By Dr. Amarjeet Singh @ AJ
You were hired to improve the business.
You identified weaknesses, introduced structure, supported employees and started delivering results. Customers noticed. Your team became more confident. Problems that had been ignored finally received attention.
Then something changed.
Your decisions were questioned more frequently. Approvals slowed down. Meetings happened without you. Your achievements received little recognition, while a small mistake became a major discussion.
You began asking yourself:
“If I am doing what I was hired to do, why am I being treated like the problem?”
Sometimes, performance exposes uncomfortable truths. A capable leader can reveal how much an organisation has tolerated, how poorly certain decisions were made, and how unnecessary some layers of control have become.
For a secure boss, that creates an opportunity.
For a controlling boss, it can feel like a threat.
Why capable leaders become targets
Not every demanding manager is toxic. Not every disagreement means someone fears your talent. Strong performers can also communicate poorly, make mistakes or resist legitimate feedback.
The distinction is in the pattern: fair expectations, consistent standards and an opportunity to improve—or repeated humiliation, obstruction and changing rules.
Research discussed by the Academy of Management identifies managerial insecurity as one possible contributor to abusive behaviour. That does not establish any individual boss’s motive, but it helps explain why authority and confidence do not always come together.
Consider what an effective leader brings into a struggling organisation: questions, evidence, alternatives and accountability.
“Why are we losing customers?”
“Why has this position remained vacant?”
“Who approved this expenditure?”
“What resources are required to achieve this target?”
These are reasonable business questions. Yet someone protecting their position may hear them as accusations.
The issue becomes personal when a boss treats a challenge to a decision as a challenge to their importance.
Your independence can disturb their control
A capable leader does more than complete instructions. They assess situations, recommend action and take responsibility.
A controlling manager may want the results of that independence while resisting the independence itself.
They expect initiative, provided every initiative confirms their thinking.
They demand ownership, while retaining every meaningful decision.
They ask for honesty, then punish uncomfortable answers.
Eventually, the employee learns that the safest contribution is agreement.
Ask yourself: does your workplace reward good judgment, or permission seeking?
A business cannot honestly demand entrepreneurial leadership while treating every independent thought as disobedience.
Why the “weak” can appear safer
The word weak needs care. Quiet employees are not necessarily weak. Someone who avoids confrontation may be protecting their livelihood. A less experienced colleague may simply need development.
The deeper issue is whether the organisation rewards dependence and compliance over contribution.
An insecure boss may feel comfortable around people who rarely question decisions, seek approval constantly, praise authority and avoid attracting independent recognition.
Such employees can make the boss feel essential.
Meanwhile, an effective leader may build a team that solves problems without constantly looking upwards. That is valuable for the business, but uncomfortable for someone who equates being needed with being powerful.
This protection is also conditional. Today’s favourite can become tomorrow’s scapegoat.
A culture built around personal loyalty offers few people lasting safety.
The answer is not to resent quieter colleagues. It is to recognise the incentives shaping everyone’s behaviour.
The tactics high performers should recognise
Workplace bullying guidance identifies behaviours such as undermining someone’s authority, exclusion, unmanageable workloads and withholding resources. These are observable actions; you do not need to diagnose someone’s personality to take them seriously.
Watch for repeated patterns.
1. They keep moving the target.
You achieve the agreed objective, but another requirement suddenly becomes the real measure of success.
Revenue improves, but the discussion switches to an unrelated weakness. A project is completed, but you are criticised for following an approach previously approved.
There is always another reason your contribution does not count.
2. They give you responsibility without authority.
You are accountable for staffing, service, sales or costs, yet cannot approve recruitment, spending or corrective action.
When results suffer, your lack of authority disappears from the conversation.
3. They delay decisions, then blame your speed.
Proposals remain unanswered. Resources arrive late. Instructions contradict each other.
Later, the question becomes: “Why have you not delivered?”
An occasional delay is ordinary business. Repeated obstruction followed by personal blame deserves closer attention.
4. They weaken your position in front of your team.
They reverse your instructions without discussion, bypass you routinely or invite employees to disregard your decisions.
Your title remains, but your ability to lead is steadily reduced.
5. They take ownership of success and distance themselves from failure.
A successful initiative becomes “my direction.” An unsuccessful initiative becomes “your decision.”
Over time, the official story bears little resemblance to the actual work.
6. They replace specific feedback with attacks on character.
Instead of identifying a missed deadline or poor decision, they call you difficult, disloyal, arrogant or “not a team player.”
Vague labels are hard to resolve because they offer no clear standard for improvement.
7. They isolate you from information and relationships.
You discover decisions after implementation. Important meetings exclude you. Your access to owners, clients or directors becomes restricted.
You are then criticised for lacking awareness.
One incident may have an innocent explanation. A recurring pattern needs evidence and action.
When they become slave drivers
Some managers behave like slave drivers: they treat employees as if a salary purchases unlimited access, unquestioning obedience and endless endurance.
They celebrate people who answer messages at midnight, cancel family commitments and absorb the workload of vacant positions.
Then they use those sacrifices as the new minimum.
