Imagine walking into your office and knowing that only 15% of your colleagues feel they are thriving, while more than one in five feel they are suffering. That’s the reality Gallup’s State of the Global Workforce 2025 report reveals about South Asia. Out of every region in the world, South Asia has the lowest percentage of thriving employees and the highest levels of daily anger and sadness.

That’s not just a number on a survey. It’s your colleague in the next cubicle who looks exhausted but doesn’t speak up. It’s that overworked worker in your friend circle who pushes through another shift despite feeling hopeless. It’s that recently entered into parenthood employee who stays late every night, not because they want to, but because saying no feels impossible.

What the Numbers Are Telling Us

Let’s break down the data:

• 20% of employees in South Asia are actively disengaged, higher than the global average of 17%. That’s one in five employees not just “quiet quitting” but actively withdrawing their energy and commitment.
• Only 15% of employees are thriving compared to a global average of 33%. This means the vast majority of South Asian workers see their present and future lives through a lens of struggle.
• Daily negative emotions are significantly higher – anger (34%), sadness (39%), and loneliness (29%). These are not abstract feelings; they are the daily lived reality of millions of workers.

What this paints is a picture of workplaces that are not just failing to engage employees, but actively eroding their mental and emotional well-being.

Why Is South Asia Struggling So Much?

Part of this stems from cultural and structural factors unique to the region. South Asia is home to deeply hierarchical organizations, where questioning authority is often discouraged. Combine that with high unemployment, job insecurity, and a culture that often glorifies overwork, and you have an environment where employees feel trapped rather than empowered.

Take for example the IT sector in India, which employs millions. While it has created global giants and success stories, inside many of these companies, employees report relentless pressure, 12+ hour days, and limited psychological safety. Promotions often depend on pleasing superiors rather than on creativity or collaboration. The result? Talented individuals burn out, disengage, or leave.

Similarly, in Nepal and Pakistan’s factories and industries, workers often operate in conditions where basic dignity such as safe spaces, predictable hours, and fair recognition are not guaranteed. It’s little wonder daily anger and sadness run so high.

The Cultural Ripple Effect

When employees spend their days angry, sad, or lonely, culture suffers. Teams become transactional rather than collaborative. Innovation takes a backseat because no one feels safe enough, or motivated enough, to propose new ideas. Leaders, instead of addressing the root causes, often double down on control, creating a cycle of disengagement and distrust.

Over time, this kind of culture doesn’t just harm employees. It hurts organizations. Companies that ignore well-being and engagement are less adaptable, less innovative, and less able to compete globally.

What Leaders Can Do Differently

The good news is this: culture is not always rigid. Even in regions where disengagement runs high, leaders have the power to shift the narrative. But it requires moving beyond surface-level perks to deep, structural changes in how organizations treat their people.

First, psychological safety must become a cultural norm. Leaders should model openness, not pseudo-openness, by genuinely considering dissenting voices and rewarding candor.

Second, well-being needs to be reframed as a business strategy, not an HR initiative. Companies like TATA Consultancy Services in India have begun integrating wellness into leadership KPIs, recognizing that mental health and engagement drive performance.

Third, focus on purpose and growth. Employees disengage not just because of workload, but because they don’t see meaning in what they do. Leaders must connect roles to impact and provide clear growth pathways, especially for younger employees eager to learn and contribute.

And finally, address the human basics – fair pay, recognition, rest, and dignity. It may sound simple, but these are the foundations of a thriving culture. Without them, no strategy can succeed.

Final Thoughts: South Asia’s Culture Crossroads

South Asia is at a turning point. The data is clear: if we continue business as usual, we will continue to see suffering workplaces and stagnant organizations. But if leaders take this as a wake-up call, there’s an opportunity to transform workplaces into spaces of trust, purpose, and possibility.

The choice is stark: will South Asia’s workplaces remain engines of struggle – or – will they evolve into engines of thriving?

The answer lies in what leaders decide to prioritize today.

In 2014, Satya Nadella took over as CEO of Microsoft, an organization deeply rooted in hierarchy. At the time, Microsoft had a reputation for being rigid, internally competitive, and slow to adapt – a classic example of how hierarchy can create silos and stifle innovation. But Nadella didn’t dismantle the hierarchy; instead, he reshaped the company culture from within. He introduced a growth mindset, emphasized collaboration, and made leadership more approachable. Over time, Microsoft transformed into a more agile, people-driven organization while maintaining its structured hierarchy.

This example challenges the notion that hierarchy and a positive workplace culture cannot coexist. Many associate hierarchy with bureaucratic inefficiencies, power imbalances, and a rigid chain of command. While it’s true that unchecked hierarchy can lead to toxic work environments, a well-managed hierarchy can provide structure, clarity, and stability – key components of a thriving culture. The question isn’t whether an organization should have a hierarchy, but rather how that hierarchy is designed and practiced.

The Misconception About Hierarchy and Culture

Many assume that flat organizations – where titles are minimal, and decision-making is decentralized – naturally have better cultures. While flat structures can promote innovation and inclusivity, they also have their challenges. Without clear leadership, decision-making can become chaotic, accountability can blur, and employees may struggle to navigate growth paths.

Hierarchy itself isn’t the enemy; it’s how it’s implemented that determines whether it strengthens or weakens workplace culture. The real challenge is ensuring that hierarchy serves the people, rather than making people serve the hierarchy.

What Makes a Hierarchical Culture Positive?

At its best, a well-structured hierarchy creates clear roles, accountability, and pathways for growth. It helps employees understand where they fit in the larger system and how they can advance. Leadership plays a crucial role in shaping how hierarchy is perceived – when leaders are seen as mentors and enablers rather than gatekeepers, hierarchy can actually enhance workplace culture.

