Share this edition
Leadership & Governance

The Manager Collapse: Why the Most Important Layer of Your Organisation Is Breaking

By Catherine Winter Editor-at-Large, Leadership & Governance

Gallup's 2026 data reveals a quiet crisis: manager engagement has dropped from 30% to 27%, with the steepest declines among managers under 35 and female managers. Managers account for 70% of the variance in team engagement. When they disengage, everyone below them follows.

Read Full Article
Editor's Note

The Squeezed Middle

This week's edition examines the crisis facing middle managers from multiple angles. Catherine Winter's lead analysis of the Gallup engagement data sits alongside new research on engagement measurement, psychological safety in hybrid teams, and the growing toll of digital fatigue. From the Field brings dispatches on the Co-op's toxic culture allegations, the quiet rebranding of DEI, and what practical culture change actually requires. Marcus Eriksen and James Chen trace the collision between AI deployment and cultural stability, and the first major legislative challenge to workplace surveillance. The pattern across every piece is the same: the people responsible for making culture work — middle managers — are being asked to do more with less, in conditions that actively undermine their effectiveness. The data says this matters more than we thought.

What the Evidence Says

Journal of Scientific Advances

Employee Engagement at the Crossroads: Measurement Clarification and a Multilevel Process Framework

2026 · Kapoor, Vikas & Sharma

An integrative review of engagement scholarship from 2010 to 2025 finds persistent definitional ambiguity and measurement inconsistency that limit responsible managerial use. The UWES, Gallup Q12, and other scales are non-interchangeable — organisations switching instruments may be measuring different constructs entirely. Proposes a multilevel process framework linking antecedents through motivational mechanisms.

5 major scales — UWES, Gallup Q12, Saks, Rich et al., ISA — are non-interchangeable, meaning engagement benchmarks may not be comparable across organisations.
Why it matters: If the tools we use to measure engagement aren't measuring the same thing, the entire benchmarking industry is built on sand.
Editor's pick This is the paper every CHRO should read before commissioning their next engagement survey.
South African Journal of Business Management

Leader Competencies for Building Psychological Safety in Hybrid Teams

2025 · Ngubane & Mbokota

A cross-sectional qualitative study of 20 managers across 13 FMCG multinationals. While managers are generally aware of psychological safety's importance, it hasn't been given strategic priority. Emotional intelligence and accountability are the two competencies most needed. Proposes a three-phase framework for building psychological safety in hybrid teams.

20 managers, 13 multinationals — yet most admitted psychological safety was not a strategic priority despite knowing its importance.
Why it matters: Managers know psychological safety matters but aren't being given the tools, training, or structural support to build it — especially in hybrid environments.
Editor's pick The gap between awareness and action is the defining problem.
Economic Sciences

Digital Fatigue and Employee Engagement in Hybrid Work: A Multilevel Perspective

2025 · Jain, Kumar, Grover & Rani

Digital fatigue — mental exhaustion from prolonged digital tool use — acts as a job demand that depletes cognitive and emotional resources. Digital autonomy moderates the effect at the individual level; psychological safety moderates at the team level; organisational digital culture and leadership moderate at the organisation level.

3 levels — individual (digital autonomy), team (psychological safety), organisation (digital culture) — all must align to prevent digital fatigue from destroying engagement.
Why it matters: We've given managers more digital tools than ever — but treated the resulting exhaustion as a personal failing rather than a structural design flaw.
0%

of employees worldwide are engaged at work — down from 23% last year, matching pandemic-era lows despite record investment in engagement programmes

Gallup's State of the Global Workplace report shows engagement falling to 21% globally, with the US at 31% (an 11-year low). The ratio of engaged to actively disengaged employees in the US fell to 1.8-to-1, down from 2.1-to-1. Most strikingly, the biggest driver was declining manager engagement, which fell from 30% to 27%. Gen Z and younger Millennials (under 35) experienced the sharpest declines — five percentage points year over year.

Source: Gallup, State of the Global Workplace 2026; HR Cloud analysis of Gallup 2026 data

Practitioner Dispatches

Toxic Culture

Co-op's 'Toxic Culture' Crisis: What Happens When Senior Staff Break Ranks

Personnel Today / BBC · February 2026

The Co-op, Britain's 180-year-old member-owned retailer, was shaken in February when senior managers sent a letter to the board alleging a "toxic culture" at the top — a climate of "fear and alienation" where staff were afraid to speak openly about business-critical issues. The Co-op denied the claims. Legal commentator Florence Brocklesby noted such allegations are increasingly common but can blur the line between legitimate concerns and resistance to change.

180 years of co-operative values — and yet senior managers describe "fear and alienation." When even mission-driven organisations produce toxic dynamics, the problem is structural, not cultural.
Why it matters: When senior managers at a values-led organisation describe "fear and alienation," it should give every leader pause. Culture isn't what's written on the wall — it's what people experience.
Editor's pick The disconnect between stated values and lived experience is the story of modern organisational life. The Co-op case crystallises it perfectly.
Read Full Article
DEI Evolution

The Great Rebranding: How DEI Became 'Workplace Culture' — and What Got Lost

Harvard Business Review / Metaintro / Catalyst · February 2026

78% of C-suite leaders are reframing DEI under terms like "employee engagement," "workplace culture," or "talent development." Only 5% of companies have fully eliminated programmes — most are restructuring, not retreating. But more than 40% of employees would consider quitting if their employer drops DEI support. The shift is driven by legal pressure (100+ lawsuits since the 2023 Supreme Court ruling) and strategic calculation.

