Why ‘Just Get On With It’ Fails: Leanne Bridges on Overcoming Team Hesitation

In a recent LinkedIn post, Leanne Bridges discusses a common frustration many business leaders face: the perceived lack of initiative from their teams. Bridges highlights the disconnect between a leader’s expectation that employees should simply “just get on with it” and the reality of why this often doesn’t happen.

Bridges opens by acknowledging the perspective of managing directors (MDs) who express this sentiment. “They should just get on with it,” she quotes, noting that leaders often feel they’ve clearly communicated tasks and are paying their teams well, making inaction seem illogical.

“And I get it. You’ve explained what needs doing. You’re paying good people good money. So when work isn’t getting done, it feels obvious.”

However, Leanne Bridges argues that the assumption behind “just get on with it” is fundamentally flawed. It presumes that the sole barrier to progress is a lack of effort, when in reality, other factors are usually at play. Bridges prompts leaders to consider the underlying reasons for team hesitation.

The Root Cause: Caution, Not Laziness

According to Leanne Bridges, the gap between instruction and execution is rarely about laziness. Instead, she posits that it stems from caution, a learned behavior where taking initiative without explicit approval has begun to feel risky for employees. Bridges suggests that if team members were truly clear and confident in their roles and the decisions they needed to make, their behavior would differ significantly.

Signs of Underlying Hesitation

Bridges outlines several indicators that suggest a team is operating from a place of caution rather than confidence:

• Constantly checking in with management before making decisions.
• Waiting for managers to chase tasks before moving forward.
• Allowing managers to be the ones who spot what has been missed.

“If your team were genuinely clear and confident, would they still be checking with you before making decisions?” Bridges asks, posing rhetorical questions designed to make leaders reflect on their team’s behavior. She emphasizes that these actions are not overt complaints but silent signals about their comfort level with autonomy.

“Probably not.”

Leanne Bridges asserts that this hesitation is a communication in itself. When employees are still checking, waiting, or hesitating, they are indirectly conveying that the environment doesn’t feel safe enough for independent action. This often occurs because, at some point, acting without seeking further validation began to feel like a potential misstep, leading to a preference for seeking explicit permission.

Creating an Environment for Initiative

The core of Bridges’s message is that the directive “just get on with it” is only effective when employees feel both clear about their objectives AND confident in their ability to execute them without undue risk. If the observed behaviors are checking, waiting, or hesitation, it signals a deficiency in that confidence.

“They’re not being lazy. They’re being cautious.”

In her analysis, Leanne Bridges encourages leaders to look beyond surface-level observations of productivity and instead diagnose the underlying reasons for a team’s cautious approach. By understanding that hesitation is often a sign of perceived risk rather than a lack of willingness, leaders can begin to foster an environment where team members feel empowered to act with greater autonomy and confidence. As Bridges concludes:

“Because somewhere along the way, acting without checking started feeling risky.”

Ultimately, Bridges suggests that addressing this gap requires leaders to build psychological safety and clarity, enabling their teams to move from a state of cautious compliance to confident execution.