In Toyota, for example, hierarchy exists, but it is not rigidly top-down. Employees at every level are encouraged to contribute ideas through their Kaizen (continuous improvement) philosophy. A factory worker can point out inefficiencies in a production line, and leadership takes it seriously. This kind of hierarchy fosters innovation while maintaining order and accountability.

Similarly, in South Asian family-run businesses, hierarchy is often deeply ingrained. While some of these organizations suffer from rigid seniority-based decision-making, others thrive by adopting a mentorship-driven approach, where senior leaders actively invest in the development of their employees. This fosters loyalty, engagement, and long-term commitment.

The Fine Line Between Structure and Rigidity

A healthy hierarchy is one where employees feel safe to voice their opinions, contribute ideas, and seek support from leadership. The problem arises when hierarchy turns into authoritarianism, where decisions are made without input from lower levels, and employees feel like mere cogs in a machine.

Many South Asian workplaces struggle with this balance. The deeply rooted respect for authority in cultures like Nepal, India, and Pakistan can sometimes lead to a fear-based work environment. Employees hesitate to challenge superiors, even when they see flaws in decisions. In such cases, hierarchy stops being a structure for efficiency and instead becomes a barrier to progress.

Leaders must ensure that employees at all levels feel psychologically safe – the confidence that they can speak up without fear of negative consequences. A culture where an intern feels comfortable questioning a flawed process, and a manager respects their input, is a culture where hierarchy functions as a support system rather than a control mechanism.

Why Trust is the Key to a Positive Hierarchical Culture

In a positive hierarchical workplace, trust flows in both directions. Employees trust leadership to make fair decisions, and leaders trust employees to take initiative. When this trust exists, hierarchy becomes an enabler of efficiency rather than a source of frustration.

Take the example of the military. The military operates on one of the most structured hierarchies, yet within this system, leaders at all levels mentor, support, and invest in their teams. The emphasis on teamwork and leadership at every stage ensures that the hierarchy doesn’t stifle performance but instead enhances discipline, accountability, and coordination.

Contrast this with a poorly structured corporate hierarchy, where managers hoard information, resist delegation, and make decisions without consulting their teams. Such environments kill motivation and engagement, leading to high attrition rates and a lack of innovation.

How Organizations Can Make Hierarchy Work for Culture

For hierarchy to coexist with a positive workplace culture, organizations need to embed transparency, growth opportunities, and open communication at every level. This means redefining the role of leadership – leaders should not just manage but mentor, coach, and empower their teams.

Microsoft’s transformation under Satya Nadella is a case in point. By shifting leadership attitudes from “know-it-all” to “learn-it-all”, Nadella created a culture where hierarchy didn’t suffocate innovation but facilitated it. Employees at different levels felt heard, ideas were encouraged, and the culture became one of collaboration rather than control.

Organizations that get this right build workplaces where structure provides clarity, but autonomy provides motivation. Employees know where they stand in the hierarchy, but they don’t feel trapped by it. Instead, they see it as a pathway for growth rather than a ceiling that limits them.

Final Thoughts: Hierarchy Isn’t the Problem – Culture Is

The debate over hierarchy vs. flat structures is often misplaced. The real issue isn’t whether an organization has a hierarchy, but how that hierarchy operates. If hierarchy exists as a rigid, power-driven structure, it suffocates culture. But if it exists as a framework for accountability, mentorship, and growth, it becomes an asset rather than a liability.

The challenge for leaders is to redefine hierarchy – not as a ranking system, but as a support system. When employees feel empowered within a structured framework, the result is a workplace culture that is both stable and dynamic, disciplined yet innovative, and structured yet empowering.

What’s your experience with hierarchical workplaces? Have you worked in an organization where hierarchy enhanced or harmed culture? Share your thoughts in the comments – I’d love to hear your perspective!

Think back to your favorite workplace memory. Chances are, it wasn’t about a meeting or a deadline, it was about a shared moment. Maybe it was a Friday afternoon coffee chat, an annual team retreat, or simply a quirky inside joke that bonded your team. These moments aren’t just fun; they’re rituals.

Workplace rituals are more than just routines, they’re shared practices that unite teams, reinforce values, and give employees a sense of belonging. They are the secret sauce behind strong workplace cultures, providing structure, connection, and meaning.

What Makes Rituals So Powerful?

Rituals foster a sense of identity and community. They’re like the threads in a tapestry, tying employees together through shared experiences. Unlike one-off activities, rituals happen consistently, creating predictability and stability in dynamic environments.

But their real power lies in the emotional connection they spark. A well-crafted ritual doesn’t feel like “just another task”, it feels like a privilege.

Examples of Impactful Workplace Rituals

1. Rituals that Celebrate Success

• At Spotify, teams end projects with a “Fail Cake.” Yes, you read that right! Whether a project succeeds or stumbles, the ritual recognizes the effort, fosters learning, and ensures that failures are seen as stepping stones rather than setbacks.
• In your organization, this could be as simple as ringing a bell when a milestone is achieved or holding a monthly meeting to celebrate team wins.

2. Rituals that Build Relationships

• Zappos is famous for its quirky “Yay! Meetings,” where every gathering starts with an appreciation moment. Employees shout out colleagues for their contributions, creating a culture of gratitude.
• Smaller teams can implement something similar, starting weekly stand-ups by sharing one thing they appreciate about a teammate.