The reliable employee becomes the permanent emergency department.
Because you solved the last crisis, you inherit the next one. Because you stayed late once, leaving on time becomes a question of commitment.
Your competence becomes the organisation’s excuse for failing to plan.
There are legitimate emergencies. Businesses sometimes require extraordinary effort. The warning sign is when extraordinary effort becomes routine and management refuses to address its causes.
“You are senior; you should manage” cannot replace adequate staffing, clear priorities and workable authority.
Ownership of a business does not confer ownership of another person’s dignity.
Why working harder may not solve it
High performers often respond to unfair criticism by increasing effort.
They prepare longer reports, reply faster, accept more work and try to remove every possible reason for complaint.
That approach can help when the problem is a genuine performance gap.
It can become exhausting when the standard keeps changing.
Before doubling your effort, ask:
- Is the expected outcome clear?
- Do I have the resources and authority to achieve it?
- Is feedback specific and consistent?
- When I improve, is that improvement acknowledged?
Fair, constructive feedback belongs in a healthy workplace. Being accountable is part of leadership. The question is whether you are being given a workable route to success.
Survive by becoming clear, calm and difficult to misrepresent
Put expectations into writing
After an important discussion, send a short, factual summary:
“My understanding is that the priority is X, the deadline is Y, and implementation depends on approval for Z. Please correct anything I have misunderstood.”
This creates a shared reference point.
Keep the tone professional. The purpose is clarity, not confrontation.
Make workload choices visible
When everything is urgent, explain the trade-offs:
“With current resources, we can complete A and B by Friday. Completing C as well requires additional support or a revised deadline. Which should take priority?”
You are showing what delivery requires.
Repeatedly accepting impossible commitments makes the underlying problem harder to see.
Keep an accurate record
Record significant incidents, dates, instructions, approval requests and outcomes. Include your own mistakes and corrective actions.
Separate facts from interpretations.
“Approval requested on Monday; received the following Thursday” is stronger than “They deliberately sabotaged me.”
Keep records through permitted channels. Do not remove confidential company material or assume private recordings are appropriate.
Avoid emotional traps
A humiliating exchange can tempt you to retaliate publicly. Your reaction may then receive more attention than the behaviour that provoked it.
Use short responses:
“Please identify the specific issue so I can address it.”
“Let us confirm the agreed requirement.”
“I would like to discuss this professionally.”
You do not need to win every argument. You need to preserve your judgment and credibility.
Maintain professional relationships
Stay connected with peers, mentors and trusted contacts. Seek perspective from people who can challenge your interpretation as well as support you.
Avoid recruiting a gossip circle. Accurate outside perspective is more useful than automatic agreement.
Know when to escalate—and when to leave
If there is a credible reporting channel, present the issue through evidence and business impact.
Explain the behaviour, its effect on delivery, the steps already taken and the remedy requested.
For example:
“Repeated reversals of approved instructions are confusing the team and delaying implementation. I am requesting a clear decision process and written confirmation of authority.”
HR may help, but assess its actual independence. If the owner is the source of the behaviour, internal options may be limited.
Review your position against a defined timeframe. Are responsibilities becoming clearer? Has the conduct changed? Are agreed actions being honoured?
You can remain open to improvement without waiting indefinitely.
Prepare options before exhaustion makes every decision feel urgent. Update your CV, maintain professional contacts and record achievements in a form you are entitled to retain.
Leaving thoughtfully can be an act of leadership over your own life.
A question for owners and senior management
When capable people repeatedly leave, do not stop at “They could not fit our culture.”
Examine the culture they were expected to fit.
Can employees disagree respectfully?
Do managers have authority proportionate to their accountability?
Are results evaluated consistently?
Can someone report mistreatment without punishment?
Are loyal favourites held to the same standards as everyone else?
Recruiting stronger people will achieve little if the organisation then punishes them for using their strength.
Do not let survival become surrender
Being targeted does not automatically prove you are exceptional. Being criticised does not automatically make your boss toxic.
Remain willing to examine your own conduct, accept fair feedback and improve.
But do not confuse humility with accepting humiliation.
You can respect authority and question a decision. You can work hard and require reasonable boundaries. You can be grateful for employment and still expect dignity.
The real danger is adapting so completely that you stop asking questions, stop trusting your judgment and begin treating mistreatment as normal.
Keep your standards. Build your evidence. Protect your options.
A leader’s strength is measured partly by what they can endure—and partly by recognising what should never become acceptable.
Dr. Amarjeet Singh @ AJ
Amarjeet Singh Sran (amarjeetsinghsran5@gmail.com) is a content creator under the Newswav Creator programme, where you get to express yourself, be a citizen journalist, and at the same time monetize your content & reach millions of users on Newswav. Log in to creator.newswav.com and become a Newswav Creator now!
The User Content (as defined on Newswav Terms of Use) above including the views expressed and media (pictures, videos, citations etc) were submitted & posted by the author. Newswav is solely an aggregation platform that hosts the User Content. If you have any questions about the content, copyright or other issues of the work, please contact creator@newswav.com.
