When the World is On Fire and Anxiety, Contempt, and Climate Distress Pull Join Your Meeting

In the dystopian world of the popular show Severance, employees are surgically severed from their emotions, creating a sterile disconnection between work and life — from the outside and the inside. Personal distractions are eliminated, but so are meaning, emotional depth, and human connection. In the real world, no such procedure exists — and that means employees bring their fears, frustrations, and anxieties with them, including growing distress over climate change.

Note from the authors: This is a follow-up to our December piece on Burning Up and Burning Out, which explored how climate anxiety impacts employee well-being and organizational dynamics and suggested strategies for organizations to address these intertwined issues.

Here, the focus remains on climate distress, but the frameworks we present — understanding emotional reactions, recognizing fear as a driver, and managing anxiety vs. contempt — apply to any divisive issue, including political tensions.

What unites us (credit Francois Top)

Meanwhile, in the Conference Room…

Jack began his weekly meeting, but the room was already tense. The fires raging just outside of town had turned the air orange, and a faint smell of smoke lingered even indoors.

Sam, a junior analyst, spoke up hesitantly. “They’re saying the air quality is dangerous today,” she said, her anxiety palpable. “Should we even be here?”

“Well, we’ve got deadlines to meet, and wildfires are nothing new. Let’s stay focused,” Alex retorted, a senior team member.

Jack could feel the divide forming — between Sam’s fear of the immediate threat and Alex’s contempt for what he perceived as a distraction.

As their supervisor, Jack knew that Sam suffered from asthma, and Alex’s recent separation likely added to his stress. Jack also knew his response in this moment would set the tone for how the team handled this crisis and future challenges.

Understanding Climate Distress

Climate change is not just a physical or economic issue — it can have profound psychological effects on both employees and management by triggering distress.

This distress is often related to a sense of powerlessness — an inability to control or mitigate the parameters of an unfolding crisis. In the workplace, the emotional toll from this distress is amplified by the complex dynamics of modern teams, in which employees are encouraged to bring their “whole selves” to work.

Climate distress — whether experienced, ongoing, or anticipated — has gained enough significance to warrant the attention of researchers and the American Psychological Association. Moreover, a recent youth-focused study from The Lancet Planetary Health found a significant amount of concern about climate change: roughly 4 out of every 5 surveyed were worried, 3 out 5 were very worried and 2 of 5 said their mental health was routinely impacted.

Some also feel guilty about being complicit, either individually or as an employee of an organization, which adversely affects the climate.

As a result, employees, managers, and leaders increasingly bring climate-related emotions into the workplace, engaging in conversations influenced by social media and political views. These discussions often exacerbate distress — or spark contempt toward those with differing levels of concern.

Adopting the Emergency Emotional Brace Position

Organizational psychiatrists tell us that we typically adopt one of two “emotional brace” positions when confronted with a threat: either anxiety, which is directed at the threat itself, or contempt, directed at those who voice their fears.

Like all emotions, anxiety and contempt motivate us to act. Sometimes, we can manage our emotional response, and sometimes, our emotional response manages us.

At its core, climate distress is actual fear — a response to real and perceived threats posed by climate change. Left unchecked, it can destabilize teams and erode trust.

Consider the forms fear can take in the workplace:

• Fear of loss: employees may fear losing control, security, or predictability when faced with crises such as fires or organizational changes resulting from natural disasters like hurricanes.
• Fear of failure: managers may feel contempt toward others’ concerns that detract from productivity.
• Fear of vulnerability: team members might mask actual fear with dismissive or defensive behaviors, creating barriers to open communication and collaboration.

Anxiety can emerge from a fear of personal harm, a loss of stability, or a disruption to routines. For Sam, in the interchange above, smoke from wildfires is a real health concern. But if Sam is unable to say, “You know, with my asthma, I probably shouldn’t be here,” that can create an actual conflict. And if that conflict goes unvoiced, it probably stays unresolved and may cause disruptive behavior. Anxiety is usually a direct result of failing to address a problem in a timely manner.

Contempt, by contrast, shields fear by rejecting it. Alex’s dismissiveness, while appearing practical and unemotional, is rooted in a different kind of fear: the fear that acknowledging climate-related challenges will derail productivity or expose vulnerabilities. Alex’s frustration with Sam’s concerns stems from his fear that the team’s focus will shift away from their work — masking fear of losing control — or being overwhelmed by issues perceived as too big to address.

We tend to focus on supporting anxious individuals while dismissing those who express contempt for weakness — seeing anxiety as a sign of fragility and contempt as disruptive instead of indicative of problems we might have missed — or might be able to address as managers.

Contempt, however, is often also a signal of valid fears from the same situation — fear of losing control, being overwhelmed, or feeling unheard.

