top of page

By:

Rahul Kulkarni

30 March 2025 at 3:32:54 pm

The Boundary Collapse

When kindness becomes micromanagement It started with a simple leave request.   “Hey, can I take Friday off? Need a personal day,” Meera messaged Rohit. Rohit replied instantly:   “Of course. All good. Just stay reachable if anything urgent comes up.”   He meant it as reassurance. But the team didn’t hear reassurance. They heard a rule.   By noon, two things had shifted inside The Workshop:   Meera felt guilty for even asking. Everyone else quietly updated their mental handbook: Leave is...

The Boundary Collapse

When kindness becomes micromanagement It started with a simple leave request.   “Hey, can I take Friday off? Need a personal day,” Meera messaged Rohit. Rohit replied instantly:   “Of course. All good. Just stay reachable if anything urgent comes up.”   He meant it as reassurance. But the team didn’t hear reassurance. They heard a rule.   By noon, two things had shifted inside The Workshop:   Meera felt guilty for even asking. Everyone else quietly updated their mental handbook: Leave is allowed… but not really. This is boundary collapse… when a leader’s good intentions unintentionally blur the limits that protect autonomy and rest. When care quietly turns into control Founders rarely intend to micromanage.   What looks like control from the outside often starts as care from the inside. “Let me help before something breaks.” “Let me stay involved so we don’t lose time.” “Loop me in… I don’t want you stressed.” Supportive tone.   Good intentions.   But one invisible truth defines workplace psychology: When power says “optional,” it never feels optional.
So when a client requested a revision, Rohit gently pinged:   “If you’re free, could you take a look?” Of course she logged in.   Of course she handled it.   And by Monday, the cultural shift was complete: Leave = location change, not a boundary.   A founder’s instinct had quietly become a system. Pattern 1: The Generous Micromanager Modern micromanagement rarely looks aggressive. It looks thoughtful :   “Let me refine this so you’re not stuck.” “I’ll review it quickly.”   “Share drafts so we stay aligned.”   Leaders believe they’re being helpful. Teams hear:   “You don’t fully trust me.” “I should check with you before finishing anything.”   “My decisions aren’t final.” Gentle micromanagement shrinks ownership faster than harsh micromanagement ever did because people can’t challenge kindness. Pattern 2: Cultural conditioning around availability In many Indian workplaces, “time off” has an unspoken footnote: Be reachable. Just in case. No one says it directly.   No one pushes back openly.   The expectation survives through habit: Leave… but monitor messages. Rest… but don’t disconnect. Recover… but stay alert. Contrast this with a global team we worked with: A designer wrote,   “I’ll be off Friday, but available if needed.” Her manager replied:   “If you’re working on your off-day, we mismanaged the workload… not the boundary.”   One conversation.   Two cultural philosophies.   Two completely different emotional outcomes.   Pattern 3: The override reflex Every founder has a version of this reflex.   Whenever Rohit sensed risk, real or imagined, he stepped in: Rewriting copy.   Adjusting a design.   Rescoping a task.   Reframing an email. Always fast.   Always polite.   Always “just helping.” But each override delivered one message:   “Your autonomy is conditional.” You own decisions…   until the founder feels uneasy.   You take initiative…   until instinct replaces delegation.   No confrontation.   No drama.   Just quiet erosion of confidence.   The family-business amplification Boundary collapse becomes extreme in family-managed companies.   We worked with one firm where four family members… founder, spouse, father, cousin… all had informal authority. Everyone cared.   Everyone meant well.   But for employees, decision-making became a maze: Strategy approved by the founder.   Aesthetics by the spouse.   Finance by the father. Tone by the cousin.   They didn’t need leadership.   They needed clarity.   Good intentions without boundaries create internal anarchy. The global contrast A European product team offered a striking counterexample.   There, the founder rarely intervened mid-stream… not because of distance, but because of design:   “If you own the decision, you own the consequences.” Decision rights were clear.   Escalation paths were explicit.   Authority didn’t shift with mood or urgency. No late-night edits.   No surprise rewrites.   No “quick checks.”   No emotional overrides. As one designer put it:   “If my boss wants to intervene, he has to call a decision review. That friction protects my autonomy.” The result:   Faster execution, higher ownership and zero emotional whiplash. Boundaries weren’t personal.   They were structural .   That difference changes everything. Why boundary collapse is so costly Its damage is not dramatic.   It’s cumulative.   People stop resting → you get presence, not energy.   People stop taking initiative → decisions freeze.   People stop trusting empowerment → autonomy becomes theatre.   People start anticipating the boss → performance becomes emotional labour.   People burn out silently → not from work, but from vigilance.   Boundary collapse doesn’t create chaos.   It creates hyper-alertness, the heaviest tax on any team. The real paradox Leaders think they’re being supportive. Teams experience supervision.   Leaders assume boundaries are obvious. Teams see boundaries as fluid. Leaders think autonomy is granted. Teams act as though autonomy can be revoked at any moment. This is the Boundary Collapse → a misunderstanding born not from intent, but from the invisible weight of power. Micromanagement today rarely looks like anger.   More often,   it looks like kindness without limits. (Rahul Kulkarni is Co-founder at PPS Consulting. He patterns the human mechanics of scaling where workplace behavior quietly shapes business outcomes. Views personal.)

