This illustrative case study accompanies “Can Reframing a Real Threat Make Things Worse?”
Tom, a warehouse shift supervisor, reports to Rachel, the warehouse manager.
Two forklift operators call in sick before the afternoon shift. A large order is scheduled for pickup that evening. The temporary workers sent as replacements have not been trained to operate forklifts.
Tom keeps the temporary workers off the forklifts and calls Rachel.
Tom: “I’m concerned about getting the order loaded safely. The temporary workers can help with packing, but putting untrained employees on forklifts could cause a serious injury.”
Response 1
Rachel: “The team has handled tough shifts before. Try looking at tonight as a chance to pull together and show what the warehouse can accomplish.”
The staffing gap remains. Tom still sees no safe way to finish loading on time. Tom also wonders whether repeating the safety concern will sound like making excuses.
Response 2
Rachel: “You’re right to keep the temporary workers off the forklifts. A deadline doesn’t change the training requirements. What do you recommend for tonight?”
Tom: “Two qualified operators from the morning shift are willing to stay. With overtime approved and a later pickup, I can get the order loaded safely.”
Rachel: “I’ll approve the overtime and work with shipping to move the pickup. How else can I help?”
Rachel approves the overtime and confirms a later pickup. Tom reorganizes the loading schedule, with qualified operators on forklifts and temporary workers packing the order.
The Threat and the Resources
Lazarus and Folkman’s Transactional Model of Stress explains Tom’s concern. In the primary appraisal, Tom recognizes a threat of serious injury. In the secondary appraisal, Tom doubts that enough qualified help and time are available to complete the work safely.
The first response asks Tom to see an opportunity while leaving the danger unaddressed. The second response provides qualified help and additional time. Tom’s stress eases because safe completion now seems possible.
Reframing can help correct an inaccurate assessment. Tom’s assessment was accurate. The appropriate response was to take the safety concern seriously and provide the resources to handle the threat.
When an employee identifies a real danger, does leadership make the work safer or ask the employee to feel better about the risk?
I help leaders and high-performing individuals eliminate pressure, reduce stress, prevent burnout, sustain motivation, and build cultures where teams perform at their best when it matters most. Mention this LinkedIn series when you schedule a free 60-minute session to discuss your organization’s challenges and how we could work together.
