Work can be demanding. Deadlines pile up. Meetings run long. Managers make decisions you do not agree with. Priorities shift. Sometimes, the job simply does not feel right.
But when workplace pressure becomes persistent harm, the stakes can be much higher.
Across South Africa, employees are facing growing pressure, with recent surveys highlighting concerns around stress, workload, job security and workplace culture. When those pressures are combined with harmful leadership or dysfunctional systems, the consequences can extend beyond a difficult day at the office.
They can affect wellbeing, team performance and organisational stability.
Yet there is another problem.
The phrase “toxic workplace” is now used to describe almost every unpleasant professional experience. That can make it harder to recognise situations that are genuinely harmful.
According to leadership expert Debbie Goodman, understanding what kind of workplace problem you are actually facing is the first step towards deciding what to do next.
Goodman, CEO at Jack Hammer Global, recently explored the issue with organisational politics expert Niven Postma during the podcast Is My Workplace Toxic?
Their central message is clear: not every bad workplace experience requires the same response.
Some situations can be changed.
Some require boundaries and strategic action.
And some demand an exit plan.
1. Truly Toxic: When Staying Comes at a Cost
A genuinely toxic workplace goes beyond ordinary frustration.
It can involve persistent bullying, manipulation, humiliation or intimidation, often causing serious damage to an employee’s confidence, wellbeing and ability to function.
The warning signs can include:
- Gaslighting
- Blame-shifting
- Retaliation
- Constant undermining
- Persistent intimidation
- A growing sense of dread
- Anxiety or panic
The critical difference is the pattern.
The harm is targeted, recurring and difficult to resolve through normal communication.
And when workplace distress begins showing up physically, the situation deserves serious attention.
Panic attacks, sleeplessness and loss of appetite can all signal that the pressure is taking a significant toll.
So, when should you act?
Goodman’s advice is direct: in a genuinely toxic environment, leaving is usually the only long-term remedy.
Simply working harder, becoming more accommodating or trying to repair the relationship alone is unlikely to fix an environment that is fundamentally harmful.
However, leaving a job is not always immediately possible.
Financial responsibilities and family commitments can make an instant resignation unrealistic.
That is why Goodman advocates developing a Plan B early.
An exit does not necessarily have to happen tomorrow.
It could take months or even a year.
The goal is to create a realistic path towards something better without creating another crisis in the process.
Most importantly, having an exit strategy can restore something that a toxic workplace often takes away: a sense of control.
“Leaving is not always immediately possible, but it is usually the only long-term remedy.”
— Debbie Goodman
2. Organisational Dysfunction: When the System Is the Problem
Not every unhealthy workplace is abusive.
Sometimes, the problem is the organisation itself.
Think endless meetings. Poor communication. Internal politics. Unclear priorities. Slow decision-making.
These environments can be exhausting.
They can also make good employees feel like they are constantly pushing against a system that refuses to move.
Other warning signs include a lack of trust in colleagues’ competence or character, avoiding difficult conversations because of a fear of conflict, and situations where politics begins taking priority over meaningful results.
But there is an important distinction.
Dysfunction is not necessarily personal abuse.
If an entire team is experiencing the same structural problems, the answer may not be to immediately resign.
Instead, employees can consider what they can influence.
That could mean setting clearer boundaries, improving decision-making within their own sphere of control, raising practical concerns or building relationships with constructive colleagues.
It can also mean choosing battles carefully.
In some cases, senior employees may have a responsibility to help improve the environment rather than simply accept dysfunctional systems as unavoidable.
The question becomes:
Is the workplace broken, or is it deliberately breaking you?
The answer can determine the next move.
3. A Bad Fit: “It’s Not You. It’s Me.”
Sometimes, there is no villain.
The job simply does not suit you anymore.
Different working speeds, communication styles, management preferences and expectations can create genuine unhappiness without crossing the line into abuse.
A return-to-office policy might frustrate you.
A new reporting structure might not work for your preferred management style.
Perhaps you thrive in a fast-moving environment while your organisation values a slower, more structured approach.
That does not automatically make either side toxic.
It may simply mean the relationship is no longer working.
The real question is compatibility
Employees need to look closely at what is actually causing the dissatisfaction.
Is the problem a core value that cannot be compromised?
Is it the nature of the work?
Is it the management style?
Could the situation be negotiated?
Could you influence the culture around you?
Or is there enough common ground to accept the differences?
If the answer is no, an exit may eventually be the right choice.
But that decision should come from understanding the mismatch rather than automatically labelling the workplace toxic.
Goodman says this type of self-assessment is not about blaming employees.
It is about separating misalignment from misconduct and finding the most realistic response.
The Most Important Question: What Are You Actually Experiencing?
The danger of calling every difficult workplace “toxic” is that it can blur three very different experiences.
A toxic workplace may require an exit strategy.
Organisational dysfunction may require boundaries, alliances and practical change.
A bad fit may require an honest conversation about whether the employee and organisation still belong together.
The response should match the problem.
That does not mean employees should tolerate harmful behaviour.
It means they should understand what they are dealing with before deciding what comes next.
Goodman believes distinguishing genuine abuse from dysfunction and poor fit allows employees to respond proportionately and in their own personal and professional interests.
Know When to Fight. Know When to Plan. Know When to Leave.
The workplace is not always going to be comfortable.
There will be difficult bosses, complicated colleagues, frustrating systems and periods when work feels overwhelming.
But discomfort and danger are not the same thing.
Neither are dysfunction and abuse.
And neither is a poor fit.
The ability to recognise the difference can be powerful.
If the problem can be influenced, act.
If the system is dysfunctional, set boundaries and work strategically.
If the environment is genuinely harming you and cannot reasonably be changed, start planning your way out.
Because sometimes the most professional decision is not to endure more.
It is to recognise when your workplace is no longer worth the cost.