3. Rituals that Reflect Company Values

• At Pixar, daily “dailies” (short review sessions) allow team members to give feedback on ongoing projects. This ritual reinforces their commitment to excellence and collaboration.
• If your value is innovation, consider hosting monthly “idea jams” where employees pitch new ideas without fear of judgment.

4. Rituals for Inclusion

• Deloitte celebrates diversity with its annual “Inclusion Day,” where employees across the globe share stories about their unique cultures and backgrounds.
• A simpler version could be organizing team lunches where employees bring dishes that reflect their heritage.

How can you Create Meaningful Rituals

Not all rituals are created equal. Some feel forced or corporate, while others organically bring teams together. Here’s how to design rituals that stick:

1. Align with Values: Your rituals should reflect what your organization stands for. If teamwork is your core value, focus on collaborative activities.
2. Involve Employees: Rituals shouldn’t feel imposed. Ask your team for input, they’ll be more likely to embrace them.
3. Keep It Simple: The best rituals are easy to implement and repeat. Complexity can dilute the magic.
4. Be Consistent: Rituals gain power through repetition. Make them a regular part of your culture.

The Hypothetical Power of Rituals

Imagine this: Every Monday morning, your team gathers for a quick “Weekend Snapshot,” where each person shares a highlight from their weekend. It takes just 10 minutes but sets a tone of camaraderie for the week ahead. Now picture the same company ditching that ritual. Employees start their week in isolation, and over time, connections fade.

Small moments can make a big difference.

Final Thoughts: Rituals Matter More Than You Think

Rituals aren’t just fluff, they’re foundational to workplace culture. They remind employees why they show up every day, not just to do a job but to be part of something bigger.

So, take a look at your workplace. Are there rituals that bring people together? If not, it’s never too late to start. After all, culture isn’t built in boardrooms, it’s built in the little moments that make your workplace unique.

Every workplace has that one person who seems to have all the answers, or at least thinks they do. When that person happens to be the leader, it can spell trouble for workplace culture.

Leaders with a “know-it-all” attitude, those who believe their way is the only way and dismiss others’ input, can stifle collaboration, innovation, and morale. While confidence is an admirable quality in leaders, unchecked arrogance creates a culture where employees feel undervalued and unheard.

The Ripple Effect of Know-It-All Leadership

1. Silencing Innovation

When leaders act as though they know everything, employees hesitate to share new ideas. Why risk rejection or ridicule when the leader clearly thinks their opinion is superior? Over time, this creates a culture where innovation stalls, and employees stick to “safe” choices.

Imagine a tech startup where the CEO insists on personally approving every feature design because “I know what users want better than anyone.” This attitude may lead to missed opportunities as employees abandon their unique insights in favor of the CEO’s outdated or one-dimensional vision.

2. Eroding Trust and Engagement

Employees thrive when they feel their contributions are valued. A know-it-all leader signals the opposite: “Your thoughts don’t matter because I’ve already figured it out.” This erodes trust and leaves employees feeling disengaged and demotivated.

Steve Jobs was famously a perfectionist, but his early “I know best” approach alienated many team members. It was only after being ousted from Apple and later returning that he learned the value of collaboration, leading to Apple’s greatest successes.

3. Creating Bottlenecks

Know-it-all leaders often micromanage, believing their input is necessary at every step. This not only slows down processes but also disempowers teams, leaving them dependent on the leader’s approval.

In a sales department, a manager insists on reviewing every client pitch, convinced they’re the only one who can “sell it right.” As a result, deadlines are missed, employees feel stifled, and potential deals slip away.

4. Fostering a Fearful Environment

When leaders dismiss or ridicule differing opinions, employees may stop voicing dissent altogether. This fosters a culture of fear, where important concerns or alternative solutions are suppressed.

At a manufacturing firm, a plant manager ignored workers’ warnings about equipment issues, insisting he knew the machines better than anyone else. When the equipment eventually failed, it led to costly downtime and avoidable damage.

Why Know-It-All Leadership Persists

Many leaders adopt this attitude because they fear appearing weak or uninformed. Others believe their success gives them the right to dictate without question. However, this mindset often backfires, as employees become disengaged and turnover increases.

Breaking the Know-It-All Cycle

1. Encourage a Culture of Curiosity

Great leaders ask questions and invite diverse perspectives. Saying “What do you think?” not only shows humility but also empowers employees to contribute.

2. Model Vulnerability

Admitting “I don’t know” can be powerful. It demonstrates self-awareness and a willingness to learn – qualities that inspire trust and respect.

3. Celebrate Collaboration

Recognize and reward team achievements rather than spotlighting your individual role. This reinforces the value of collective effort over individual ego.

4. Provide Safe Spaces for Feedback

Create an environment where employees feel comfortable challenging ideas, even yours. Constructive disagreement leads to better decisions and a more dynamic workplace.

Final Thoughts: From Know-It-All to Learn-It-All

Leadership isn’t about having all the answers, it’s about creating a space where the best answers emerge. A know-it-all leader may feel like a driving force, but they often become the biggest obstacle to growth and innovation.

The best leaders shift from “I know it all” to “I’m here to learn”. They recognize that their success depends not on their knowledge alone but on the collective brilliance of their team.

We’ve all heard it before. The leader who proudly declares, “I worked until 2 AM last night,” as though it’s a badge of honor. While their intention might be to inspire dedication, this message often backfires. It sets an unspoken expectation that working beyond limits is a sign of commitment, and worse, a requirement for success.

Welcome to the toxic side of hustle culture, where overwork is glorified, and rest is seen as weakness. This mindset not only damages workplace culture but also takes a significant toll on mental health, often leading to burnout, disengagement, and, tragically, even loss of life.

