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.)

Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj was 100% secular ruler, the ultimate ideal king: Nitin Gadkari

  • PTI
  • Apr 3
  • 3 min read

ree

New Delhi: Union Minister Nitin Gadkari on Wednesday described Shivaji Maharaj as an exemplary king, a benevolent ruler, and a "100 per cent secular figure." He said if there is an ultimate ideal, it is undoubtedly Shivaji Maharaj.

Speaking at the launch of the book "The Wild Warfront - Shivaji Maharaj: Volume 2" by Vishwas Patil, Gadkari, who claimed that he has only one photograph in his office – that of Shivaji Maharaj -- said the Chhatrapati holds a special place in the hearts of Indians and is even more significant to him than his own parents.


"Nowadays, the word 'secular' is very popular, but the meaning of the word 'secular' in the English dictionary is not religious neutrality. The meaning of the word secular is 'equal respect for all religions,' treating all religions with equal justice. This is the meaning of secular. Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj was a public welfare king in our country’s history who was 100 per cent secular.


"Particularly throughout his history, he won many battles and never attacked a mosque... He always showed respect for women, was a king devoted to the people, and was strict in administration," Gadkari said to a packed audience at Maharashtra Sadan.


To emphasise his point about Shivaji being a secular and just king, Gadkari referenced the Battle of Pratapgarh, which took place on November 10, 1659, between the Maratha forces led by Shivaji Maharaj and the Bijapur troops under General Afzal Khan.


The 67-year-old lauded how, after killing Khan, Maharaj ordered his army — which he mentioned included many Muslim soldiers — to bury Khan with full respect at the battlefield -- Pratapgarh Fort.


Congress leader Shashi Tharoor, who was also present at the launch, said he was happy that Gadkari discussed the secular aspect of Shivaji Maharaj, a quality that, he argued, is often underappreciated, even by the Maharaj's own admirers.


According to the Lok Sabha MP of Thiruvananthapuram, it was Shivaji, who after many of his conquests, gave strict instructions to his soldiers that "if they ever came across a Quran, they should pick it up, treat it with respect until they could find a Muslim to hand it over to."


He added, "Those were the kind of values that Shivaji had. We all know about Shivaji's chivalry towards women, the extraordinary grace with which he dealt with the people, and the fact that his army consisted of people from every caste. Literally, every caste, from Dalit to Brahmin, was with him — around him, amongst his courtiers, and amongst his soldiers. He had Muslim soldiers. There was absolutely no bigotry in Shivaji."


Commending the book, which is Nadeem Khan's English translation of Patil's historical Marathi novel "Rankhaindal", Gadkari expressed hope that people now in India — those outside Maharashtra — and in Western countries would see a just picture of the king, as the history written during the Mughal era and British rule was unfair to him.


"... There were many things that were unfair to him, some even called him a 'lootera' (a bandit). I can say with full confidence that Shivaji's personality was complete, it was exceptional. In our current governance system, how a king should be, how a king should act, he is an example of that," he said.


Tharoor, too, congratulated the author for bringing his skill of "novelisation of history" to best use and able to pull off two volumes on Shivaji in fictional form, who he admits is an extraordinarily interesting figure to read about in any Indian language.


He seconded Gadkari saying that Shivaji has indeed come through various renderings in the national imagination -- from demonisation during the Mughal era to being hailed as "original Hindu nationalist" by freedom fighter Bal Gangadhar Tilak.


"We have had demonisation of him (Shivaji), as Gadkari ji reminded us of 'lootera,' a bandit, which was propagated by the partisans of the Mughal side. Then, we had the veneration of him as the great anti-colonial resistance figure, and this notion of resistance.


"You had different interpretations even within Maharashtra. Jyotiba Phule's interpretation of Shivaji as the voice of the subaltern, as the voice of the underclass rising up, versus, say, the Bal Gangadhar Tilak version of the original Hindu nationalist, portraying Shivaji as the origin of Hindu nationalism," explained the 69-year-old Congress leader.


Touted by publishing house Westland Books as the dazzling second volume of Patil's "The Wild Warfront", the book reconstructs Shivaji Maharaj's life and battles through intensive research.


Patil, known for his novels like "Ranangan", "Chandramukhi", "Panipat", and "Sambhaji", has sold over 50,000 copies of the two volumes in Marathi -- "Jhanjhawat" (The Whirlwind) and "Rankhaindal" (The Wild Warfront).

Comments

bottom of page