78% rebranding, 5% retreating — the gap between the headlines and the reality of what's actually happening in corporate DEI.
Why it matters: The rebranding reveals something uncomfortable: when DEI was framed as justice, it was politically vulnerable. Reframed as business strategy, it may survive — but at the cost of the equity agenda that gave it moral force.
Editor's pick The numbers tell a more nuanced story than the headlines. This is essential reading for anyone trying to navigate the DEI landscape in 2026.
Read Full Article
Culture Change

Six Moves That Actually Change Culture — According to BTS

Consultancy.eu / BTS · February 2026

Global consultancy BTS identifies six practical actions for cultural change: building shared habits, using existing levers (meeting rhythms, decision practices), avoiding common pitfalls (messaging over modelling), shifting deep beliefs, aligning culture with technology, and starting small and scaling fast. The key insight: momentum dies when leaders treat culture as an HR project rather than a business imperative.

6 actions — none of them involve posters, values workshops, or keynote speakers. All require leaders to change their own behaviour first.
Why it matters: After years of abstract culture frameworks, this is refreshingly practical. The emphasis on leader behaviour over messaging is supported by the evidence — and it's harder than it sounds.
Read Full Article

Culture in Context

Political Economy

The AI-Culture Collision: Why Technology Strategy and Culture Strategy Can't Be Separated

World Economic Forum / Hacking HR / Multiple · February 2026

A survey based on 48 million employee responses shows a 9.89% year-over-year increase in unhealthy behaviours. Psychological safety dropped 3.38%. AI displacement anxiety, economic uncertainty, and rising social tensions are eroding cultural stability at the exact moment organisations plan to scale AI. The WEF's Future of Jobs Report projects 92 million jobs eliminated but 170 million created by 2030 — but the cultural infrastructure to manage that transition barely exists.

Why it matters: Organisations are deploying AI to transform productivity while simultaneously undermining the cultural conditions — trust, safety, stability — that make people productive. This isn't a paradox; it's a design flaw.
Editor's pick Eriksen connects the dots between AI strategy and culture erosion. The 48-million-response dataset makes the cultural cost of the AI transition impossible to dismiss.
Read Full Article
Technology

Michigan's RAISE Act: The First Major Legislative Challenge to AI Workplace Surveillance

Michigan Chamber / WGVU News / OnLabor · February 2026

Michigan lawmakers introduced the Responsible AI Security for Employees (RAISE) Act, which would ban AI-driven automated decisions on wages and employment, require employee notice and consent for AI surveillance, and regulate data collection practices. Supported by the AFL-CIO and nursing unions. Companies that track mouse movements, screen time, and bathroom breaks would face new restrictions. The bill follows existing Michigan laws criminalising AI deep fakes.

42% of large enterprises now use AI-driven employee monitoring (Gartner) — up from 24% in 2022. Michigan's bill is the first major US legislative response.
Why it matters: Michigan's bill is a signal: the regulatory framework for AI workplace surveillance is coming. Organisations that have been quietly deploying monitoring tools may soon face disclosure requirements that force the cultural conversation they've been avoiding.
Read Full Article

Also This Week

Briefly Noted

01

Hybrid employees report 34% engagement — highest of any work arrangement — while fully on-site workers trail at 28%

Gallup's 2026 data shows the gap has widened for three consecutive years, challenging the assumptions behind return-to-office mandates.

Gallup 2026 via HR Cloud
02

Toxic workplace culture is 10.4 times more predictive of employee turnover than compensation

New research links abusive supervision directly to increased healthcare utilisation and chronic illness, putting a price on toxic leadership.

Forbes / MIT Sloan Management Review
03

79% of CEOs and board members cite social polarisation as a key issue — but report limited confidence in managing it

The gap between recognising the problem and knowing what to do about it is one of the defining challenges of contemporary organisational leadership.

Heidrick & Struggles CEO & Board Confidence Monitor 2026
04

89% of HR leaders believe mental health benefits create competitive advantage — but only 9% believe their current solution reduces health plan spend

The conviction-to-ROI gap in workplace mental health suggests the business case remains more aspirational than proven.

Spring Health 2026 Workplace Mental Health Report
05

AI could make 18 million US entry-level jobs obsolete — roughly 12% of the workforce

Harvard Business School research warns this would fundamentally reshape how organisations build talent pipelines and cultural continuity.

Harvard Business School / Burning Glass Institute
Coming Next Week

Next week: The Culture Review examines the growing gap between what organisations promise in recruitment and what new hires actually experience — plus new research on onboarding as a culture mechanism, and why the first 90 days determine whether your culture story holds.

Get the Weekly Briefing

Original editorial, curated research, and practitioner dispatches — delivered to your inbox every Monday at 7am UK time. No spam, no fluff, unsubscribe anytime.

How We Work: We curate, summarise, and add original commentary. We always link to original sources and clearly label opinion vs. reporting.