The Dangerous Message Behind “I Worked Late”

When leaders share stories of late nights and endless hours, it creates a ripple effect:

• Implied Expectations: Employees feel pressured to match that level of effort, even if it’s unsustainable.
• Erosion of Boundaries: Work begins to seep into personal time, leaving no room for rest or recovery.
• Normalized Burnout: Overworking becomes the norm, not the exception.

What’s worse is that employees often emulate the behavior of their leaders. If a director proudly discusses their midnight grind, team members may feel guilty for logging off “too early” at 7 PM.

The Human Cost of Overwork

The consequences of this glorified overworking culture can be severe, leading to physical and mental health problems. The World Health Organization (WHO) reported that overworking was linked to 745,000 deaths globally in 2016, illustrating the dire implications of excessive work hours. Chronic stress from overwork can result in anxiety, depression, and even physical ailments such as heart disease and high blood pressure.

The impact of glorifying overwork goes beyond missed sleep; it can have devastating consequences. Let’s look at a few real-life examples:

1. Karoshi in Japan: The term karoshi, meaning “death by overwork,” originated in Japan, where long working hours have led to heart attacks, strokes, and suicides. The death of Matsuri Takahashi, a 24-year-old employee at Dentsu, a major advertising agency, shocked the nation in 2015. She regularly worked over 100 hours of overtime a month before taking her own life.
2. The Goldman Sachs Incident: In 2021, a leaked survey from junior analysts at Goldman Sachs revealed that many were working over 100-hour weeks. One analyst wrote, “I didn’t come into this job expecting 9-5, but I also didn’t expect constant abuse.” Stories like these spotlight the extreme toll that overwork takes, especially in high-pressure industries.
3. Puneet Kumar’s Tragedy: In India, a young IT professional, Puneet Kumar, suffered a fatal cardiac arrest after months of grueling 14-16 hour workdays. His story became a cautionary tale about the price of relentless hustle.
4. Ernst & Young’s Overwhelming Workload: In 2024, a 26 year old employee Anna Sebastian Perayil died due to “overwhelming workload”. She had joined EY just four months before succumbing to work pressure. Worst of all, no one from EY even attended her funeral. This showed how easily people can be replaced at work.

These aren’t just isolated incidents, they’re symptoms of a systemic issue where overwork is not only accepted but celebrated.

Why Glorifying Overwork is Culturally Damaging

1. Burnout Becomes Inevitable Employees pushed to their limits will eventually hit a wall. The World Health Organization officially classifies burnout as an occupational phenomenon, characterized by chronic workplace stress that hasn’t been successfully managed.
2. Productivity Paradox Research shows that working long hours doesn’t equate to higher productivity. In fact, overworked employees are more prone to mistakes, reduced creativity, and declining overall output.
3. Decline in Mental and Physical Health Constant overwork increases the risk of anxiety, depression, heart disease, and even premature death. It creates a workplace where health is sacrificed for perceived success.
4. Loss of Talent Organizations that perpetuate overworking lose talented employees to burnout or attrition. Millennials and Gen Z workers, in particular, prioritize work-life balance and are more likely to leave toxic environments.

How Leaders Can Set a Healthier Example

1. Model Healthy Boundaries: Instead of boasting about late-night work, talk about the importance of rest and balance. Share stories of success achieved without sacrificing well-being.
2. Reward Results, Not Hours: Focus on what employees accomplish, not how long they spend at their desks. Recognize efficiency and creativity over sheer time commitment.
3. Normalize Flexibility: Encourage employees to disconnect after hours and take time off when needed. Make it clear that work-life balance is not just allowed but celebrated.
4. Foster Open Conversations: Create a culture where employees feel safe discussing stress and mental health without fear of judgment.

A Better Way Forward

As leaders, we have a responsibility to shape workplace culture in a way that prioritizes well-being over endless hustle. Let’s move away from glorifying overwork and start celebrating sustainable success. Because the truth is, a healthy, rested, and engaged workforce isn’t just good for employees, it’s good for business too.

Organizational culture: ever heard the phrase, “It’s not a bug; it’s a feature”? Well, culture is like the software running your workplace. If it’s buggy, your organization can crash. This was the hot topic in Adam Grant’s podcast, WorkLife, where he explored the telltale signs of a toxic culture and what makes or breaks a workplace.

Grant, along with insights from Maria, a marketing manager with a rather wild experience, outlined the four deadly sins of work culture. If you’ve ever wondered why your workplace feels off or why people can’t wait to leave, here’s a breakdown.

Sin 1: Toxicity

The most glaring cultural flaw is toxicity. It’s what happens when results trump relationships, leaving a trail of disrespect, exclusion, and unethical practices. If high-performing jerks are tolerated (or worse, celebrated), Houston, we have a problem. Toxicity is the main driver behind resignations, beating even low pay.

Sin 2: Mediocracy

This happens when relationships overshadow results. Everyone’s so eager to get along that performance takes a back seat. It’s all smiles, no substance. People are promoted based on likability rather than competence, leading to what’s known as the Peter Principle, being promoted to your level of incompetence.

Sin 3: Bureaucracy

When rules suffocate risk-taking, you’re stuck in bureaucracy. It’s the “we’ve always done it this way” mindset that kills creativity. Innovation is sidelined, and red tape is everywhere. Need to use the restroom? Please fill out Form 27B first.

Sin 4: Anarchy

On the flip side of bureaucracy lies anarchy, where risks reign supreme, and rules are nowhere to be found. It’s chaotic, inconsistent, and downright exhausting. Everyone’s running in different directions, and structure is a foreign concept.

