enough?

Also Read: PropertyGuru promotes Genevieve Godwin to Chief Human Resources Officer

In the same Canadian study, it is noted that employee policies are often inadequate in their support. That they “do not acknowledge the long-term suffering caused by grief or the variable intensity of different kinds of loss”.

The policy on bereavement leave understands grief as a “time-limited state with instrumental tasks and ceremonial obligations” when it is significantly more complicated than that. Sheryl Sandberg and Adam Grant also made the same argument as well in their book, Option B.

In recent years, organisations have been setting high standards for bereavement leave. Facebook employees will receive up to 20 days, and Mastercard did the same.

There also organisations that allow leave-donating, where employees donate their paid leave to another employee when there’s an emergency.

Companies like KPMG, Infosys and Accenture have long embraced the policy.

Another option would be an employee assistance fund, where coworkers donate to help cover funeral and other expenses. Coworkers who make contributions will be matched by the company with a higher ratio, often twice or thrice the amount.

Dependent on the loss they experience, the context can also affect the way the company treats the bereaving employee; unexpected deaths, violent deaths and suicides are likely to be more traumatising, with a stronger stigma and a higher propensity for disenfranchisement.

Leaders need to take these factors into account when agreeing on time off, especially in organisations without a formal policy.

When employees return to work, the managers are significantly instrumental in their smooth return. Leaders need to understand what the bereaved employees want and need: how do they want their colleagues to respond?

Do they want to come in for a few hours so that their return is not too overwhelming?

Do they want to work halftime for a few weeks?

4. Constantly check-in to see if further accommodation is needed

While it can help benefit the employee from being overwhelmed, managers must also note where the plans are failing. If an employee struggles several months after a loss, the manager can suggest a professional consultation. It might be a case of “complicated grief”, which is distinct from the usual grief, which requires clinical attention.

Be open when they restart

Confronting mortality over time with patient and steady support has strong generative effects and leaders need to take advantage of that. Also referred to as “post-traumatic growth,” literature has shown that it is where we gain new perspectives and adopt new mindsets that ultimately leads to positivity, including newfound appreciation of life, strengthening good relationships with others, increased emotional resilience and increased confidence (e.g. “If I can live through this, I can live through anything”).

While it cannot replace the devastating feelings of loss or the need to grieve, it involves living fully with the loss and that is where we understand the fragility of life and its worth—it is a step to moving on.

The emergency of hope and resolve after a loss has no timeline; we don’t know when we begin to experience post-traumatic growth.

Also Read: Human resources hacks for the bootstrapped startup

However, leaders need to be able to identify the first signs of them as soon as they appear, then doubling down on nurturing them through affirmation and gentle interest.

Rather than captivate the employee with an optimistic, hopeful vision of the future, leaders should listen and support the employee as they figure their way out of the fog, forging a space for meaning in the present.

Leaders need to have open conversations with them: whether it be gently asking about the facts of the situation or listening to them rant. It is an important time for leaders to make deep, personal connections with them as two singular human beings.

For instance, some leaders would speak up about their own loss as well. In the same vein as leadership by example, leaders who want to create an environment of openness need to model that by doing it themselves.

Even if the manager was not touched by bereavement, every manager would have had a significant experience of loss to turn into an expression of compassion.

Discussing personal experiences of grief, like battling cancer or surviving an accident, are great ways to allow the employee to see that the