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!

“हाम्रो संस्कृतिमा आजको दिन रक्षा बन्धन मनाउंछौ, यो “राखी” भनेर किन अरुको संस्कृतिमा हामी अन्धभक्त भएर पछि लाग्न खोज्दै छौं ?“

Translation: In our culture, we celebrate Raksha Bandhan, why are we blindly following others’ culture with the name of “Rakhi”?

After some mindless scrolling of my news feed enjoying my dark-textured black tea, this particular post made me stop, re-read it, and think.

If you do not know about this festival, click here.

To be fair, I have witnessed a lot of “Rakhi” celebrations and pictures in my social media (mostly on my facebook, twitter & instagram) today. It seemed like the people celebrating “Rakhi” and tying the thread to their respective brother(s) this year were in larger quantity than in the past years. I wouldn’t want to deep dive into religious history and cultural accounts about this festival because foremost, I’m not an expert in these matters; and second, my interest is more drawn by the human behavioral aspect of this “increasing” tendency of “Rakhi” celebration. So why do people adopt this foreign culture?

Turns out, it’s basic human behavior.

ZOOMING OUT

As Zalmy (2017) writes in his opinion, festivals – in general – act like stress relievers and help us balance our emotions. Festivals provide us with the opportunity to come together with family, relatives, and friends together in a bond of love. Phelps (2016)’s article published on FestivalMag supports this argument by saying that festivals could help reduce stress levels.

“Rakhi” is the celebration between siblings. Researches have shown that bonding with siblings act as a hidden resource in therapy. A research article published by Lewis in 1990 in Journal of Strategic and Systemic Therapies concludes with clinical examples describing three ways to involve siblings in therapy: as participants, consultants, and mutual nurturers. A logical conclusion here is that the “Rakhi” festival, which celebrates this therapeutic experiences through bonding, is justified across all cultures, not just to any one particularly.

Another research article published by Cicirelli in 1989 in Psychology and Aging has come to a finding that closeness of the bond to a sister (by both men and women) was related to less depression.

ZOOMING IN

There’s a famous dialog from the movie Red Sparrow, “Every human being is a puzzle of need. You must become the missing piece, and they will tell you anything.“

Whatever any particular person thinks, feels, and does is the reflection of his/her needs being either met or unmet. And as Dr. Marshall Rosenberg quotes, “When we are in contact with our feelings and needs, we humans no longer make good slaves and underlings.“

When we are in contact with our feelings and needs, we humans no longer make good slaves and underlings.

– Dr. Marshall B. Rosenberg, Non-Violent Communication: A Language of Life

To better understand the human needs, we can either look inside the “Needs Inventory” of The Center for Non Violent Communication (CNVC) or Max-Neef’s classification of fundamental human needs.

My older article on the pandemic and human behavior was based on the fundamental needs. The COVID-19 pandemic has caused few fundamental human needs to be unmet – especially the need for recreation (leisure), need for affiliation, affection, and connection.

SO?

So, the increased number of “Rakhi” celebrations can be accredited to the fulfillment of these needs. People needed to have fun after the 100+ days of lockdown. They needed to feel connected on a different way with their siblings, because the bonding eventually contributes to a better mental-health and overall well-being.

To overcome this need for recreation and connection, people blended in the “foreign” culture with their own. One can’t really point fingers at anyone.

If you’re wondering why do people “under-value” our own cultural practices, then a quick answer to that would be “Path of Least Resistance (or Principle of Least Effort)“, and I will explain it in my next article. Stay tuned!

Update: Read the Principle of Least Effort article up here.