Maria’s tale in the podcast has illustrated an organization guilty of all four sins, a Christmas gift policy for the boss (but not employees) and absurd energy rituals that made strategy look like a bad joke.

Detecting Cultural Red Flags

Grant and his guest, organizational culture queen Jenny Chatman, emphasized the importance of assessing a company’s culture before joining. Chatman’s advice? Be a detective. Ask insiders about the values that truly drive decisions, how people are rewarded, and what non-negotiables exist.

And if you’re already inside? A culture audit is your best tool. Identify gaps between current norms and desired behaviors. Then, tell and retell stories that reflect the values you want to promote.

A Strong Culture is Adaptive

The best workplaces don’t just expect people to fit in; they adapt to their people and the ever-evolving world. By maintaining flexibility, organizations can avoid the pitfalls of groupthink and rigidity.

Adam Grant put it best: “Building a great workplace isn’t just about expecting people to adapt to the culture, it’s also about adapting the culture to the people.” Food for thought for all the culture curators out there.

Credits: Insights and inspiration are derived from Adam Grant’s WorkLife podcast episode, The 4 Deadly Sins of Work Culture, with the TED Audio Collective.

Let’s keep the culture conversation going! Share your thoughts or experiences in the comments below.

This debate of should leaders be feared or loved has been going on for what feels like forever. Machiavelli, that Renaissance dude, thought fear was the way to go. But is he still right?

—

Imagine having a boss who’s a total pain in the neck. You say “good morning” to them out of pure fear, and they’re always putting you on blast in front of everyone else. They’ve got a mouth like a sailor and love to yell at you and your coworkers when they’re stressed out. If you try to talk back or give them your opinion, they’ll just shut you down. Don’t even think about asking them for help – people are terrified to go to them. And when they ask you to meet them, your day is just wasted!

We all probably have or know a boss/supervisor like that. If you don’t know or have one, chances are you might be one. If you are one, you might be the best audience who should read this.

—

The age-old debate about whether it’s better for leaders to be feared or loved has persisted for centuries. Niccolò Machiavelli, a Renaissance political philosopher, famously argued in his book ‘The Prince‘ that it is better to be feared than loved, if one cannot be both. He believed that fear is a more reliable motivator than love because fear is rooted in self-preservation, while love is often fickle and conditional.

But is Machiavelli’s ideology still relevant today? Let’s explore both sides of the argument with a modern lens.

The Case for Fear: Machiavelli and Machiavellianism

Machiavelli’s perspective on leadership was shaped by the tumultuous political landscape of his time, where rulers needed to maintain power amidst constant threats. He believed that fear would ensure loyalty, as people are less likely to challenge or betray a leader they fear. This concept has evolved into what we now call Machiavellianism—a personality trait characterized by manipulation, exploitation, and a focus on self-interest. Leaders who embrace Machiavellianism may see short-term gains, as fear can indeed drive immediate compliance and efficiency.

In the field of psychology, Machiavellianism (sometimes abbreviated as MACH) is the personality trait construct characterized by interpersonal manipulation, indifference to morality, lack of empathy, and a calculated focus on self-interest. The more a leader is into manipulation, self-interest focused, and indifferent to morality, the higher mach it is attributed to the person. Machiavellianism is one of the component of the dark-triad psychological theory – along with narcissism and psychopathy. High scores in these traits have been found to statistically cause social distress and create severe problems for organizations, especially if they are in leadership positions. However, the same traits are also associated with some positive outcomes, such as mental toughness and being more likely to embrace challenges.

A modern example could be Steve Jobs, who was known for his demanding and sometimes intimidating management style. Some former employees have described working with Jobs as challenging due to his high expectations and occasional outbursts. However, his relentless pursuit of excellence and refusal to accept anything less than perfection led to the creation of revolutionary products like the iPhone, iPad, and MacBook. Jobs’ leadership style, though feared by some, was undeniably effective in driving innovation and success.

The Case for Love: Building Loyalty and Trust

On the other side of the spectrum, there’s the argument for leading with love—building strong, trusting relationships with employees or followers. A leader who is loved fosters an environment of respect, collaboration, and loyalty. This kind of leadership builds a positive culture where people feel valued, heard, and motivated to contribute their best work.

Consider the example of Satya Nadella, the CEO of Microsoft. Nadella transformed Microsoft’s culture from one that was often described as cutthroat and competitive to one that values empathy, collaboration, and continuous learning. His leadership, rooted in kindness and understanding, has led to a resurgence of Microsoft as a leading technology company, with employees who are deeply committed to the company’s mission and vision.

Contrary to the dark triad, there exists a light triad that consists of three facets: Kantianism (see and treat others as people, not as a means to an end), Humanism (valuing the dignity and worth of each individual), and Faith in Humanity (believing in the fundamental goodness of humans). People and specially leaders with high levels of light triad demonstrated excellent reliability and validity, predicting life satisfaction and a wide range of growth-oriented and self-transcendent outcomes above and beyond existing measures of personality.

Leading with love doesn’t mean being a pushover. It’s about balancing empathy with accountability. Loved leaders earn respect not just because they are kind, but because they genuinely care about their team’s success and well-being. This approach leads to a more sustainable and positive work environment, where people are driven by purpose rather than fear.

The Balance: Is One Better Than the Other?

While both fear and love can be powerful motivators, they lead to very different outcomes. Fear may yield quick results, but it often comes at the cost of long-term loyalty and trust. On the other hand, love may take longer to foster, but it builds a foundation of respect and collaboration that can lead to sustained success.

Leadership today requires more than just commanding respect; it demands emotional intelligence, adaptability, and the ability to inspire others. In a world where employees have more choices and values like diversity, inclusion, and well-being are prioritized, leading with love is not just preferable—it’s necessary.