A Ticking Time Bomb in a Broken Britain: Juggernaut at 50

Juggernaut at 50

Yes, this is the film where the climactic choice boils down to cutting the red wire or the blue one. Fifty years ago, director Richard Lester’s Juggernaut (1974) sailed into cinemas, only to be unjustly categorized alongside Hollywood’s glossier, cacophonous disaster films. Unlike its more bombastic counterparts, the ‘veddy British’ Juggernaut eschews grandiosity for something altogether more profound - a miniature study of a crumbling, multicultural Britain under siege from within that has an eerie resonance today.


The plot is deceptively simple: The aptly-named luxury liner Britannic, with 1,200 passengers on board, is threatened by a number of booby-trapped bombs planted by an embittered former British military bomb-disposal expert, who, calling himself ‘Juggernaut’ demands a half-million pounds in ransom within a few hours else he will blow the ship to kingdom come.


Within this taut conceit, Lester crafts a microcosm of 1970s Britain, teetering on the brink of socio-political collapse and grappling with an identity frayed by multicultural tensions.


As the crew and passengers become floating hostages, forced to endure a night they will always remember, an elite bomb disposal unit races against time to dismantle the bombs. Meanwhile, the authorities’ frantic search for the saboteur veers into predictable territory, with suspects ranging from Arab nationals to Irish terrorists.


The drama unfolds not in a glossy Hollywood fantasia of heroism but in a grim, overcast milieu. At the center of this pressure-cooker narrative is Richard Harris, delivering what is arguably the finest performance of his career. As Anthony Fallon, the bomb disposal expert tasked with saving 1,200 lives aboard the Britannic, Harris inhabits the role with a brooding intensity, muttering philosophical musings while engaging in a job of almost incomprehensible peril.


“What are 1,200 lives in the grand scheme of things?” he barks at one point, the question less an abstraction than a grim meditation on the randomness of survival and the frailty of human systems. Harris’s weariness mirrors that of a nation, burdened by crises both internal and external, and his performance is the film’s brooding heart.


Lester’s direction is surgical. The tension never relents; every frame tightens the screws and ensures the film remains taut and claustrophobic while every scene infused with a pervasive dread. This is a film of cold greys and sterile whites with Omar Sharif’s subdued captain steering the ship not only through literal peril but also the existential void of a leader powerless to protect his domain.


Deliberately shorn of his Doctor Zhivago and Funny Girl charm, Sharif is introspective, even seedy, as a man stripped of his usual magnetism and charm - a hollow echo of Britain’s colonial past.


The rest of the cast is a who’s who of British acting greats. Anthony Hopkins is the harried detective racing to prevent disaster; Lester regular Roy Kinnear provides comic relief, though even his moments feel tinged with melancholy. Ian Holm adds a jittery energy, while David Hemmings and Lester stalwart Roy Kinnear inject fleeting moments of levity,


But Juggernaut remains Harris’s show. His portrayal of Fallon elevates the film from a suspenseful thriller to a poignant meditation on human frailty and resilience, his stoicism underlining the futility of heroics in an age of entropy.

The ending, when it arrives, is a masterstroke. The bomb is defused, Fallon does a quiet jig proclaiming himself the “Champion.” There is a hollowness to this victory, as if the film itself doubts the utility of such triumphs. The ship sails on, but to what?


If The Godfather II and The Conversation plumbed the depths of American disillusionment, Juggernaut did the same for Britain, with a defused bomb standing in for a nation left to quietly smoulder.


Lester, known for his anarchic touch in films like A Hard Day’s Night (1964), Petulia (1968) and The Three Musketeers (1974), proves adept at ratcheting up tension. Harris’ Oscar-nominated turn in This Sporting Life is usually cited by critics as his greatest. For my money, I rate this even better.


Juggernaut is far more than a high-wire thriller. It is a lament for a crumbling Britain and a vital work of 1970s cinema, standing shoulder to shoulder with the decade’s best. If anything, its quiet power, much like Fallon’s, deserves to be championed!

-PTI

Comments


bottom of page