Managers must address both perspectives, as dismissive and anxious individuals might highlight critical issues. Ignoring either can result in missed opportunities or blind spots. The contemptuous do not have a solution to the problem and dismiss it, and the anxious know or enhance a threat but cannot quite articulate it or know what to do about it.

In other words, anxiety and contempt are two sides of the same coin — because both are rooted in fear. Left unaddressed, both anxiety and contempt can fracture team trust, erode cohesion, and stall collaboration.

By understanding this fear dynamic in the context of climate change, managers can create supportive environments where employees feel empowered to cope with even highly stressful (or ultimately unsolvable) situations. This involves:

• seeing emotions as natural responses to threats;
• adopting flexible approaches that respect individual coping styles;
• balancing immediate needs with long-term strategies to foster organizational resilience; and,
• using both contempt and anxiety as warning signs about the emotional temperature.

Leaders and managers can use these four practices to deal with climate change fears — which is unique because it affects everyone — and across any stressful situation in the workplace.

Put Your Emotional Mask on First

To successfully triage the emotional dynamics of climate distress, managers must understand how individuals under their care cope with fear, loss, and threats to their well-being. Before being emotional first responders, managers must also become more aware of how they, themselves, cope with those same stressors.

A recent Harvard Business Review article on The Hidden Costs of Climate Change in the Workforce presents how psychologists categorize coping strategies:

• problem-focused coping (making active strides to address climate change);
• emotion-focused coping (managing negative emotions related to climate change); and,
• meaning-focused coping (managing negative emotions while in parallel promoting positive emotions, such as hope, by combating climate change).

Understanding coping mechanisms is vital for managers, who must navigate the emotional landscapes of diverse teams. Each approach has strengths and limitations, and a strategy’s effectiveness depends on context and individual needs.

For Jack, these coping styles are not abstract concepts — they’re playing out in real time. As a result, they require real-time solutions, often generated on the fly by managers who have not been trained to do so.

Recognizing Fear as a Shared Experience in Climate Distress

Managers must recognize that this fear is not a weakness — it is a shared human experience (see Table 1) and that individual coping strategies will vary. Jack’s challenge in bridging the divide between Sam and Alex is to bring the fears driving their emotions out into the open. He must signal to the team that fear, when acknowledged and managed, can be a source of connection rather than conflict.

Table 1

From Fear to Connection: Leadership Opportunity

In these moments, managers aren’t just guiding workflow — they’re setting the emotional tone. How Jack responds could either deepen the divide or help the team move forward with greater clarity and cohesion. Sam’s anxiety calls for reassurance and tangible actions to address her safety concerns, while Alex’s frustration requires acknowledgment of his need for control and structure.

To address the interplay of fear, anxiety, and contempt, managers can harness the following three strategies: normalize the emotional impact of climate distress; reframe contempt as a need for control; and, channel anxiety into climate action.

Let us consider them in the context of our team meeting.

1. Normalize the Emotional Impact of Climate Distress

Fear is a rational response to uncertainty and disruption, and sudden climate-related events like the fires in Los Angeles are terrifying to all.

By addressing emotions like anxiety and anger/contempt, managers create a safe space for employees to express their concerns.

Jack could open the conversation by saying: “Climate events like these fires affect all of us in different ways. It’s natural to feel worried or frustrated. Let’s figure out how we can address these concerns together.”

This approach validates both Sam’s anxiety and Alex’s focus on productivity, reducing defensiveness and encouraging collaboration.

2. Reframe Contempt as a Need for Control

Contempt often signals a fear of losing control over tasks, priorities, or team cohesion.

Managers can reframe this defensiveness by showing how addressing concerns proactively contributes positively to overall stability and efficiency.

For example, Jack might say to Alex: “Addressing Sam’s concerns isn’t a distraction — it’s a way to ensure our team can stay focused and productive despite disruptions. Let’s think about how we can work together to move forward.”

This reframing helps Alex see emotional conversations as part of effective leadership, rather than a threat to progress.

3. Channel Anxiety Into Climate Action

Anxiety thrives in uncertainty but can be transformed into action when employees feel empowered. Jack could help the team focus on what they can control by:

1. Offering flexibility, such as remote work during extreme weather.

2. Sharing updates on workplace safety measures, e.g. filtration systems.

3. Encouraging the team to brainstorm solutions for future climate disruptions, giving them a sense of agency.

By redirecting Sam’s anxiety into practical steps, Jack addresses her immediate fears and strengthens the team’s resilience for future challenges. The Appendix suggests questions organized around coping mechanisms for all parties involved, including the team as a unit.

From Severance to Connection

Back to our mythical world of Severance … in which employees are shielded from the discomfort of uncertainty, fear, and personal burdens. As the series evolves, the cost is clear: lack of true connection and informed decision-making.

