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.)

India and Russia: Resilient Allies in a Changing Global Landscape

India and Russia

During the Cold War, the Soviet Union forged strong ties with India, epitomized by the 1971 Treaty of Peace, Friendship, and Cooperation, which laid the foundation for decades of collaboration in defence, technology and economics. The disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991 did not mark the end of this relationship but rather, it initiated a new phase, with both nations reaffirming their commitment to strategic cooperation.


In early 2025, Russian President Vladimir Putin is expected to visit India at the invitation of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, with the Kremlin confirming the visit. The visit comes at a critical time for India as it navigates the complexities of its relationships with both the West and Russia, balancing its growing defence ties with the U.S. and its historical ties with Moscow. This diplomatic engagement, from ceremonial, is part of the reciprocal annual exchanges that have become the cornerstone of India-Russia relations. The ties between the two countries have evolved significantly over the years, with Modi and Putin meeting regularly at major international events and bilateral summits, reinforcing their shared vision of cooperation in defence, energy and trade.


Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov has emphasized the frequent communications between the two leaders, noting their direct meetings and phone calls every few months. In July, Modi travelled to Moscow for the 22nd India-Russia Summit, where both leaders addressed global security, climate change, and economic realignments. Later, in October, Modi attended the BRICS summit in Kazan, further solidifying India’s role in shaping a diverse geopolitical landscape.


India’s growing role in global forums like BRICS, the SCO, and the G20 aligns with Russia’s desire for greater influence in global governance, making their bilateral relationship all the more crucial in reshaping the future of international diplomacy.


At this juncture, India-Russia relations remain among the most enduring bilateral partnerships in modern geopolitics. Rooted in mutual respect and strategic collaboration, the partnership continues to address both traditional and emerging challenges in global affairs. Putin’s 2025 visit is particularly significant, as the world grapples with the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza, and the resurgence of power struggles. For Russia, this visit signals a determination to deepen ties with India, a key partner in the Global South, especially as Moscow faces growing isolation from the West due to its ongoing war in Ukraine.


For India, the visit presents an opportunity to assert its non-aligned foreign policy and advance its interests as a leader within global forums such as BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), and the G20. India has long managed a delicate balancing act in its foreign relations, strengthening its strategic partnership with the United States while maintaining robust ties with Russia, particularly in defence and energy security. However, the evolving proximity between Russia and China, amid Western sanctions, poses a challenge for India, given its ongoing border tensions with China. Furthermore, India’s expanding defence relationship with the U.S., exemplified by initiatives like the QUAD, remains a growing concern for Moscow. Despite the strength of their political and defence ties, bilateral trade and investment between India and Russia have been underwhelming, which limits the economic potential of their partnership.


Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has created diplomatic challenges for India, which has sought to balance its historical ties with Moscow while navigating its evolving relations with the West. India remains one of the largest importers of Russian defence equipment, including advanced systems like the S-400 missile defence system and nuclear-powered submarines. Joint military exercises, such as the INDRA series, further underscore the strong defence collaboration between the two nations.


Energy cooperation is another cornerstone of the India-Russia partnership. Russia has emerged as India’s top crude oil supplier in the wake of sanctions on Moscow, which have reshaped global energy markets. India is also reliant on Russian nuclear fuel, with projects like the Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant symbolizing their ongoing collaboration.

Despite these strong sectors, trade relations remain relatively low, and both nations have been exploring mechanisms to enhance economic exchange, including a potential rupee-rouble exchange system designed to bypass the dominance of the U.S. dollar.


Looking forward, there are significant opportunities for collaboration in technology and space exploration, particularly through joint initiatives like India’s Gaganyaan mission with Russian assistance. Additionally, projects like the International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC) could boost regional connectivity and trade, opening new avenues for cooperation.


At the heart of India and Russia’s foreign policy lies a shared history of mutual respect and a strategic vision for navigating global dynamics. Despite the challenges posed by changing geopolitical landscapes, the resilience of this relationship remains strong, anchored in their ability to adapt to emerging opportunities and global shifts. As both nations continue to navigate an increasingly complex global order, their bilateral relations will undoubtedly remain a critical pillar in their respective foreign policies.


(The author is an educationalist. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page