Conclusion: Leading with Love in Today’s World

In the modern context, leaders who are loved tend to create more positive, innovative, and resilient organizations. While fear can be a useful tool in certain situations, it’s a short-term strategy that often leads to burnout and high turnover.

On the other hand, love builds trust, fosters creativity, and inspires people to go above and beyond because they feel genuinely connected to the leader and the organization’s mission. In a world that increasingly values collaboration, empathy, and social responsibility, leading with love is not only better but essential for long-term success.

In organizations, to optimize the power of leader expectations, the management and leadership team needs to underscore the importance of the values of trustworthiness among their members. It is believed that when organizations focus on developing trust, they will reap the benefits inherent within the Pygmalion effect as employees will be more responsive to their leader’s high expectations and corresponding behaviors.

So, while Machiavelli’s advice might have been sound in his time, the leaders of today and tomorrow should aim to be more loved than feared. Sorry Niccolò!

You see a viral dance step tutorial video on TikTok, Instagram Reel, or YouTube Shorts and think yourself – I could do it easily as well. You see a plumber fix the leaking tap rotating the teflon seal tape over the tap thrice, and you think yourself – I could do it easily as well. You observe a workshop facilitator conduct a two hours session, and immediately think – I could do it easily as well. The list goes on.

You could do it easily. But chances are, you could struggle – and fail miserably. Many of us overestimate how much we can learn by observing others. I thought I could learn guitar chords just by watching people play over the YouTube videos. And boy was I wrong.

This is a common phenomenon in learning – the illusion of skill acquisition.

Easier Seen Than Done: The Research

In a fascinating study at Northwestern University, researcher Michael Kardas had participants watch videos of skills like dart-throwing and the moonwalk dance multiple times, some even up to 20 times. After watching, they were asked to guess how well they could perform these skills before giving it a shot themselves. Surprisingly, many believed that just by watching the videos, they could become skillful. Interestingly, the more they watched, the more confident they felt about their abilities.

However, the study’s results were unexpected. Despite feeling more confident with each viewing, the participants didn’t actually improve in performing the skills when they tried them. Their confidence in learning through observation didn’t match the reality of their unchanged performance. This highlights the misconception that simply watching instructional videos can lead to skill mastery, emphasizing the importance of active practice and engagement for effective learning.

Can you land a plane?

Passive observation can have a surprising effect on people’s confidence in handling challenging tasks, even life-or-death situations like landing a plane, as discovered by Kayla Jordan, a PhD student at the University of Waikato, New Zealand. Inspired by Kardas’s research, she wanted to explore if this phenomenon could extend to highly skilled tasks. Piloting, for example, demands extensive training and knowledge of complex subjects like physics and engineering, far beyond what a short video can convey.

In their study, participants were asked to imagine being in a scenario where they were the only one left to land a plane due to the pilot being incapacitated. Half of them watched a brief video showing a pilot landing a plane, while the others did not. Interestingly, the video didn’t provide any instructional guidance on the pilot’s actions during the landing. Despite this, those who watched the video showed a significant increase in their confidence to successfully land a plane themselves, about 30% more than those who didn’t view the clip, as noted by Jordan. This highlights the intriguing way in which passive observation can influence one’s perception of their own capabilities in demanding situations.

Why does this happen?

If you have been around a child, you will know that they imitate their elder ones. Human beings – since their infant age – watch others and learn. This is the basic premise of the “Social Learning Theory”, developed by psychologist Albert Bandura, which explains how people learn new behaviors and skills by observing others.

This theory highlights three key aspects: observation, imitation, and modeling. First, you observe someone else’s actions. Then, you try to imitate what you saw. Finally, through practice and feedback, you model your behavior to become more like the observed behavior. Bandura also emphasized the role of reinforcement and punishment. If the person you observe gets praised for their actions, you’re more likely to copy them. Conversely, if they get punished, you’re less likely to follow in their footsteps.

However, in case of illusion of skill acquisition, we don’t really reach the imitation and modeling phase. We observe and then do not engage in deliberate practice. Without deliberate efforts made into practicing, we don’t get required feedback for corrections, which means we omit the modeling phase as well. Humans are social beings, and much of our learning occurs through observing others. Mirror neurons facilitate this type of learning, which can be efficient but also prone to creating illusions of mastery.

Here’s the culprit!

I was watching my mom cook a delicious meal. I noted everything she did – from the steps to the list of ingredients. A few weeks later, I replicated her every step. It was a disaster. I swear I did all the steps right, but I don’t know why the meal was a disaster! From childhood, I have learnt cooking from watching others cook – be it in my own kitchen or in the TV cooking shows. That has helped me gain knowledge about cooking new dishes. I have ideas about new dishes, recipes, and the ingredients used – but have I learnt how to cook it? Probably I can’t say unless I give it a try.

This sort of learning is facilitated by our mirror neurons, which is referred, rightly or wrongly, as “The most hyped concept in neuroscience”. Mirror neurons are a type of brain cell that responds both when we perform an action and when we observe someone else performing the same action. Mirror neurons are also said to be responsible for being more empathetic towards another person. They are thought to be involved in understanding others’ actions and intentions, as well as in learning through imitation.

While mirror neurons help us learn by observation, they can also create a false sense of competence because they simulate the action in our brains without actual physical practice or feedback.

So what to do now?

