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.)

Shadows and Deception: The Third Man at 75

he Third Man at 75

A perfect film? Well, as near as one, and certainly the one film to rival any of Alfred Hitchcock’s greatest, director Carol Reed’s ‘The Third Man’ (1949) has only grown more iconic as it turns 75 this year.


Naïve American pulp fiction writer Holly Martins arrives in post-war Vienna to visit his friend Harry Lime, only to learn that Lime has supposedly died in an accident; unconvinced, Holly investigates and becomes ensnared in a web of deception, ultimately discovering that Lime is alive and deeply involved in black-market corruption.


Based on Graham Greene’s novella, the film’s enigmatic allure remains undiminished, with each ingredient essential to its lasting brilliance—from Robert Krasker’s vertiginous camera angles to Anton Karas’ haunting zither score, to the unforgettable performances of Joseph Cotten, Trevor Howard, and of course, Orson Welles as the elusive, amoral Harry Lime.


Krasker’s cinematography gives the film its eerie, surreal quality, casting Vienna as a crumbling metropolis teetering on the edge of chaos, its bombed-out streets and sewers becoming characters. The use of tilted, or ‘Dutch,’ angles distort our perspective, mirroring the moral confusion of post-war Europe where nothing is as it seems.


And then there is Karas’ zither. Its distinctive, lilting melody runs counter to the film’s stark visuals, as though it belongs in a different world entirely—one less dark, less haunted. Karas, an obscure Viennese musician, was discovered by Reed in a café and invited to score the film. His music, playful and melancholic, acts as a constant reminder that behind the tension and danger, life in Vienna goes on. The zither has a charm that pulls the viewer in, just as Harry Lime’s charm conceals his moral rot.


The performances elevate ‘The Third Man’ into a noir masterpiece, possibly the greatest British film ever. Cotten plays Holly Martins, a man adrift in a world he does not understand, with a mix of naivety and stubborn determination. Howard, as Major Calloway, embodies British stiff-upper-lip pragmatism, the foil to Holly’s idealism. But it is Orson Welles as Harry Lime who defines the film. His entrance, revealed in a doorway bathed in shadow, his face half-lit, is one of cinema’s most iconic moments.


Welles imbues Lime with a magnetic charisma, making it easy to see why Holly would be so devoted to him—until he learns the truth. The brilliance of his portrayal lies in the way he makes Lime both charming and despicable, a man whose very existence is a commentary on duplicity.


Set in a Vienna divided by Allied powers, the film reflects the paranoia and cynicism of the Cold War. Greene had been a British intelligence officer, and his portrayal of the moral murkiness of post-war Europe is rooted in firsthand knowledge. The story’s moral compass is shattered, just as the city of Vienna is divided into conflicting zones, each occupied by different world powers.


‘The Third Man’ is not merely a thriller but a meditation on moral ambiguity, and nowhere is this more apparent than in Welles’ legendary “cuckoo clock” speech. Perched high atop a Ferris wheel, Lime delivers a chilling justification for his black-market dealings in diluted penicillin, which has killed innocent children.


The speech, improvised by Welles, encapsulates Lime’s amorality. It is both a moment of intellectual grandeur and profound cynicism, one that makes the audience shudder as much as it dazzles. The dialogue is crackling right from the first frame as director Reed’s voice, tinged with sardonic humour, introduces the fractured world where Holly Martins soon finds himself, stumbling into a story far darker than the ones he pens, mirroring the viewer’s disorientation in a city where the lines between hero and villain blur in the shadows.


The film’s commentary on duplicity is all the more poignant given Greene’s connection to Kim Philby, his former boss in British intelligence. Philby, one of the infamous Cambridge Five, was later revealed to be a Soviet spy – ‘The Third Man’ - following the defections of Burgess and MacLean. Lime, like Philby, is a man who hides in plain sight, using charm and wit to mask a monstrous betrayal. Lime’s double life serves as a metaphor for the broader deceit of the Cold War era, where no one could be trusted, and loyalties were fluid.

Comments


bottom of page