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’s Budget and the Road Ahead

Updated: Jan 29

Part 1:

As coalition politics reshapes governance and global tensions mount, India’s economy balances cautious optimism with emerging challenges in the run-up to FY 2024-25.

India’s Budget

January brings a wave of positivity and hope for everyone as the new year ushers in fresh resolutions and optimistic plans for the future. Financial planning takes centre stage during this time, both at an individual and policy level. The Central Government prepares for the upcoming Budget session of Parliament, where the General Budget is discussed and adopted, setting the economic tone for the country.


The anticipation around the budget creates excitement and expectation, as people look forward to potential benefits and improvements in various sectors. Recently, Budget Day has generated significant buzz and glamour in the media corridors. Ironically, it’s said that there is an exponential rise in the number of economists in the country around this time, which subsides within a few days. One day before the General Budget, the government tables the Economic Survey, an equally critical document that doesn't receive as much attention. The Economic Survey provides an analysis of the previous year's economic performance, including in-depth analysis of various indicators and concludes with estimates and recommendations for the upcoming year. The General Budget outlines the government’s plans for the upcoming year, including financial allocations and policy measures, and estimates the revenue and expenses of the Government of India. Fundamentally, the Economic Survey serves as the basic guideline document on which the government formulates its plans in the General Budget. It is imperative to study both documents together to gain a holistic view of the Indian economy.


Before delving into the actual numbers, it is essential to set the context. The previous two financial years saw a recovery from the pandemic shocks, with very high growth rates. FY 23-24 witnessed a GDP growth of 8.2 percent, and hence, at the advent of FY 24-25, positive sentiments were at their peak. The first quarter, being an election quarter with the model code of conduct in force, saw no major policy actions by the Government. Much to everyone’s surprise, the BJP lost its majority in the results, but the NDA together garnered the majority numbers. After ten years, the country again witnessed a coalition Government, which at this stage seems stable and strong. However, coalition governments face their own limitations, and there is a risk of delays in implementing critical reforms. The government had to change gears, and the country saw some critical bills referred to the Joint Parliamentary Committee for consideration and recommendation. Against this backdrop, the RBI projected a quarter-on-quarter average growth rate of 7.2 percent, while the Economic Survey report estimated growth within a range of 6.5 percent to 7 percent.


As discussed earlier, government spending had certain limitations, focusing only on ongoing projects, which resulted in sluggish growth. The country witnessed a GDP growth rate of 6.7 percent during Q1 of FY 24-25. Compared to previous general election quarters, it was the highest rate since Q1 FY 04-05. However, Q2 FY 25 fell short of the RBI's expectations, with a growth rate of 5.4 percent, attributed to rising prices and a sluggish increase in government capital expenditure. Corporate results for Q2 were also lacklustre, creating negative sentiments in the capital markets. Rising inflation concerns prompted the RBI to maintain policy interest rates. The RBI did aggressive intervention in the currency markets which resulted into a steady Dollar exchange rate. It was evident that due to the protectionist policy of RBI the rupee has been overvalued. Recently, the RBI has stopped active intervention, and the Rupee has started depreciating. While Q3 numbers are still awaited, it is projected that Q3 will witness a bounce back in economic activity, mainly driven by the festive season.


Globally, tensions flared as the Israel-Hamas conflict escalated, with Israel launching attacks on Hezbollah in Lebanon and Iran directly confronting Israel. Despite the Middle East volatility, crude oil prices remained relatively stable, and the Russia-Ukraine war had minimal impact on India. Meanwhile, Donald Trump’s aggressive campaign for a return to power stirred global unease, promising a stronger ‘America First’ stance. Biden's tightened sanctions on Russia will disproportionately affect nations purchasing Russian crude. Combined with rising oil prices and a depreciating rupee, these factors are expected to strain India's economy in Q4, with inflation looming. The government's foreign policies, it seems, will be tested more than its economic strategies.


(The author is a Chartered Accountant and works at Authomotive Division of Mahindra and Mahindra Limited. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page