Overcoming the illusion of skill acquisition requires a mindful approach to learning and practice. Here are three actionable things you can initiate to overcome this illusion:

Engage in Active Practice: Instead of passively observing or assuming that watching others perform a skill will lead to mastery, actively engage in practice yourself. Practice involves hands-on experience, allowing you to develop muscle memory, refine techniques, and gain a deeper understanding of the skill. By consistently practicing and actively applying what you’ve learned, you can bridge the gap between understanding a skill conceptually and being able to execute it effectively.

Seek Constructive Feedback: Feedback is crucial for skill development as it provides valuable insights into areas of improvement and helps you correct mistakes. Actively seek feedback from mentors, instructors, or peers who are experienced in the skill you’re trying to acquire. Constructive feedback not only highlights your strengths but also pinpoints areas where you can enhance your performance. Embrace feedback as a tool for growth and use it to adjust your practice strategies and refine your skills effectively.

Set Specific Goals and Track Progress: Establish clear, measurable goals for your skill development journey. Break down the skill into smaller milestones or targets that you can work towards achieving. By setting specific goals, you create a roadmap for your progress and can track how far you’ve come. Regularly monitor your performance, celebrate small victories, and reflect on areas where you may need to focus more attention. Goal-setting helps you stay motivated, maintain direction, and overcome the illusion of skill acquisition by grounding your efforts in tangible outcomes.

One more thing…

Although learning can occur from observing others perform something, the observer’s confidence in their own ability to perform the skill can also be a determining factor. This can cause the false increment of their ability to perform the skill compared to their actual ability. This illusion of motor competence – i.e., “Overconfidence” arises because the learner doesn’t get access to sensory feedback about their own performance.

So the next time you see a video with someone performing or doing something, ask yourself – “Can I really really do it?”.

Spanish La Liga: Real Madrid’s Galacticos

2002-03 Season, Spanish La Liga: O Fenomeno (The Phenomenon) Ronaldo joined the Los Blancos, Real Madrid Football Club, from Inter Milan for a staggering fee of 45 million euros. With his 23 league goals, Real Madrid won the Spanish La Liga for 29th time in its history. They were jubilant and ecstatic with the victory.

In order to further strengthen their team for their conquest next season, the club decided to bring in another star midfield player – David Beckham. In the subsequent 2003-04 season, Beckham arrived at the Santiago Bernabeu, the home of Real Madrid, from Manchester United for a whopping fee of 35 million euros. Addition of Beckham ensured Real Madrid added another star in their galaxy – alongside other star players like Iker Casillas, Roberto Carlos, Zinedine Zidane, Raul, Ronaldo, and Luis Figo. With such reinforcement, they were highly favored to win their 30th title.

In a shocking manner, Real Madrid finished fourth in the 2003-04 season, behind champions Valencia, FC Barcelona, and Deportivo La Coruna. To fight back from this embarrassment, Real Madrid bought another forward next season – Michael Owen – the golden boy from Liverpool. Despite the golden boy addition, the 2004-05 season saw FC Barcelona edge Real Madrid with four points. Real Madrid still couldn’t win their 30th title.

In 2005-06 season, Real Madrid splashed out a whopping 96 million euros for multiple players – defender Sergio Ramos and midfielder Baptista from Sevilla, and forward Robinho from FC Santos. Even with such reinforcements, Real Madrid still finished second behind FC Barcelona, this time with a gap of 12 points. For the second consecutive season, Real Madrid did not win any competitions.

Real Madrid finally wins their 30th League Title

In 2006-07 season, Real Madrid splashed huge with more than a hundred million euros. Only after signing the 2006 World Cup winning defender Fabio Cannavaro and his Juventus manager Fabio Capello, along with forwards Ruud van Nistelrooy from Manchester United, Gonzalo Higuain from River Plate, defender Marcelo from Fluminense, and defensive midfielder Emerson from Juventus, Real Madrid managed to win their 30th league title. However, shortly after winning the La Liga title, the club surprisingly sacked manager Capello after he refused to field David Beckham and Ronaldo, and his defensive tactics. This season saw Zidane’s retirement as well as Ronaldo leaving Real Madrid for AC Milan.

The Big Question

The question remains – why could Real Madrid, a team filled with such superstars and gifted players, not win the league for over three seasons, and remain trophy-less in two of them?

While there are multiple reasons for Madrid’s galacticos remaining trophy-less for consecutive seasons, one of them is a departure of an under appreciated genius – Claude Makelele.

Makelele arrived at Real Madrid from Celta Vigo in the 2000-01 season, when Real Madrid started operating with the goal of making it the most fashionable club in the world and was dubbed galacticos since they were aiming to recruit one expensive world famous player every summer. However, despite his value for the team, Makelele was one of its most relatively underpaid player, earning a fraction of that paid to teammates like Zidane, Figo, Raul, Ronaldo, Carlos, McManaman and Guti.

When Madrid’s 28th title winning manager Del Bosque was shockingly sacked, and after the arrival of David Beckham, Makelele decided to ask for an improved contract – especially after getting encouragements from team members Zidane, Raul, McManaman, and Morientes. The club management outright refused to even consider his request. Upset, Makelele handed in a transfer request, and was signed by English Premier League sides, Chelsea in 2003-04 season. Club president Fiorentino Perez infamously scorned on Makelele’s footballing abilities after his departure and proclaimed he would not be missed.

Rise of Chelsea: The Makelele Role

In Steve McManaman’s autobiography, he described Makelele as “the most important and yet least appreciated midfielder at Real Madrid.” The then captain of Real Madrid, Fernando Hierro, also criticized club president Perez for both Makelele’s departure and the manner of departure, and said, “The loss of Makelele was the beginning of the end for Los Galacticos, he was the base, the key and I think he is the same to Chelsea now.”

