Spotting Early Warning Signs Before They Become a CNESST Case

Six weeks later, Sophie resigns. In her exit interview, she mentions a “difficult work climate” that has lasted for months. Mathieu is genuinely surprised: as far as he was concerned, nothing had really happened.

That is exactly the problem with weak signals: they never look like an emergency. And yet, prevention often starts there.

In brief:

• Weak signals (withdrawal, silence, isolation) never look like an emergency, but they often foreshadow a crisis.
• Disengagement follows a path through 4 phases : affective withdrawal, behavioral withdrawal, cognitive withdrawal, and finally cynicism.
• People exposed to psychosocial risks face twice the risk of psychological distress and up to four times the risk of workplace accidents or musculoskeletal disorders.
• Act 27 requires companies to identify and prevent psychosocial risks, not merely react once a crisis has been declared.
• Effective prevention relies on an integrated, planned, and consistent year-round program, rather than on a one-off intervention.

In this article:

1. The missing reflex in people management
2. What your team is telling you before the situation becomes critical
3. The cost of failing to notice
4. An observation checklist to replace guesswork
5. Starting a reflection and building over time
6. Closing the loop
7. Frequently asked questions

The missing reflex in people management

In project management, we have long understood that a risk is not a disaster: it is a hypothesis to monitor. A delayed deliverable, a critical dependency, or a decision that is taking too long is documented, tracked, and addressed before becoming a problem.

Strangely, this reflex is lost when it comes to people. A growing workload, a lack of clarity about tasks or roles, inconsistent messages (too much or too little information being shared), increasing silence, or a person gradually isolating themselves are often normalized. We wait for them to turn into a real problem (a work stoppage, complaint, conflict, or resignation) before intervening.

The result: we manage the crisis rather than the risk, even though this is precisely what the law now requires: preventing the risk rather than managing the illness once it has been diagnosed.

What your team is telling you before the situation becomes critical

Disengagement does not happen all at once. It follows a four-stage path, inspired by Rosse and Miller’s (1984) work on gradual withdrawal from work:

The trap is waiting until the final stages to act, even though the first stage was the best time to open a dialogue before cynicism took hold and affected the rest of the team.

A person who has seemed more distant for a few weeks is not necessarily in distress or experiencing harassment. But the change in behavior deserves to be observed, addressed tactfully, and monitored over time.

The cost of failing to notice

Weak signals are not merely a matter of team climate. Datas from the Institut national de santé publique du Québec show that people exposed to one or more psychosocial risks face:

• twice the risk of psychological distress;
• 1.4 to 4 times the risk of workplace accidents;
• 1.5 to 4 times the risk of musculoskeletal disorders.

The organizational impact is also felt through absenteeism, turnover, and presenteeism. A person may continue working, replying to messages, and attending meetings while already being disengaged internally.

Presenteeism is one of the most deceptive signals: on the surface, the person is still there. In reality, they are functioning with significantly reduced energy, concentration, or ability to engage.

An observation checklist to replace guesswork

There is no need to wait for a formal audit to get started. A few questions, asked regularly (rather than only in response to a crisis), can turn a vague impression into an actionable signal. The key is to follow up over time, open a dialogue, and find win-win solutions with the person concerned:

• Has someone’s behavior changed in meetings?
• Is someone systematically avoiding certain projects or people?
• Has a key person’s workload increased without discussion?
• Are unspoken tensions noticeable within the team?
• Is someone who used to be proactive now waiting to be told what to do?
• Are mistakes, oversights, or delays multiplying for someone who is usually reliable?

A positive answer is not a diagnosis. It is an invitation to find out what is happening.

You can start with a simple sentence:

“I’ve noticed that you’ve been participating less in discussions lately. How are things going for you right now?”

The goal is not to jump to conclusions, but to create a space where the person can describe what they are experiencing.

However, keep in mind: listening is not enough. When a person shares what they are experiencing, they expect it to lead to something: follow-up conversations, concrete action, and solutions considered together.

Starting a reflection and building over time

Managers and teams do not develop these reflexes sustainably as a result of a single intervention. A conference can raise awareness, create a common language, and start the conversation. However, it is not enough on its own to transform day-to-day practices.

For weak signals to be effectively detected, the organization must plan for an integrated, planned, and consistent year-round program. Depending on its needs, this program may combine:

• awareness conferences or workshops for all teams;
• practical training on stress, mental workload, communication, or psychosocial risks (PSR);
• coaching and peer learning to support managers in concrete situations;
• follow-up sessions to assess what has changed and adjust actions.

The logic is simple: raise awareness, practice, support, and revisit. Repetition and consistency are what allow the right reflexes to take root, as in any prevention program.

Closing the loop

If Mathieu had asked Sophie one direct question that Tuesday morning—“You seem quieter than usual lately; how are you doing right now?”—the story might have taken a different turn.

Preventing psychosocial risks therefore does not rely solely on the vigilance of an individual manager. It also depends on the organization’s ability to establish shared reference points and maintain these practices over time.

Act 27 requires companies to identify and prevent psychosocial risks. But moving from obligation to a collective reflex requires more than a one-off action: it requires an annual program, integrated into the realities of teams and consistent enough to support prevention before a crisis occurs.

Frequently asked questions

What is a weak signal in team management?

It is a subtle change in behavior, often seemingly harmless (silence, withdrawal, irritability, isolation), that is not an emergency but may signal gradual disengagement or a more serious psychosocial risk.

What are the stages of disengagement at work?

According to Rosse and Miller’s (1984) work, disengagement follows four stages: affective withdrawal, behavioral withdrawal, cognitive withdrawal, and finally cynicism, which gradually affects the team climate.

What does Act 27 require companies to do?

Act 27 requires companies to identify and prevent psychosocial risks at work, rather than intervening only after a problem (work stoppage, complaint, or resignation) has already occurred.

How can a manager address a weak signal with an employee?

By observing the change, addressing it tactfully, and opening a simple dialogue—for example: “I’ve noticed that you’ve been participating less in discussions lately. How are things going for you right now?”—while being prepared to follow up with concrete action.

Sources

• Institut national de santé publique du Québec (INSPQ), Psychosocial risks at work and measurable health risks — report available online.
• Rosse, J. G., et Miller, H. E. (1984). Study on gradual withdrawal from work (“employee withdrawal”).