In our beloved real world, the best leaders do not dismiss distress — they recognize it, address it, and use it to build connection and resilience. In the context of climate distress, fear, anxiety, and even contempt are not distractions; they are signals, revealing what matters most to employees and teams.

As climate challenges intensify, the ability to manage not just climate-related problems and climate disaster response but also emotional complexity will define successful organizations. Proactive leaders — from CEOs to team leaders like Jack — can transform fear into purposeful action, anxiety into engagement, and contempt into understanding.

Appendix: Questions per Coping Scenario

Problem-focused

Questions for team members:

• What specific challenges are you experiencing due to this situation (e.g., air quality, work disruptions, work delays, longer workdays)?
• Have you experienced similar situations before? If so, what approaches worked well for you? What are the threats you see?
• Can you make adjustments in your work environment to help you feel safer or more productive?
• What support or resources would help you navigate this issue?

Questions for the team as a unit:

• What practical steps can we take as a team to ensure everyone feels supported while maintaining our goals?
• Can we implement operational adjustments to reduce disruptions, such as flexible scheduling or remote work?
• How can we plan for the future? When climate change-related problems impact the business, we need to build an “ER-like” decision tree for the organization. What does that look like? What is our team’s input here?
• What potential climate disasters do we face as an organization? What does our business continuity plan look like so we can all “grab a go-bag,” get our families together, and get out of town, all within a few hours, and still have a viable business — able to open at 9 a.m. tomorrow?
• If no plan exists, we must create one — and test it to ensure it works. This process can be both a bonding experience and a confidence-builder, reinforcing the idea that the organization is truly prepared for anything.

Reflection of (for) Jack:

• Are there organizational policies or resources we need to update to better address climate-related challenges? What should I report to my supervisors or HR?
• How can I ensure my team feels confident about our solutions?
• How do they get their work done? Can that work be done from anywhere? If so, what equipment/capabilities can be made redundant for remote work if remote work is required?

Emotion-focused

Questions for team members:

• How are you feeling about what’s happening? Are there particular emotions or concerns weighing on you? Is there anything you’d like to share about how this is affecting your focus or energy at work?
• What imminent climate-related threat is top of your mind?
• How does completing your/our work fit in with this threat? When do you feel the threat of work not getting done?
• How does work completion fit in with your priorities?
• What problems are you experiencing with others expressing concerns about the climate?
• When do you perceive others as being needy/unnecessarily hysterical?
• Does labeling it that way help? Does it hurt the relationships you have?
• How do you repair a relationship when it is damaged? What support do you need to be able to focus on your teammate and their concern?
• What can you do to manage your emotions more effectively?
• How can I help you feel emotionally supported during this time?”
• Are there specific tools or resources (e.g., mindfulness exercises, EAP services) that you think would be helpful?

Questions for the team as a unit:

• How is everyone doing today? Are there emotions or thoughts you’d like to address as a group? What can we do to create a safe space for open, nonjudgmental conversations?
• Are there moments when you feel overwhelmed or unsupported? How can we address that together?
• How can the team simultaneously attend to its members’ anxiety and to the work that is our primary purpose and will not go away?
• What do we do now as a team when we are distressed? What can we do better?
• What does it mean when someone feels distressed, scared, anxious, or contemptuous?

Reflections for Jack:

• They are emotionally raw right now. How can I help them repair their relationships enough to return to work?
• What are my emotions? Who do I go to for support?
• If emotions serve as motivation, where are they motivating away from the task, and where are they pushing others away?
• What is working and creating stronger bonds as a team?
• Do I recognize, validate, and set expectations regarding expressing the emotions of my team members?
• When do I let them dominate the conversation? How do I avoid this?
• Am I balancing empathy with composure and focus?

Meaning-focused

Questions to ask team members:

• How do you feel your work contributes to addressing our challenges? Are there ways we can consider aligning your role with initiatives that reflect your values or concerns about climate change?
• What inspires you to keep moving despite the difficulties we’re facing?

Questions for the team as a unit:

• What shared values or goals can we focus on to give our work more meaning during this time? Can we undertake projects or initiatives as a team to address these broader challenges?
• How can we balance our immediate goals with our long-term impact and purpose?

Reflection for Jack:

• Do I communicate how our work matters to larger, meaningful goals?
• Where do I support general climate distress vs getting the work done?
• How do I manage this? I may think am neutral, but they all likely know how I feel. How do I bring in different perspectives and foster trust?
• How do I help them see emotions as data that can bring positive action?
• How do I gauge progress in our competence as a team?
• How can I connect individual and team efforts to our organization’s sustainability or resilience initiatives?

For more aspects of this conversation, please see Dr. Morrison’s posts (part 1 and part 2).