Makelele usually played in front of the team’s back-line, where he served as a defensive protection cover for the defenders. With his ability to read the game, break down plays, mark and anticipate opponents, and aggressive tackling, he was regarded as the best in the position. In his role, he was highly regarded throughout his career for his positional awareness, tactical discipline, intelligence, energy, and ball winning ability. With such abilities and playing a key role in redefining the defensive midfield role, that role is now colloquially known as “The Makelele Role ” in his homage.

With his arrival, Chelsea finished second in the league in 2003-04 season. In 2004-05 season, Makelele was a key player in Mourinho’s campaign, winning the league first time in 50 years and also the League Cup. As of now, this Chelsea side still holds the defensive record for most clean sheets and fewest goals conceded in English Premier League season, all thanks to the defensive cover from Makelele.

The Battery of the Team

When Claude Makelele signed for Chelsea in the summer of 2003, then manager Claudio Ranieri proclaimed Makelele as the ‘battery of the team.’

Now what does this term – ‘battery of the team’ – mean?

Take a moment to think about your decision making process while purchasing a new phone. The decision criteria mostly would include the brand, screen size, display types, processor speed, cameras, RAM, and storage. The battery of the phone rarely comes to the discussion on the decision criteria – not because it is not required, but is often overlooked. The battery powers all the functions – the display, processor, camera, and storage, but is not always considered the best part of any phone. Claudio Makelele was the battery of the team because he was the one to protect the defensive line and supply the ball to the strikers so that they can score.

Similarly, in our teams, we have people who connects and gels the team together – supplying power and energy to other team members. Covering someone’s late night shift, asking a colleague to take a break, protecting a teammate’s mistake – these all are hallmarks of someone who provides energy to the team. The battery of the team often gets under appreciated, and looks like an average performer. But beneath the average performer could be our teams’ battery – who is constantly charging the team, someone who is constantly energizing other team members.

It is essential as leaders and managers to recognize these average performing energizers – because they might be the reason that our star performers are performing their best. Removing them might cause the star performers’ productivity to dwindle down, as that happened with Real Madrid’s galacticos. To identify such ‘battery’ in the team, be in a constant connection with all members of the team – not just with your best performers. Get to know the ins and outs of all team members. Get to know them personally. Get to know which team member contributes in which areas apart from their own designated works.

Getting to know, understanding, and connecting with your team members – this will help you recognize the ‘battery’ in your team. Hold on to them, and sometimes charge them too. It is the battery that powers all other functions in the phone, but the battery needs to be charged too. Similarly, your team’s battery might need frequent charges too.

I repeat – do not mix office retreats with team building activities.

Why? Before asking me why, I guess you need to ask your team members first. Ask them if the trust fall or the scavenger hunt they have been forcefully playing in every retreat contributed to their growth, or at least made a positive improvement within their teams. If they were really ‘really’ honest, most of them would say the games and stuff were ‘fine’, the reflections were ‘nice’, but once they were back to their work desks, most people had swept these understandings and notions out of their minds.

The better question we need to be asking should be – why does team building activities in office retreats do not work? Multiple academic research say it works and even contributes to team camaraderie. However, in reality, the academic research deviates from the practical work settings. So why not to mix it? And what to do about it?

I’ll tell you.

What retreat actually is?

Retreat – This word originates from when armies pulled themselves back or withdrew forces as a result of looming defeat or enemy’s superior powers. This was done in order to gather themselves back, and assess a different ploy to get victorious over their enemies.

In corporate world, retreat practices are pulling employees back from their exhausting work duties and giving them a relaxing environment for having fun and ensuring they get all sorts of rests – physical, emotional, social, and mental. And then someone decided to think “Let’s utilize this moment to rebuild ourselves”, and few years later – BOOM – Corporate Games and Team Building Activities were emphasized in the office retreats.

Why team building in retreat don’t work?

Ironically, these team building activities ensures that people continue using their cognitive and physical abilities and deprive them of the well deserved rest, which was intended in the first place. Retreats are a personal space for personal reflection, rests, and a change of mundane lifestyle from the corporate offices. But when the team building activities are imposed on the people, it takes away all that personal space and leaves people wanting more personal space for themselves.

The team building activities are not bad – that’s not what I am arguing. Team building activities are required, but office retreats are not the time and place to do it. Moreover, the team building activities like minefield, blindfolded walk, trust falls, and scavenger hunts are a standard thing that doesn’t offer much customization in terms of what the organization and their team needs. Team building and bonding means to understand each other, become vulnerable, feel safe to share their deepest fears, and feel confident that their team understands it all – it shouldn’t be with everyone in the office. Those team building activities are socializing activities rather than understanding the teams’ challenges and problems. Those activities are ‘forced fun’ and no one likes forced fun. Take notes, dear HR.

To be honest, a coffee conversation between two people in the team might be more effective in creating the desired level of bonding than doing these socializing activities. There is nothing wrong with socialization – but socialization has its own pace with different people. Not everyone opens up with the same game or activity – it’s forced fun, and people do not like anything imposed. And at few times, the team building activities can also become team breaking activities. Especially when people become competitive in these team building games, it can cause more harm than good.

What to do about it?

So what to do about it? If you are actually connected with your team members, they will tell you the answer to this. But in case if you aren’t, try to take initiatives to understand what your team requires, what their preferences and priorities are. It’s not as simple as asking – “What do you want to do in the retreat?”, but goes more deeper than that. Building that connection with your team is the way to start, and for retreats, keep it more for the rest, relaxation, and out of work chatters.

Let retreats be just retreats. For team building, make it a separate event – and it can be in office event if you really want to build your team.